woolybanana Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 It leaves a nasty taste...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1141811/Couple-wrongly-accused-abusing-baby-children-late-court-rules.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keni Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I have a feeling there might be a line of solicitors now queuing up to support this couple - failing that there could be a case to answer for negligence for those who took the children away, or even human rights abuse for the parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Âme Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 What a hideous mess for all concerned. The parents, all four children, the adoptive parents...There doesn't seem to have been any second opinion solicited about how the child's injuries could have been sustained, until after all three children were removed permanently and legally adopted. I wonder whether the authorities consulted the family GP, who prescribed soya milk with no vitamin C replacement.I would hope that, at the very least, the biological parents can secure the right to see their children, even if another move between families isn't deemed to be in the children's best interests.'Lessons to be learned' is becoming a rather overused phrase, of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 There was a feature about this on 'This Morning' Apparently the law actually prevents you asking for a second opinion in these cases, but I'm not sure at what stage - it seems bizarre.What is also heartbreaking is the fact that two of the children are together but the third one is not...dreadful to split a family.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Âme Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I wondered whether the three boys were together. What a shame. When you say 'you' are prevented from seeking a second opinion, does that mean the accused parents or the authorities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 As I understood it, the parents: the parents solicitor was there and seemed to be saying that just phoning up a doctor and asking if he knew anything about it could land you in prison - it seemed very odd. Apparently there is a 'group' going to meet MP's in the House of Commons to ask them to change the law.The interview may be available on the 'This Morning' Web site to check.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Âme Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Thanks RH. Frightening for parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I agree - it's an awful thing, I also have sympathy for the adoptive parents who must also have been through hell with this too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 About 18months to 2 years ago I watched a TV program about this family. The woman was actually pregnant with their latest when they were explaining their case. The program finished on the woman saying that they were off to Ireland to have this new baby to 'protect' it and themselves from the various court cases against them ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I remember that too..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormanH Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Frankly I don't care and I don't see any reason to post this on a Forum about France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powerdesal Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 [quote user="NormanH"]Frankly I don't care and I don't see any reason to post this on a Forum about France.[/quote]NormanH,This topic is posted in the 'Other Topics' section, a description of which is....''NON-France related discussion. Place for members to catch-up''It is therefore in the correct section being 'NON-France related' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 [quote user="NormanH"]Frankly I don't care and I don't see any reason to post this on a Forum about France.[/quote] What's got your goat? It may be a forum about France but it doesn't mean that contributors can't think of other issues as well, especially as this one is in the English language that some of you seem to be wailing hi and lo to not being able to speak with the natives ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 How can you say that, Norman? This case is a travesty. Just because it is about a couple in the UK makes no difference. This Forum frequently discusses non-French things.Back to topic. In virtually all adoptions nowadays, there is some sort of contact, whether direct or indirect. Indirect contact is via posting letters to each other, sometimes at a rate set by the courts (e.g. once per year with photos etc). I haven't read what the level of contact is in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 [quote user="NormanH"]Frankly I don't care and I don't see any reason to post this on a Forum about France.[/quote]What is wrong with you, NormanH, you didnt have to read it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valB Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 If you don't care NormanH then don't bother getting involved in the comments of this thread. Some may agree with what has happened, others may not but we have a right to discuss it on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 Well, to be honest, I hope the parents take it to the human rights court and that the social workers who tried to hide behind the system are hung out to dry from on top of an angry anthill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weedon Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Whether you have any interest or not Norman, you have to be pretty hard hearted and insensitive to post the way you did. Not got any children yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 Norman, you have children too I seem to remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Didn't the social workers act initially on the information they were given by Doctors ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 Frankly, RH, this case has been around a long time and I am too incensed to be able to see straight any more. And the language I would use is not allowed on this nice forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 It makes me incredibly sad, a close friend has adopted a family of siblings, I know what they went through to be approved as adopters and how her and her husband moved heaven and earth to give the children a stable home - had to move to a bigger house, buy a bigger car etc all to a short timescale in the end. The children now have a new extended family who love them and a new routines, friends etc. I heard an adoptive father speak about it on the Jeremy Vine show and he raised some good points about losing potential adopters if the adoptions had been overturnedOn the other hand as a mother, the thought that children are being denied their natural family is equally wrenching, like some sort of endless torture.The priority has to be the children, I suspect this will go to Europe, don't you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odile Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 so, so terribly sad. I agree RH the childrens' wishes must come first. I cannot imagine what will happen as they become teenagers and young adults - and become aware of what happened. Desperate situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 Oh I certainly hope so, but quick. After all, it is only four years since they were taken away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gardian Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 We heard the piece about this on this morning's R4 Today programme and I must admit that my initial reaction (on hearing the intro, but before the interviews) was "Social Services cockup again, how could they do that, etc,etc".Having heard the interviews, it's clear to me that nothing in cases like this ever clear. Probably best intentions at the time on the basis of the available evidence, now almost certainly proved to have been wrong, but the children long since adopted (well, a year or two, but that's a long time for young children).For good and obvious reasons, adoption when granted, has to be a final act except in very exceptional circumstances. That's correct in the interests of the children, to say nothing of the adopting parents.I suspect that there's no real answer here and I certainly don't envy the (often maligned) judges who had to rule in this desperately sad case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.