Dear Caerphilly Council,
1. Since 1 April 2009 how many applications for a Care Order have been made by the Local Authority?
2. At the date of replying, how many children are in the care of the Local Authority under:
a. A S31 Order
b. A S20 Order
3. How many of the applications for a Care Order made since 1 April 2009 have resulted in:
a. A Supervision Order
b. A Care Order - Permanent Foster Care/Care Home
c. An Adoption Order.
d. A Special Guardianship Order - placed with family
e. No Order
4. In relation to 3b, 3c and 3d how many of the parents had:
a. Been convicted of a criminal offence against their children
b. Had the benefit of a residential family assessment
5. In relation to 3c how many applications for freeing orders were made?
6. In relation to question 1. how many of the parents had made an official complaint against children's services prior to the commencement of care proceedings?
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for your request for information, which we received on 19th
January 2011. This e-mail is intended to acknowledge your request, and we
will respond to your request in a separate e-mail.
Most information requests are dealt with under the Freedom of Information
Act 2000. However environmental information is considered for disclosure
under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. If the information
you have requested is personal information about yourself, we must
consider disclosure under the Data Protection Act 1998. If this is the
case we will provide you with a subject access request form for completion
and notify you of relevant timescales and fees.
We will transfer the request to the correct legislation automatically, as
required by the Freedom of Information Act. For further information on
how we will deal with your request, please see the table below.
If you have any queries or concerns then please contact us.
Freedom of Information Act 2000 &
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
We will consider the following points in dealing with your request for
Timescales for responding to you We will consider your request and
you should receive the information within the statutory timescale of 20
working days, unless the information is not held or is exempt from
disclosure. Both the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental
Information Regulations allow this timescale to be extended in certain
circumstances. If your request is affected by a timescale extension we
will explain this to you.
Third Party Information If the information you request contains reference
to a third party they may be consulted prior to a decision being taken on
whether we disclose the information to you. We will tell you if this is
Format of Information provided We will try to respond in the format that
you have requested. If this is not possible we will let you know. If you
require alternative formats, e.g. language, audio, braille, large print,
etc. then please let us know.
Exemptions The Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 define a number of exemptions, which may
prevent release of the information you have requested. Before we provide
the information we will consider whether it is proper to release it. If
any of the exemption categories do apply then the information will not be
released. We will tell you if this is the case, and you will have a right
Fees You may have to pay a fee for this information under the Freedom
of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limits and Fees
Regulations) 2004. We will consider this and let you know. If so you
will have to pay the fee before we process and release the information.
The 20 working day time limit for responding will not resume until we
receive your payment.
You have the right to appeal against our decision.
Freedom of Information Act 2000 / Environmental Information Regulations
2004 If you wish to appeal please set out in writing your grounds of
appeal and send to:
Caerphilly county borough council,
Hengoed. CF82 7WF
Appeals will be determined by Mr. Dan Perkins - Head of Legal Services &
Monitoring Officer If you are unhappy with that decision you have the
right to appeal to:
Information Commissioner's Office - Wales,
Mount Stuart Square,
Cardiff, CF10 5FL
Telephone: 029 2044 8044
Fax: 029 2044 8045
Email: [email address]
Dear WWW: FOI,
Anthony Douglas has a number of roles in the 'child removing process':
He is the Chief Executive of CAFCASS who provide the Court Advisors whose recommendations as to what is in the best interest of the children (Usually Adoption if the child is young, healthy and adoptable) have to be followed.
Anthony Douglas is Chair of British Agency of Adoption and Fostering. Who provide Foster carers and Foster/Adopters who are often 'good friends' with the CAFCASS court advisor and who are paid £400 per child PER WEEK. The cared for children are often described as 'delightful' and therefore a pleasure to care for, the only thing wrong with the children is that they miss their parents. The Foster carer will have to constantly interrogate the child for any instances of punishment they may have been subject to by their parent in order to help make the case that the parent is 'horrible'. Then the child will constantly be told 'your parent is horrible' so the child stops asking to see the parent and adoption is made easier.
Anthony Douglas writes the books that Child Protection Social Workers study for their tactics for removing children such as telling parents they 'are placing their own needs above the needs of the children by going to work/College etc.
Anthony Douglas has a relationship with CORAM who advise on Contact and Expert reports and then social workers tell parents 'if you get positive assessments you can have your children back- Coram adoption agency therefore advise on how to avoid that happening such as making rules for contact impossible by telling parents they are not allowed to show emotion, mention clothing or talk about wider issues in contact. Social Workers will also make false allegations of assault in order to prevent contact. Expert reports are also impossible to pass because Expert Psychologists give parents a test in order to determine which personality disorder the parent has. If the parent's answers do not disclose any personality disorder then the parent has a low disclosure score which indicates they are lying which is therefore an indication of the worst personality disorder possible ie Narcissm.
Anthony Douglas also writes the Public Law Outline which is the guidance that Judges have to follow in the removal of children which tells Judges they can remove children with no notice, no evidence, no investigation, no Police Protection Order and just get the child into care and then CAFCASS will arrange that the child will never return to the parent which makes CARE Proceedings an ideal opportunity for Local Authorities to avoid dealing with complaints (they can simply torture any complainant parent by starting care proceedings and therefore effectively steal their children for complaining).
From my questions of CAFCASS and from Whistle Blower's evidence which resulted in the dismissal of the whole board of CAFCASS in 2003 (including dismissal of the whistleblower) which can be read about here:
[ potentially defamatory text removed ] [ potentially defamatory text removed ] [ potentially defamatory text removed ]
My question is in order to research whether Local Authorities are parties to this child trafficking scam by starting Care Proceedings against families who complain, by arranging the permanent removal of children from parents who have neither been properly assessed in contravention of their Human Rights, nor have the parents been guilty of any behaviour which would constitute any criminal offence ie. neglect/child abuse.
So far in my research I have discovered there are many Local Authorities who will readily commence Care Proceedings in response to a parent who complains about the Local Authority, and due to the various Ombudsmans being reluctant to investigate this clear abuse of power, the Local Authority all too often 'get away with it'.
It has further become clear to me in my research to date that it is not uncommon for children to lose their biological parents with NO GOOD REASON WHATSOEVER and to be exposed to serious child abuse once 'in care' often resulting in the child self harming, committing suicide, running away, becoming mentally disturbed, turning to drugs, alcoholism and crime.
My research in asking the above question and subsequent questions is therefore to ascertain whether your local authority are really protecting children that you are certain are being abused/neglected because the parents have been convicted of a criminal offence against the children and you have carried out a full 3 month residential family assessment to ensure that the parent cannot be rehabilitated to stop offending against the children or whether your local authority are complicit in a child trafficking scam taking healthy and well cared for children from parents who have done the children no wrong and are only guilty of 'complaining'
Dear L S Palmer
Further to your e mail received on 19 January 2011, please find
attached the response to your Freedom of Information Request.
Data Protection Officer
Performance Management Unit
Tel: 01443 864968