Fosrered children removed because of UKIP membership

[ebaynut]

I think Hoddy was asking for a link showing UKIP to be racist, this link seems like common sense to me and not at all racist.

[Hoddy]

Not exactly ebaynut, but I had studied that site and could not see which bit of it was racist.

I will say that I have grave concerns about the population of the UK. At the moment we are dependent on the rest of the world for our energy and food supplies. This is something I don't like. I do not know much about energy supplies but I do know a bit about agriculture. It bothers me no end that we are building on so much land. About five miles from where I live, for example, there are plans to build on some very fine agricultural land which we will never be able to retrieve once it's under concrete. I don't think we should be expanding our population at such a rate.

Hoddy

[Hoddy]

I've just heard on the news that the three children concerned have been split up, presumably because so few foster carers will take three children. Yet another reason to have eft them where they were.

Hoddy

[woolybanana]

So, now we can be fairly sure that the social workers are protecting themselves.

[Russethouse]

[quote user="Hoddy"]I've just heard on the news that the three children concerned have been split up, presumably because so few foster carers will take three children. Yet another reason to have eft them where they were.

Hoddy[/quote]

I know someone who has adopted three siblings, one of them had been seperated and the first months back together were more difficult than they otherwise would have been. Had their social workers been prepared to split them they would have been adopted easily, finding a home for three was more challenging.

To have split these children up because of the parents political views seems to be hugely iresponsible.

[Quillan]

Here is another form of stupidity.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2238075/Social-workers-tried-colour-match-beautiful-baby-like-pot-Dulux-paint-Foster-parents-say-happiness-tempered-memory-bitter-battle-Sasha.html

 

[Rabbie]

It seems a pity that this seems to be coming a political football with no real consideration of the children's needs which should be paramount. Lets hope that common sense prevails and the children are kept together and found a good foster home regardless of the political views of the foster parents.

[ebaynut]

I understand fully your concerns Hoddy, a similar project is trying to get pushed through in the town about six miles from myself. There they are trying to get permission to built on a green field site which is featured in one of Gainsborough's paintings, spoiling the views of this beautiful part of the Stour valley forever. As you say, once it is under concrete it can never be reclaimed.

And for what, not the local people, most of the new owners will come from outside the local area. Most trying to escape the huge population explosion and overcrowding in their present location.

 

I wonder if the children in this case would have been removed if the parents had been members of the anti n-a-z-i- league, or whatever this bunch of ne'er-do-wells call themselves these days? 

 

[NickP]

Maybe social workers should just do their jobs, and not set them selves up as political commissars. What they do is not rocket science, just to make sure the vulnerable are well cared for. There is no remit in their job description to judge peoples political persuasion. After all we all know that lots of people either lie about who they support or even change their minds as soon as the election is over and their selected MP etc. has not done what they said they would do. Remember it was not so long ago that social workers set them selves up as judge and jury and denied lots of ethnic minority children; homes and families because social workers wouldn't allow ethnic mix.

[YCCMB]

Exactly. I'm not sure when or why the requirements for a good foster parent multiplied so far beyond the obvious basics, but I thought it bad enough when some of the other "criteria" regarding age, weight etc., seemed to have been adopted as standard.

It should be clearer today than ever that being a physically active, slim, financially solvent occasional smoker with a steady job and a record of voluntary service to the community and support of the Tory (or any other mainstream) party does not make an ideal custodian of the morals and physical wellbeing of young children. Nor does being a member of the clergy, being the beneficiary of a public-school education, or any number of other criteria.

I may be naive, but if I were looking for foster parents, I'd be looking for people who could dish out love and patience, weren't too houseproud, had kids of their own and could cook. If they could then pass a CRB check and jump through the necessary hoops and inspections, then it would be enough, if coupled with a robust and sensible Social Services policy of backup and support. Trouble is, I'm beginning to doubt whether the last bit is achievable.

[Quillan]

[quote user="Rabbie"]It seems a pity that this seems to be coming a political football with no real consideration of the children's needs which should be paramount.[/quote]

Well Rabbie I couldn't agree more. In recent months we have seen this, the new article in the DM about coloured kids and white parents and of course all the BBC stuff. Even worse I think things have died down for the victims after somebody incorrectly identified his abuser and it seems nobody else is willing now to report on the quite genuine ones. They are in short all being ignored in my opinion yet it is them that we should be the most woried about. It is unfair that politicians use any of the children from any of these cases as political footballs.

[PaulT]

[quote user="Rabbie"]It seems a pity that this seems to be coming a political football [/quote]

Well, there is a by election there on Thursday

[Quillan]

Should anybody be interested it will be discussed on "The Wright Stuff" on C5 at 09:30 GMT or 10:30 CET.