The Irish Couple


C & P: an Irish Couple whose Three Children were taken
for having been left unsupervised for 10 minutes

1. Nature of the Case / Background
This case is an example of “levels of threshold” being applied wholly inappropriately:
• Since the mother has had three miscarriages during which she passed out for over 20 minutes, she didn’t want to do that to her children, when she feared another miscarriage. Having gone to get her husband, Social Services and Police took their three children, aged 5, 2 and 1, on 26th October 2011.
• Since then, Social Services are looking for allegations against the father C to build a case for foster care. They are following the Government’s pressures for adoption, whilst the children are held in ‘temporary foster care’.
• Whilst in care, the parents see the children three times a week and have observed gross negligence that the mother is compensating for with the love and care only birth mothers provide.

2. Submissions of Fact
The behaviour of Social Services Carmarthenshire does not differ from other councils where victims of child snatching have suffered cruelty and injustice for the sake of cashing in on foster money (on average £400 / week per child). Social Services do NOT have the interest of children at heart and are wholly ineffective when dealing with complaints of negligence that are voiced during supervised contact sessions:
• The carers’ dog is sleeping in the bed of one child
o It is evident that the child has been coached to lie about this since it came out
• Head lice were not treated
o instead the child has a bleeding skull from scratching her head
• The children are kept unkempt, with dirty finger and toe-nails and trousers hanging over the shoes
o The sagging trousers resulted in a fall so that the child had to be taken to hospital
• The children are not dressed according to the temperature of the season and thus were ill.
• The children were taken for an day long excursion without the consent of the parents.
• False excuses are offered, such as a “rush is due to contact with grass”, whereas there is ample photographic evidence for the child to have been in touch with grass.

3. Points of Law and Procedure
Based on his experience of over 1,500 cases, John Hemming MP advises that complaint procedures are usually not effective, only judiciary ones. This would suggest that the couple should take Social Services to court, before the Local Council initiates secret Family Court procedures.

4. Summary
The “levels of threshold” that Social Services are observing vary between the farcical and the ridiculous, suggesting that staff have never raised children themselves. Just as in Case 002, where false allegations were fabricated and manipulated, after the children had been taken, the money making wheels are churning – at the expense of the children, for whom every day away from their parents is a day of trauma and disaster:
• Mother P uses contact sessions to compensate for the negligence of the carers
• Many mothers say that no contact is better than supervised contact sessions
• Children suffer more from the separation of their parents than any ‘levels of threshold’ might justify.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s