Social Services...

[Elliott 7]

So I hear the story about the 18 year old mum in Nottingham having her baby snatched from her at birth by social services. Apparently this happens every day, but in this case the social services bungled the steal by not getting court approval first. So a judge orders the baby to go back to its mother... only, a few days later, for another court decision to go in the favour of the social services again.

They refuse to tell us anything about this case. We don't know who this mother is, what her background is, why they suspect she may be a danger to her child. No reason is given and it is all underwraps. Okay, so maybe they do have a valid reason and they're keeping it under wraps for sensitivies sake.

That is okay, until I read that Tony Blair, cunt supremo, set a TARGET for each county council on how many children they need to take away from their mother's and put up for adoption. If county councils meet this target, they get extra money, which presumably will go straight onto their wages. Tony Blair set up a system where social services are basically making up reasons so they can sell the babies off for a bigger wage.

If that doesn't make you angry, well then you are dead inside. People need to die for this atrocity. Who's with me?

[warnie_666 1,081]

What a Cunt......Isnt he the Cunt who sucks up to the Yanks???....Hope someone puts his children up for apdoption...

[MikeCFC 45]

Social Services are a total joke.A bunch of jobsworths that abuse their power.Why the hell take a baby away from their mother,who's carried that baby for 9 months?.Social Services always make cock up's,taking children away from parents that over feed them etc,when they should really be clamping down on the parent's who's children that are being properly abused or mistreated.

[We Hate Scouse 10,286]

That is disgusting. Labour have well and truly ruined this country.

[Layla 0]

Social services arg!!Why not offer her support you dont know how she was gana be around that baby!Apprantly it was cause she had mental problems or something but still support be nice then take the baby away!

Blair is a twat!!Why not just make them focus on the children who are actully in danger then we wouldnt be reading about so many cases were a child has died despite being on the at risk registar etc and had half a dozen social workers assisended to the case!

[misschief 24]

They can't tell you anything about the case due to the woman's right to confidentiality. And I can assure you any money for meeting targets certainly doesn't go on wages. Don't get me wrong, I haven't got a lot of time for Social Workers and I know there's been bad press from cases in the past but Im not sure the myth about them snatching children away without due cause is still the case. The thing is, a large part of their training and a government directive is that the child's wellbeing must take preference over the adult's and therefore, Social Workers are duty bound to scrutinise the child's care. Ive often thought the Social Workers in my team fuss too much about patient's kids but having said that, their onus is always on keeping the child with its parents.

[Elliott 7]

They can't tell you anything about the case due to the woman's right to confidentiality. And I can assure you any money for meeting targets certainly doesn't go on wages. Don't get me wrong, I haven't got a lot of time for Social Workers and I know there's been bad press from cases in the past but Im not sure the myth about them snatching children away without due cause is still the case. The thing is, a large part of their training and a government directive is that the child's wellbeing must take preference over the adult's and therefore, Social Workers are duty bound to scrutinise the child's care. Ive often thought the Social Workers in my team fuss too much about patient's kids but having said that, their onus is always on keeping the child with its parents.

The fact that they are taking kids away AT birth tells me that when this is happening, their onus is definitely not on keeping the child with the parents. I'm not saying every kid taken from birth is a mistaken case, I'm sure it must be justified sometimes. It would be nice if they at least told us the reasons as to why they might suspect this woman and others are not fit to be parents. The reason is they and the judges that decide these cases are currently answerably only to each other. Public servants need to be answerable to the public, otherwise it is only working against the ideals of democracy. We as citizens of a supposedly democractic country deserve to know how our money is being used.

And using a money prize, and I bet some of it does go on wages, even if most of it doesn't, is absolutely wrong when you're talking about lives here.

[changingman2000 35]

If Blair knew of this then he is a biger cunt than I thought he was, And I already thought he was a cunt.

Politics nowdays, I hate it, could never vote tory, labour are wankers to the core, Need to be a marmite valley warrior to vote LIb dems

[misschief 24]

The fact that they are taking kids away AT birth tells me that when this is happening, their onus is definitely not on keeping the child with the parents. I'm not saying every kid taken from birth is a mistaken case, I'm sure it must be justified sometimes. It would be nice if they at least told us the reasons as to why they might suspect this woman and others are not fit to be parents. The reason is they and the judges that decide these cases are currently answerably only to each other. Public servants need to be answerable to the public, otherwise it is only working against the ideals of democracy. We as citizens of a supposedly democractic country deserve to know how our money is being used.

And using a money prize, and I bet some of it does go on wages, even if most of it doesn't, is absolutely wrong when you're talking about lives here.

Mate, sometimes it just isnt safe to allow kids to stay with their parents. As cruel as it is, Ive known babies to be removed at birth for periods of time if the mother's post natal mental health meant she had the potential to kill the child whilst not responsible for her actions - isnt that a good enough reason? And like Ive said before, the public can't and actually shouldn't be given any information around these cases due to confidentiality laws.

And you can bet what you like, this money doesn't go on wages or there'd be a lot more people training to be social workers than there are.

Edited February 3, 2008 by misschief

[Elliott 7]

I'm not saying every kid taken from birth is a mistaken case, I'm sure it must be justified sometimes.

[Fulham Broadway 16,894]

Really difficult job. I've a mate who's a Social Worker and he deals with kids at risk. I've watched him slowly lose his sense of humour over the years. Some of the scenarios you wouldn't want your worst enemy brought up in, and the safety of the kids is paramount.

Social Workers used to be the baddies in the 60s and 70s when they were taking kids away just because of extreme poverty.

The way this current story was 'promoted' was just to inflame the public about a 'mother losing her baby'. They have left out crucial details.