Social work courses too easy to pass, say MPs
Sub-standard training putting children's lives at risk, warns select committee for children, schools and families
Buzz up!
Digg it
David Brindle
The Guardian, Thursday 30 July 2009
Article history
Social work training is unfit for purpose, according to a damning report by MPs out today. The Commons select committee for children, schools and families warns that children's lives are being put at risk because social workers are not being prepared adequately for the challenges they face.
The root cause lies in sub-standard degree courses. The report cited evidence "from several quarters" that the degree is too easy to pass, while some social work courses have a reputation for being hard to fail.
Children's charity the NSPCC told the committee that its practice teachers had on occasion come under pressure to pass students whom they felt should not be allowed to proceed further.
Urging an investigation into whether the funding arrangements for degree courses act as a perverse incentive to pass unsuitable students, the committee says: "It is unacceptable that social work courses, or any element of them, should have a reputation for being 'difficult to fail'."
The committee's verdict comes 24 hours after an interim report from the government's social work taskforce outlined plans to overhaul the training and leadership of the profession in the wake of the Baby P affair .
While the MPs welcome the prospect of radical reforms, they say they are concerned that a "plethora" of other new initiatives has been announced and set in train by ministers before the taskforce has concluded its work. "It is not clear how these initiatives fit together with each other, or with existing structures," the report says.
Helga Pile, national officer for social workers at Unison, said: "To say that social work training is not fit for purpose is a bit alarmist and damaging to the profession. There are lots of highly skilled, competent social workers out there doing a fantastic job. But they are battling with truly impossible working conditions which no amount of training can compensate for."
The report also criticises the entry requirements for degrees. In 2006-07, almost half the students admitted to courses had fewer than 240 Ucas points (three grade Cs or equivalent at A-level), compared to fewer than a quarter of entrants to comparable teaching or nursing degrees. The Joint Universities Council has reported complaints from some employers about standards of literacy among social work graduates.
Children's minister Lady Morgan told the committee that the door should remain open to would-be social workers "with life skills". But the MPs say that while A-levels are an imperfect measure of potential, "as they are a proxy for the intellectual ability that social work students need, we wish to see an improvement in the average grades required".
The committee proposes establishing a social work development agency, similar to the Training and Development Agency for teaching, to bring together recruitment, workforce development and funding and commissioning of training. MPs also called for better pay for social workers.
Barry Sheerman, who chairs the committee, said: "Social workers need a high-quality training body and high-profile national leadership of their profession – and they need to be better rewarded."
the MPs' findings, Lady Morgan said: "We have asked the taskforce to consider the select committee's recommendations in their thinking about long-term reform needed.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
The Charters
Grandparents Apart UK
‘Bringing Families Together’
*0141 882 5658 *
Contacts all over the UK
Main Groups
Wales - 01492 874 395
Kilmarnock- 01563 821 869
Non profit making.
Staffed by Volunteers
Join us and help make a difference for our children.
Contact the number above or e-mail from our website.
The essential role that grandparents do play in children’s lives.
Dedicated Grandparents are the huge army that is never recognised officially for their tireless love and protection for children which comes automatically to them. Being mostly available 24/7 for caring for children but do suffer the indignity of being ignored as irrelevant persons. This is an army that doesn’t need to be bought with up to £200,00p a week (from a hard pressed public purse) to buy care for each child which is attracting the wrong kind of people. A lot do need help but not bought. There is a lot of them caring for their grandchildren that do not need or accept a penny but do it because they can afford it and it is their own flesh and blood.
The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ does not ask for legal rights for grandparents or anything like that. There is too much opposition from the government for that and god only knows why. It asks for the professionals to look more closely at the role grandparents can play in their children’s lives to make them utilize the benefits grandparents can be, like keeping a child in a stable home environment, maintaining a child’s identity, health history, keeping extended family connections rather than strangers which renders a child confused, resentful and withdrawn effect which carries with them through-out their whole lives.
The Forgotten Children. +
The Way Forward.
Scroll down for much more.
http://gapukfamilyinformation.blogspot.com/
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’
(Bringing Families Together)
It is important that parents, grandparents and other family members, speak to, and treat each other, with respect. You may not get on, but you can still be civil, for the sake of the children. Try to avoid arguing with or criticising family members in front of the children. It can be very upsetting for them.
On occasions professional organizations such as social work departments or the courts can become involved and may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s entire life. In these circumstances it is vital that the loving and supportive role that the wider family, in particular grandparents can play is utilised to the full
FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO CHILDREN
(Grandchildren can expect)
To be involved with and helped to understand decisions made about their lives.
To be treated fairly
To know and maintain contact with their family (except in very exceptional circumstances) and other people who are important to them.
To know that their grandparents still love them, even if they are not able to see them at the present time.
To know their family history.
The adults in their lives to put their needs first and to protect them from disputes between adults - not to use them as weapons in quarrels between adults.
Social workers , when making assessments about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
The Courts, when making decisions about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
Lawyers and other advisers to encourage relationship counseling or mediation when adults seek advice on matters affecting them and their children.
Along with others, Grandparents Apart UK put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” by demanding to be heard about the gaps in family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for our love of them why would we bother?
Grandparents Apart UK. 22 Alness Crescent, Glasgow G52 1PJ
A Scottish Registered Volunteer Charity No. SC 031558
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Separation
‘Bringing Families Together’
*0141 882 5658 *
Contacts all over the UK
Main Groups
Wales - 01492 874 395
Kilmarnock- 01563 821 869
Non profit making.
Staffed by Volunteers
Join us and help make a difference for our children.
Contact the number above or e-mail from our website.
The essential role that grandparents do play in children’s lives.
Dedicated Grandparents are the huge army that is never recognised officially for their tireless love and protection for children which comes automatically to them. Being mostly available 24/7 for caring for children but do suffer the indignity of being ignored as irrelevant persons. This is an army that doesn’t need to be bought with up to £200,00p a week (from a hard pressed public purse) to buy care for each child which is attracting the wrong kind of people. A lot do need help but not bought. There is a lot of them caring for their grandchildren that do not need or accept a penny but do it because they can afford it and it is their own flesh and blood.
The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ does not ask for legal rights for grandparents or anything like that. There is too much opposition from the government for that and god only knows why. It asks for the professionals to look more closely at the role grandparents can play in their children’s lives to make them utilize the benefits grandparents can be, like keeping a child in a stable home environment, maintaining a child’s identity, health history, keeping extended family connections rather than strangers which renders a child confused, resentful and withdrawn effect which carries with them through-out their whole lives.
The Forgotten Children. +
The Way Forward.
Scroll down for much more.
http://gapukfamilyinformation.blogspot.com/
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’
(Bringing Families Together)
It is important that parents, grandparents and other family members, speak to, and treat each other, with respect. You may not get on, but you can still be civil, for the sake of the children. Try to avoid arguing with or criticising family members in front of the children. It can be very upsetting for them.
On occasions professional organizations such as social work departments or the courts can become involved and may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s entire life. In these circumstances it is vital that the loving and supportive role that the wider family, in particular grandparents can play is utilised to the full
FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO CHILDREN
(Grandchildren can expect)
To be involved with and helped to understand decisions made about their lives.
To be treated fairly
To know and maintain contact with their family (except in very exceptional circumstances) and other people who are important to them.
To know that their grandparents still love them, even if they are not able to see them at the present time.
To know their family history.
The adults in their lives to put their needs first and to protect them from disputes between adults - not to use them as weapons in quarrels between adults.
Social workers , when making assessments about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
The Courts, when making decisions about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
Lawyers and other advisers to encourage relationship counseling or mediation when adults seek advice on matters affecting them and their children.
Along with others, Grandparents Apart UK put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” by demanding to be heard about the gaps in family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for our love of them why would we bother?
Grandparents Apart UK. 22 Alness Crescent, Glasgow G52 1PJ
A Scottish Registered Volunteer Charity No. SC 031558
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Separation
No matter what you may think about separation. No matter what you may feel about separating. No matter what your situation or experience, life will change for you and your children.
How it changes, is up to you.
One of parent’s greatest concerns is how the separation will affect their children. Divorce or separation does not doom children to years of emotional problems or lifelong dysfunction. Exposure to constant parental conflict and unhealthy family situations, however, can significantly impact children's lives in a negative way.
The quality of your life and the lives of your children does not have to be overshadowed by separation..
Because divorce leaves us feeling emotionally vulnerable, our tendency is to focus on all the things we can't change verses what we can change.
What most parents need to help their children is information, reassurance and support.
Help, is now readily available at any of our groups. If we don’t know we can out you in touch with a man that does ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ and ‘The Parenting Agreement’ ‘The Charter for Fathers’ were designed for the best interests of the children by making information and resources both available and easily accessible.
Help, is now readily available at any of our groups. If we don’t know we can out you in touch with a man that does ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ and ‘The Parenting Agreement’ ‘The Charter for Fathers’ were designed for the best interests of the children by making information and resources both available and easily accessible.
We offer support designed to give parents what they need to get back on track and point them in the right direction.
When going through the process of separation, parents often need help with:
· gaining perspective on their situation
· developing practical solutions to difficult problems
· seeing possibilities while managing change
· tapping into their strengths as a parent and a person
· moving from feeling helpless to feeling in control of their lives
· coping with pressure at work
‘The Charter for Fathers’
(Avoiding Conflict, Protecting children)
Separation and divorce can be a nasty and bitter experience for every one concerned especially the children. It appears to 90% are fathers that lose out but it can happen to mothers too.. You would not believe your new loving sweetheart, presently telling you that “I will always be yours”, could be anything else but loving and gentle.
In our experience in dealing with grandparents that are prevented from contact with their grandchildren is that there is at least one parent involved too. We have come to the conclusion that both are inseparable and in the end it is the children we care for in the conflict of hatred, spite and revenge that ruins their lives.
We just hope you will not experience any of these horrors but! Some of you certainly will. Too often we have heard “I just can’t believe it, that she/he could go to these extremes like telling lies about domestic violence and using the children for revenge and blackmail to get back at me for their own selfish means”.
If you are experiencing marital problems or thinking of separating get in touch with a family group for advice. Do not delay and do not try to work it out yourself or force your will on anyone. Contact any of us listed on the contacts list before you do anything, and we mean anything. If we can’t help we will know a man that can.
1. Urgent! Firstly contact an outside family agency, someone not involved with the family and keep contact throughout. You must resolve the situation without any aggression or incidents or you will fail. If you don’t heed this you will possibly lose your children as well.
2. Speak to someone in a help group before contacting anyone you are in conflict with.. You will be too emotional to handle this on your own.
3. Do not swear or raise your voice or obstruct in any way. if you do come in contact with your ex-partner or their family.
4. If the police become involved move away as directed immediately. The police have no stomach for family problems. Do not argue or try to reason as you will get removed and possibly charged with breach or harassment and it will never be removed from your record, even if you are innocent. It could be used against you if courts or Social Services get involved. Don’t give any excuse or you will be indefensible and nobody can help. You have been warned!
5. You will have to fight for any rights you do have regarding your children. It is equal on paper but don’t be fooled by this, in reality if you don’t live with your children, in the eyes of Social services, schools and the police you have no rights at all. Always have witnesses to everything you do and record everything in a diary.
6. If you need a solicitor make sure they are family law specialists as others could possibly take your case and lack the expertise. Be prepared to do most of the case work yourself, they are your children, make sure you get things right, you will only get one chance.
7. Mediation has resolved many disputes before a molehill becomes a mountain, before it goes into the real slanging match with accusing and condemning in court. You don’t want to be the cause of them saying, “you are angry and aggressive so I won’t attend mediation”. Give no excuses to refuse to attend. Make sure that the mediation is provided by an independent organisation like Family Mediation. They ask for donations only. You will find them in your local phone book or computer.
8. It has been reported the parent with residency, man or woman can be guilty of false accusations so be prepared to find yourself falsely accused and branded as:-
a) Violent b) Controlling c)Abusive d)Aggressive c) Sexual abuse.
All of these will be used to alienate you from your children.
9. Above all try and gain agreement through mediation without involvement of lawyers, courts, police or Social Services. If you gain a court order for contact it is not always complied with and is often not enforced making a mockery of our family laws. Your children have nothing to gain by these agencies involvement and very real significant harm can come of it.
10. Seek help as soon you can from a help group and keep in touch with at least one of their members and their meetings.
We have a fair amount of contacts you can talk to so call us on 0141 882 5658
The Ten Commandments of Family Law.
(What needs to change for our children’s best interest?)
1, Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child starts with Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not to.
2, The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in Children’s welfare and answerable in law.
When going through the process of separation, parents often need help with:
· gaining perspective on their situation
· developing practical solutions to difficult problems
· seeing possibilities while managing change
· tapping into their strengths as a parent and a person
· moving from feeling helpless to feeling in control of their lives
· coping with pressure at work
‘The Charter for Fathers’
(Avoiding Conflict, Protecting children)
Separation and divorce can be a nasty and bitter experience for every one concerned especially the children. It appears to 90% are fathers that lose out but it can happen to mothers too.. You would not believe your new loving sweetheart, presently telling you that “I will always be yours”, could be anything else but loving and gentle.
In our experience in dealing with grandparents that are prevented from contact with their grandchildren is that there is at least one parent involved too. We have come to the conclusion that both are inseparable and in the end it is the children we care for in the conflict of hatred, spite and revenge that ruins their lives.
We just hope you will not experience any of these horrors but! Some of you certainly will. Too often we have heard “I just can’t believe it, that she/he could go to these extremes like telling lies about domestic violence and using the children for revenge and blackmail to get back at me for their own selfish means”.
If you are experiencing marital problems or thinking of separating get in touch with a family group for advice. Do not delay and do not try to work it out yourself or force your will on anyone. Contact any of us listed on the contacts list before you do anything, and we mean anything. If we can’t help we will know a man that can.
1. Urgent! Firstly contact an outside family agency, someone not involved with the family and keep contact throughout. You must resolve the situation without any aggression or incidents or you will fail. If you don’t heed this you will possibly lose your children as well.
2. Speak to someone in a help group before contacting anyone you are in conflict with.. You will be too emotional to handle this on your own.
3. Do not swear or raise your voice or obstruct in any way. if you do come in contact with your ex-partner or their family.
4. If the police become involved move away as directed immediately. The police have no stomach for family problems. Do not argue or try to reason as you will get removed and possibly charged with breach or harassment and it will never be removed from your record, even if you are innocent. It could be used against you if courts or Social Services get involved. Don’t give any excuse or you will be indefensible and nobody can help. You have been warned!
5. You will have to fight for any rights you do have regarding your children. It is equal on paper but don’t be fooled by this, in reality if you don’t live with your children, in the eyes of Social services, schools and the police you have no rights at all. Always have witnesses to everything you do and record everything in a diary.
6. If you need a solicitor make sure they are family law specialists as others could possibly take your case and lack the expertise. Be prepared to do most of the case work yourself, they are your children, make sure you get things right, you will only get one chance.
7. Mediation has resolved many disputes before a molehill becomes a mountain, before it goes into the real slanging match with accusing and condemning in court. You don’t want to be the cause of them saying, “you are angry and aggressive so I won’t attend mediation”. Give no excuses to refuse to attend. Make sure that the mediation is provided by an independent organisation like Family Mediation. They ask for donations only. You will find them in your local phone book or computer.
8. It has been reported the parent with residency, man or woman can be guilty of false accusations so be prepared to find yourself falsely accused and branded as:-
a) Violent b) Controlling c)Abusive d)Aggressive c) Sexual abuse.
All of these will be used to alienate you from your children.
9. Above all try and gain agreement through mediation without involvement of lawyers, courts, police or Social Services. If you gain a court order for contact it is not always complied with and is often not enforced making a mockery of our family laws. Your children have nothing to gain by these agencies involvement and very real significant harm can come of it.
10. Seek help as soon you can from a help group and keep in touch with at least one of their members and their meetings.
We have a fair amount of contacts you can talk to so call us on 0141 882 5658
The Ten Commandments of Family Law.
(What needs to change for our children’s best interest?)
1, Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child starts with Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not to.
2, The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in Children’s welfare and answerable in law.
3, Children are human beings. Stop treating them as Commodities like a business deal. Cost only criteria and can ruin children’s lives
4, If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in line with article 8 of the UN Convention on the rights of the child. (Should only be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5, Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6, All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers. (c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Services Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are failed
7, Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent And combat section 6 b+d)
8, More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their managers
9, Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection)
10, Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
10, Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
Parentimg Agreement
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Maggies wisdom
Morning Jim.
As I am an early person in the mornings, some times switching on the computer as early as 3am I look forward to your emails regarding all family news and family courts and all the information of the Justice system, lets say so called Justice. Jim you do a very good job via the emails for all the guys out there, no matter where they are in the world at least they can know what is happening, and they are not alone.
What I would like to tell you and maybe the guys is that working a phone line for years and talking to women, god knows how many thousands over the year’s one of the constant moans of a women, was, and still is
My husband is always working, comes home late, falls asleep in front of the TV, cannot be bothered to have sex, maybe he has another women, he can’t be bothered with me or the kids, we don’t go out much, he never tells me he loves me, or how nice I look, and he’s become lazy, I have to decorate the house, do the garden and so on.
My answer
Most men are under such pressure to work and pay the bills, if the rent was not paid, then the whole family can be made homeless, and of course after a days work, he is tired, having been under pressure at work to make sure he does not lose his job, he also has the worry of feeding the family, school fees, uniforms gas/electric bills to pay and so on, so of course the poor man is tired from the worry. I found many women do not recognise these facts, and neither does the family courts.
I think it should be made more aware, world wide, that the men have the main responsibility to keep the family together just by going to work, and bringing in the money to pay bills.
If women become the bread winners, after all they are always stating they want equal rights, then they would stop their arguments, and understand that to get up every morning rush out of the house, in the car in the rush hour, or by public transport is worse, and do the same journey home in the evening, and to do this day in day out, all year, it can be very tiresome, and for many men when they get home, they want peace in the camp.
Family Courts.
When a man is seeking rights to see his kids, the courts must acknowledge that
The man went to work paid all bills, and by doing so, kept the family together, and was a responsible person.
If a dad is deigned any rights to his kids, then it is the courts that are now breaking up the family, and it must become the responsibility of the courts or State to maintain what is left of the family. DO not make orders for fathers to pay for some thing that has been taken away. If the courts take on a liability and sit in judgement which the courts do, then they must pay for their judgments. We cannot pay for electricity or gas bills or any other bills, if we don’t have them. So a responsibility can be taken away from a dad by a court giving no rights.
MAGGIE TUTTLE
As I am an early person in the mornings, some times switching on the computer as early as 3am I look forward to your emails regarding all family news and family courts and all the information of the Justice system, lets say so called Justice. Jim you do a very good job via the emails for all the guys out there, no matter where they are in the world at least they can know what is happening, and they are not alone.
What I would like to tell you and maybe the guys is that working a phone line for years and talking to women, god knows how many thousands over the year’s one of the constant moans of a women, was, and still is
My husband is always working, comes home late, falls asleep in front of the TV, cannot be bothered to have sex, maybe he has another women, he can’t be bothered with me or the kids, we don’t go out much, he never tells me he loves me, or how nice I look, and he’s become lazy, I have to decorate the house, do the garden and so on.
My answer
Most men are under such pressure to work and pay the bills, if the rent was not paid, then the whole family can be made homeless, and of course after a days work, he is tired, having been under pressure at work to make sure he does not lose his job, he also has the worry of feeding the family, school fees, uniforms gas/electric bills to pay and so on, so of course the poor man is tired from the worry. I found many women do not recognise these facts, and neither does the family courts.
I think it should be made more aware, world wide, that the men have the main responsibility to keep the family together just by going to work, and bringing in the money to pay bills.
If women become the bread winners, after all they are always stating they want equal rights, then they would stop their arguments, and understand that to get up every morning rush out of the house, in the car in the rush hour, or by public transport is worse, and do the same journey home in the evening, and to do this day in day out, all year, it can be very tiresome, and for many men when they get home, they want peace in the camp.
Family Courts.
When a man is seeking rights to see his kids, the courts must acknowledge that
The man went to work paid all bills, and by doing so, kept the family together, and was a responsible person.
If a dad is deigned any rights to his kids, then it is the courts that are now breaking up the family, and it must become the responsibility of the courts or State to maintain what is left of the family. DO not make orders for fathers to pay for some thing that has been taken away. If the courts take on a liability and sit in judgement which the courts do, then they must pay for their judgments. We cannot pay for electricity or gas bills or any other bills, if we don’t have them. So a responsibility can be taken away from a dad by a court giving no rights.
MAGGIE TUTTLE
Saturday, July 4, 2009
A grandsons cry for help.
On The morning of the 2/7/09 at 7.21 my grandson called my mobile to tell me he was in trouble at home, oh said
I, why, he replies, I ran away from home yesterday, again I said why, he said
I CANNOT STAND THIS MISRABLE LIFE ANY MORE.
He recently turned age 8.
I believe my grandson has spoken these words (a miserable life) on behalf of children world wide, who are deigned the right to see their loving grandparents and fathers.
Tell me, from where would an innocent sweet little child find such words to put them into a sentence.?? Well the answer is within the system, family courts, social services ect and yes the children’s charities, oh yes children’s charities please give money to the charities, yes, if you use some of it to help kids have a say in their own little life’s, and for the children world wide, who just may be thinking the same words (a miserable life).
Apart from Grandparents and Fathers, there is no one in the system listening to the children, who like my grandson are desperate for help, and we can do nothing, let me tell you, the system only listens to money, and whilst taking our money, they then go on to preach to the world, children are to young to know their own minds, so are they to young to say, I cannot stand this miserable life any more.?? Till time ends, there will be talking’s and meetings, children’s charities begging for their wages, and the whole system telling us grandparents and fathers you have no rights,
Oh please, all you do-gooders, do you really think you know the answers, half of you are not even married.
So the words of the Bible say,
Suffer little children come on to me.
Maybe the Muslim religion has it right .Hell on earth and heaven above.
And that man will destroy himself,
Not before it destroys the families and children of the world.
And to my Grandsons cry for help, I was only able to give words of comfort, one day you will be a big boy, and then you can come for ever to your Grandma.
MAGGIE TUTTLE.
I, why, he replies, I ran away from home yesterday, again I said why, he said
I CANNOT STAND THIS MISRABLE LIFE ANY MORE.
He recently turned age 8.
I believe my grandson has spoken these words (a miserable life) on behalf of children world wide, who are deigned the right to see their loving grandparents and fathers.
Tell me, from where would an innocent sweet little child find such words to put them into a sentence.?? Well the answer is within the system, family courts, social services ect and yes the children’s charities, oh yes children’s charities please give money to the charities, yes, if you use some of it to help kids have a say in their own little life’s, and for the children world wide, who just may be thinking the same words (a miserable life).
Apart from Grandparents and Fathers, there is no one in the system listening to the children, who like my grandson are desperate for help, and we can do nothing, let me tell you, the system only listens to money, and whilst taking our money, they then go on to preach to the world, children are to young to know their own minds, so are they to young to say, I cannot stand this miserable life any more.?? Till time ends, there will be talking’s and meetings, children’s charities begging for their wages, and the whole system telling us grandparents and fathers you have no rights,
Oh please, all you do-gooders, do you really think you know the answers, half of you are not even married.
So the words of the Bible say,
Suffer little children come on to me.
Maybe the Muslim religion has it right .Hell on earth and heaven above.
And that man will destroy himself,
Not before it destroys the families and children of the world.
And to my Grandsons cry for help, I was only able to give words of comfort, one day you will be a big boy, and then you can come for ever to your Grandma.
MAGGIE TUTTLE.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Draft Children's Hearings (Scotland Bill)
Draft Children's Hearings (Scotland) Bill
The Draft Children's Hearings (Scotland) Bill was published on June 26, 2009. You can read the
Draft Bill, Policy Overview and FAQ on this website.
The Draft Bill contains the Scottish Government's proposals to reinforce and modernise the Children's Hearings System.
Explanatory Notes to accompany Part I of the Draft Bill can also be read on the website. The rest of the Explanatory Notes will be published soon.
Key proposals contained in the Draft Bill
The creation of a new national body, the Scottish Children's Hearings Tribunal, to drive up standards across Scotland.
Changes in functions and practice to improve support for both professionals and panel members, leading in turn to improving better outcomes for children and young people.
Legal and procedural changes to increase fficiency and ensure that children's rights continue to be properly upheld.
Under these proposals, the Scottish Children's Hearings Tribunal will be responsible for all functions associated with the Children's Panel, including recruitment, selection and training of panel members.
The Scottish Children's Reporter Administration will deliver the Children's Reporters service.
People will continue to be recruited, selected, trained and sit on hearings on a local basis.
Considering the proposals
The Draft Bill gives stakeholders the opportunity to consider the proposals.
We welcome your comments on the Draft Bill, at events this summer or by email to the Bill Team.
Hard copies of the Draft Bill pack have been sent to every panel member, panel chair, CPAC, Children's Hearings Training Unit and other key stakeholders. Please contact the Bill Team if you need hard copies.
The Bill is scheduled for introduction to the Scottish Parliament in the autumn.
Minister's Tour:
Inverness
Glasgow
Shetland
Edinburgh
Aberdeen
Dumfries & Galloway
Minister's Tour
The Draft Children's Hearings (Scotland) Bill was published on June 26, 2009. You can read the
Draft Bill, Policy Overview and FAQ on this website.
The Draft Bill contains the Scottish Government's proposals to reinforce and modernise the Children's Hearings System.
Explanatory Notes to accompany Part I of the Draft Bill can also be read on the website. The rest of the Explanatory Notes will be published soon.
Key proposals contained in the Draft Bill
The creation of a new national body, the Scottish Children's Hearings Tribunal, to drive up standards across Scotland.
Changes in functions and practice to improve support for both professionals and panel members, leading in turn to improving better outcomes for children and young people.
Legal and procedural changes to increase fficiency and ensure that children's rights continue to be properly upheld.
Under these proposals, the Scottish Children's Hearings Tribunal will be responsible for all functions associated with the Children's Panel, including recruitment, selection and training of panel members.
The Scottish Children's Reporter Administration will deliver the Children's Reporters service.
People will continue to be recruited, selected, trained and sit on hearings on a local basis.
Considering the proposals
The Draft Bill gives stakeholders the opportunity to consider the proposals.
We welcome your comments on the Draft Bill, at events this summer or by email to the Bill Team.
Hard copies of the Draft Bill pack have been sent to every panel member, panel chair, CPAC, Children's Hearings Training Unit and other key stakeholders. Please contact the Bill Team if you need hard copies.
The Bill is scheduled for introduction to the Scottish Parliament in the autumn.
Minister's Tour:
Inverness
Glasgow
Shetland
Edinburgh
Aberdeen
Dumfries & Galloway
Minister's Tour
Saturday, June 27, 2009
The Ten Commandments of Family Law.
The Ten Commandments of Family Law.
(What we feel needs to change for our children’s best interest?)
1,Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child starts with Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not to.
2,The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in Children’s welfare and answerable in law.
3,Children are human beings. Stop treating them as Commodities
like a business deal. Cost only criteria and can ruin children’s lives 4,If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in line with article 8 of the UN Convention on the rights of the child. (Should only be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5,Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6,All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers. (c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Services Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are failed
7,Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent And combat section 6 b+d)
8,More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their managers
9,Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection)
10, Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
(What we feel needs to change for our children’s best interest?)
1,Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child starts with Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not to.
2,The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in Children’s welfare and answerable in law.
3,Children are human beings. Stop treating them as Commodities
like a business deal. Cost only criteria and can ruin children’s lives 4,If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in line with article 8 of the UN Convention on the rights of the child. (Should only be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5,Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6,All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers. (c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Services Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are failed
7,Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent And combat section 6 b+d)
8,More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their managers
9,Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection)
10, Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
The Forgotten Children of drug and Alcohol Abuse.
The forgotten children are children that are caught in a protection gap where no-one can help them if they are being abused until the unthinkable happens and in the situation of a 37% rise in drug and alcohol fatalities (one nearly every day) “Who” is looking out for these children that are involved? No-one! No one is permitted to contact them if the resident parent wishes it.
Children’s agencies say they can only cope with half the calls they receive and can only act when the abuse has been recognized, usually when a child has been badly abused or worse. A gap in child protection that grandparents could fill because of their unique relationship and love for their grandchildren; creating a much needed helpline to someone they can trust. Grandparents know their own children and have the special insight as to how they could treat their grandchildren, especially in drug and alcohol danger homes.
An abuser of a child can get a court order with or without good reason banning a non-resident parent or grandparents from having contact when all they want is to know are the children OK. Surely this is in the best interests of a child? Every one who loves them should be able to have some contact in case of problems in their lives. A stranger is allowed to come and go any night and has abused and murdered a child. Non-resident parents and grandparents are enraged at this powerlessness to protect their own children.
The above was put to the previous Scottish Executive by Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland their answer was “we have nothing further to add to our previous correspondence with you” Turning a blind eye will not make the abuse go away. It is obvious they had no answers to this problem. They have previously stated they also have no answer to non-compliance of court orders.
The unique relationship children could have with their grandparents must be explored and supported to the full for the welfare of our children. There is an army of grandparents out there where the majority of them would be delighted to help in early intervention should problems arise in their offspring’s home. For example, taking care of children and providing them with a known home environment rather than being taken to strangers, especially if their mum or dad is in trouble. The worst thing that can happen to a child at any age is to be parted from the family. The effects of this can be with them all their lives and lead to insecurity and problems in society.
Children’s agencies say they can only cope with half the calls they receive and can only act when the abuse has been recognized, usually when a child has been badly abused or worse. A gap in child protection that grandparents could fill because of their unique relationship and love for their grandchildren; creating a much needed helpline to someone they can trust. Grandparents know their own children and have the special insight as to how they could treat their grandchildren, especially in drug and alcohol danger homes.
An abuser of a child can get a court order with or without good reason banning a non-resident parent or grandparents from having contact when all they want is to know are the children OK. Surely this is in the best interests of a child? Every one who loves them should be able to have some contact in case of problems in their lives. A stranger is allowed to come and go any night and has abused and murdered a child. Non-resident parents and grandparents are enraged at this powerlessness to protect their own children.
The above was put to the previous Scottish Executive by Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland their answer was “we have nothing further to add to our previous correspondence with you” Turning a blind eye will not make the abuse go away. It is obvious they had no answers to this problem. They have previously stated they also have no answer to non-compliance of court orders.
The unique relationship children could have with their grandparents must be explored and supported to the full for the welfare of our children. There is an army of grandparents out there where the majority of them would be delighted to help in early intervention should problems arise in their offspring’s home. For example, taking care of children and providing them with a known home environment rather than being taken to strangers, especially if their mum or dad is in trouble. The worst thing that can happen to a child at any age is to be parted from the family. The effects of this can be with them all their lives and lead to insecurity and problems in society.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
cSA Amended Authority Form. Do not Sign.
Hi to everyonePlease do not sign the CSA's amended "Representative Authority" form, until you have had legal advice.Sue Price of the MRA spoke with me recently. After our discussions, I believe that there is some concern about the revised wording of the CSA’s newly amended "Representative Authority" form. www.csa.gov.au/forms/index.aspxhttp://www.csa.gov.au/forms/pdf/RepresentativeAuthority.pdfwww.csa.gov.au/forms/RepresentativeAuthority.aspxThis form has to signed by a person who represents another person in a child support matter. This person can be (and often is) a non-lawyer. The layout of the form suggests that the person who signs as a representative also accepts the potential liability of up to $2000, if the person that they are acting for has been found to have made a false statement.We would suggest any person who is considering signing this amended "Representative Authority" form, should obtain legal advice before so doing.RegardsJohn
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Grandparents/Grandchildren. (The Way Forward)
Grandparents /Grandchildren.
(The way forward)
Gloria Hunniford is an excellent celebrity to highlight the need for grandparents to be more prominent in their grandchildren’s lives. I have written to her myself a few months ago because of the similarity of losing both our daughters to breast cancer in early motherhood. It was heartbreaking to lose our own daughter but to find out that we could be cut off from her children, especially when they had bonded with us from birth, caused the children and us so much grief and distress it was unbearable.
The UK Government is being requested to remove the need for grandparents to crave a courts permission to apply for contact with their grandchildren. In Scotland we already have the right to go straight to court without asking permission but it has not advanced the cause any further. The problem of being irrelevant persons in the eyes of Social Services and professionals and to convince a court that grandparents are decent enough to have contact with their own flesh and blood. “This being an insult to the extreme”.
We need to be more focussed and specific about what is required.’ The Charter for Grandchildren’ having been thought out carefully by the legal eagles of a government and created by the Scottish Executive needs to be adopted and made compulsory for professionals such as Social Services to accept that grandparents are of huge importance in children’s lives.
The UK Governments are determined that grandparents will never get automatic legal rights to their grandchildren; they claim it would cause more problems than it would resolve. In the stakeholders group that created the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ we experienced hostility from father’s groups who claimed that grandparents would have more rights than some parents, and if that came about it would cause enormous conflict on a massive scale. We have no desire to take over our grandchildren; we only wish to know them, love them and be part of the family. We consider parents to be the first and foremost in their children’s lives every time, with grandparents a close second.
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ was to be advisory guidelines for everyone who work in the welfare of children to consider more carefully the role grandparents can play in their grandchildren’s lives, especially in the absence of one or both parents. There is an urgent need to have this as legal protection for children because of the failings of the professionals dealing with their welfare and to ensure children have the best and fairest treatment by Social Services or professionals that is humanly possible.
We have a petition on line to make 'The Charter for Grandchildren' Mandatory for professionals working in the welfare and protection of children to ensure children have the best care and protection available.
Please sign? http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/TCFGRA/ Hard copies are also available for signatures.
For all the Governments of the UK to adopt and make the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ mandatory for all professionals to be answerable in law for not working “In the Child’s best interest” especially in today’s society where it is everyday headlines in the media about their failing our children.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
(The way forward)
Gloria Hunniford is an excellent celebrity to highlight the need for grandparents to be more prominent in their grandchildren’s lives. I have written to her myself a few months ago because of the similarity of losing both our daughters to breast cancer in early motherhood. It was heartbreaking to lose our own daughter but to find out that we could be cut off from her children, especially when they had bonded with us from birth, caused the children and us so much grief and distress it was unbearable.
The UK Government is being requested to remove the need for grandparents to crave a courts permission to apply for contact with their grandchildren. In Scotland we already have the right to go straight to court without asking permission but it has not advanced the cause any further. The problem of being irrelevant persons in the eyes of Social Services and professionals and to convince a court that grandparents are decent enough to have contact with their own flesh and blood. “This being an insult to the extreme”.
We need to be more focussed and specific about what is required.’ The Charter for Grandchildren’ having been thought out carefully by the legal eagles of a government and created by the Scottish Executive needs to be adopted and made compulsory for professionals such as Social Services to accept that grandparents are of huge importance in children’s lives.
The UK Governments are determined that grandparents will never get automatic legal rights to their grandchildren; they claim it would cause more problems than it would resolve. In the stakeholders group that created the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ we experienced hostility from father’s groups who claimed that grandparents would have more rights than some parents, and if that came about it would cause enormous conflict on a massive scale. We have no desire to take over our grandchildren; we only wish to know them, love them and be part of the family. We consider parents to be the first and foremost in their children’s lives every time, with grandparents a close second.
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ was to be advisory guidelines for everyone who work in the welfare of children to consider more carefully the role grandparents can play in their grandchildren’s lives, especially in the absence of one or both parents. There is an urgent need to have this as legal protection for children because of the failings of the professionals dealing with their welfare and to ensure children have the best and fairest treatment by Social Services or professionals that is humanly possible.
We have a petition on line to make 'The Charter for Grandchildren' Mandatory for professionals working in the welfare and protection of children to ensure children have the best care and protection available.
Please sign? http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/TCFGRA/ Hard copies are also available for signatures.
For all the Governments of the UK to adopt and make the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ mandatory for all professionals to be answerable in law for not working “In the Child’s best interest” especially in today’s society where it is everyday headlines in the media about their failing our children.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
'The Charter for Fathers'
‘The Charter for Fathers’
(Dealing with Conflict, protecting children)
Separation and divorce can be a nasty and bitter experience for every one concerned especially the children. It appears to be that 90% are fathers that lose out but it can happen to mothers too.. You would not believe your new loving sweetheart, presently telling you that “I will always be yours”, could be anything else but loving and gentle.
In our experience in dealing with grandparents that are prevented from contact with their grandchildren is that there is at least one parent involved too. We have come to the conclusion that both are inseparable and in the end it is the children we feel for in the conflict of hatred, spite and revenge that ruins their lives.
We just hope you will not experience any of these horrors but! Some of you certainly will.
Too often we have heard “I just can’t believe it, that she/he could go to these extremes like telling lies about domestic violence and using the children for revenge and blackmail to get back at me for their own selfish means”.
If you are experiencing marital problems or thinking of separating get in touch with a family group for advice. Do not delay and do not try to work it out yourself or force your will on anyone. Contact any of us listed on the contacts list before you do anything, and we mean anything. If we can’t help we will know a man that can.
1. Urgent! Firstly contact an outside family agency, someone not involved with the family and keep contact throughout. You must resolve the situation without any aggression or incidents or you will lose. If you don’t heed this you will possibly lose your children as well.
2. Speak to someone in a help group before contacting anyone you are in conflict with.. You will be too emotional to handle this on your own.
3. Do not swear or raise your voice or obstruct in any way. if you do come in contact with your ex-partner or their family.
4. If the police become involved move away as directed immediately. The police have no stomach for family problems. Do not argue or try to reason as you will get removed and possibly charged with breach or harassment and it will never be removed from your record, even if you are innocent. It could be used against you if courts or Social Services get involved. Don’t give any excuse or you will be indefensible and not even we can help. You have been warned!
5. You will have to fight for any rights you do have regarding your children. It is equal on paper but don’t be fooled by this, in reality if you don’t live with your children, in the eyes of Social services, schools and the police you have no rights at all. Always have witnesses to everything you do and record everything in a diary.
6. If you need a solicitor make sure they are family law specialists as others could possibly take your case and lack the expertise. Be prepared to do most of the case work yourself, they are your children, make sure you get things right, you will only get one chance.
7. Mediation has resolved many disputes before a molehill becomes a mountain, before it goes into the real slanging match with accusing and condemning in court. You don’t want to be the cause of them saying, “you are angry and aggressive so I won’t attend mediation”. Give no excuses to refuse to attend. Make sure that the mediation is provided by an independent organisation like Family Mediation. They ask for donations only. You will find them in your local phone book or computer.
8. There also appears to be a standard template used by the parent with residency so do not be alarmed to find yourself falsely accused and branded as:-
a) Violent b)Controlling c)Abusive d)Aggressive c) Sexually abuse.
All of these will be used to alienate you from your children.
9. Above all try and gain agreement through mediation without involvement of lawyers, courts, police or Social Services. If you gain a court order for contact it is not always complied with and is often not enforced making a mockery of our family laws. Your children have nothing to gain by these agencies involvement and very real significant harm can come of it.
10. Seek help as soon you can from a help group and keep in touch with at least one of their members or/and their meetings.
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Jimmy - 0141 882 5658 - UK
Jim - 01389 874 095- Clydebank and the west
Charlie - 01324 410 064- Larbet
Bill - 01563 821 869- Ayrshire
Richard - 01224 297 175- Aberdeen & the north
Eamonn - 0141 580 0102- Barrhead & the west
Frank- 01492 874 395- Wales
Elton - 01253 341 659- Blackpool area.
The Ten Commandments of Family Law.
(What we feel needs to change for our children’s best interest?)
1…Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a
child starts with Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not
to.
2....The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in
Children’s welfare and answerable in law.
3…Children are human beings. Stop treating them as Commodities like a
business deal. Cost only criteria and can ruin children’s lives
4.....If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in
line with article 8 of the UN Convention on the rights of the child. (Should only
be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5 ...Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6. ..All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers.
(c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Services Orchestrating “cover up’s”,
when children are failed
7…Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape
recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent and combat section 6 b+d)
8….More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their
managers
9….Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only
the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection)
10…. Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent , Glasgow G52 1PJ, 0141 882 5658. http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
(Dealing with Conflict, protecting children)
Separation and divorce can be a nasty and bitter experience for every one concerned especially the children. It appears to be that 90% are fathers that lose out but it can happen to mothers too.. You would not believe your new loving sweetheart, presently telling you that “I will always be yours”, could be anything else but loving and gentle.
In our experience in dealing with grandparents that are prevented from contact with their grandchildren is that there is at least one parent involved too. We have come to the conclusion that both are inseparable and in the end it is the children we feel for in the conflict of hatred, spite and revenge that ruins their lives.
We just hope you will not experience any of these horrors but! Some of you certainly will.
Too often we have heard “I just can’t believe it, that she/he could go to these extremes like telling lies about domestic violence and using the children for revenge and blackmail to get back at me for their own selfish means”.
If you are experiencing marital problems or thinking of separating get in touch with a family group for advice. Do not delay and do not try to work it out yourself or force your will on anyone. Contact any of us listed on the contacts list before you do anything, and we mean anything. If we can’t help we will know a man that can.
1. Urgent! Firstly contact an outside family agency, someone not involved with the family and keep contact throughout. You must resolve the situation without any aggression or incidents or you will lose. If you don’t heed this you will possibly lose your children as well.
2. Speak to someone in a help group before contacting anyone you are in conflict with.. You will be too emotional to handle this on your own.
3. Do not swear or raise your voice or obstruct in any way. if you do come in contact with your ex-partner or their family.
4. If the police become involved move away as directed immediately. The police have no stomach for family problems. Do not argue or try to reason as you will get removed and possibly charged with breach or harassment and it will never be removed from your record, even if you are innocent. It could be used against you if courts or Social Services get involved. Don’t give any excuse or you will be indefensible and not even we can help. You have been warned!
5. You will have to fight for any rights you do have regarding your children. It is equal on paper but don’t be fooled by this, in reality if you don’t live with your children, in the eyes of Social services, schools and the police you have no rights at all. Always have witnesses to everything you do and record everything in a diary.
6. If you need a solicitor make sure they are family law specialists as others could possibly take your case and lack the expertise. Be prepared to do most of the case work yourself, they are your children, make sure you get things right, you will only get one chance.
7. Mediation has resolved many disputes before a molehill becomes a mountain, before it goes into the real slanging match with accusing and condemning in court. You don’t want to be the cause of them saying, “you are angry and aggressive so I won’t attend mediation”. Give no excuses to refuse to attend. Make sure that the mediation is provided by an independent organisation like Family Mediation. They ask for donations only. You will find them in your local phone book or computer.
8. There also appears to be a standard template used by the parent with residency so do not be alarmed to find yourself falsely accused and branded as:-
a) Violent b)Controlling c)Abusive d)Aggressive c) Sexually abuse.
All of these will be used to alienate you from your children.
9. Above all try and gain agreement through mediation without involvement of lawyers, courts, police or Social Services. If you gain a court order for contact it is not always complied with and is often not enforced making a mockery of our family laws. Your children have nothing to gain by these agencies involvement and very real significant harm can come of it.
10. Seek help as soon you can from a help group and keep in touch with at least one of their members or/and their meetings.
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Jimmy - 0141 882 5658 - UK
Jim - 01389 874 095- Clydebank and the west
Charlie - 01324 410 064- Larbet
Bill - 01563 821 869- Ayrshire
Richard - 01224 297 175- Aberdeen & the north
Eamonn - 0141 580 0102- Barrhead & the west
Frank- 01492 874 395- Wales
Elton - 01253 341 659- Blackpool area.
The Ten Commandments of Family Law.
(What we feel needs to change for our children’s best interest?)
1…Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a
child starts with Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not
to.
2....The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in
Children’s welfare and answerable in law.
3…Children are human beings. Stop treating them as Commodities like a
business deal. Cost only criteria and can ruin children’s lives
4.....If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in
line with article 8 of the UN Convention on the rights of the child. (Should only
be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5 ...Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6. ..All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers.
(c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Services Orchestrating “cover up’s”,
when children are failed
7…Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape
recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent and combat section 6 b+d)
8….More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their
managers
9….Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only
the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection)
10…. Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent , Glasgow G52 1PJ, 0141 882 5658. http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Public Communications Unit
Thank you for your emails dated 1 April about child contact. I am sure you will appreciate the Ministers receive a vast amount of correspondence and are unable to reply to each one personally. Your emails have been forwarded to the Department for Children, Schools and Families as this department is responsible for children's services. I have been asked to reply to issues that fall within the remit of this department. The Government believes that children benefit from a continuing relationship with both parents following divorce or separation, where it is safe and in the child’s best interests. The Children Act 1989 supports this and, most importantly, it makes the welfare of the child concerned, rather than the rights of the parents, its paramount consideration. While most parents can and do resolve issues about contact and residence following separation or divorce, the court becomes involved if either parent applies for an order for residence or contact. The court has a wide discretion to take account of all the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Decisions are made after the judge has heard and considered all the evidence provided by both parties and any other witnesses, including experts. Both parties are entitled to have their views heard and have the opportunity to respond to any evidence put before the court. If arrangements under a court order do not work out, either parent may, according to the circumstances, apply to the court for the order to be varied, revoked, or enforced. We do not see any need to change this law, but we do need to change the way parents settle disputes. In particular, we would like to see a reduction in the number of parents resorting to the courts, as this so often results in poorer outcomes for the children and greater dissatisfaction for the parents. Where cases do come before the court, we are promoting extensive use of measures such as mediation and in-court conciliation to divert such cases from a full court hearing. Linked to this, we also want to provide a wider range of levers to ensure the proper implementation of court orders. It is realised that there are cases where non-resident parents have difficulty in maintaining contact with their children because of the obstructive behaviour of the parent with whom the children reside. Where contact has been agreed or ordered by the courts, it is essential that it is adhered to. If, at the end of a long and difficult dispute, the contact ordered by the court does not take place, then it has been a waste of time and energy but, more importantly, the child is not benefiting from what the court has decided will promote their welfare. The enforcement of contact orders is a sensitive area. Deliberate refusal to obey any court order is contempt of court that can be punished with a fine or imprisonment. The court also has the power to decide to transfer residence to the other (non-resident) parent if this is considered to be in the child’s best interests. However, penalties such as fines and imprisonment may not always be appropriate in a child contact case because of the effect that this may have on the children at the centre of the dispute. The Children and Adoption Act 2006 gives courts additional powers to facilitate contact and enforce contact orders. For instance, in addition to the current system of fines and imprisonment, they will be able to refer parents to a counsellor or a parenting programme or make enforcement orders imposing requirements for unpaid work. The courts will also be able to award financial compensation, for example where the cost of a holiday has been lost. These additional levers will be available to the courts in any contact case, if the court considers they would assist resolution. The Government does not believe that an automatic 50:50 division of the child’s time between the two parents would be in the best interests of most children. In many separated families, such arrangements would not work in practical terms, owing to living arrangements or work commitments. Enforcing this type of arrangement would not be what many children want and could have a damaging impact on some of them. Children are not a commodity to be apportioned equally after separation. The best arrangements for them will depend on a variety of issues particular to their circumstances: a one-size-fits-all formula will not work. The assumption that both parents have equal status and value as parents is enshrined in current law. The actual arrangements made by the courts start from that position. Mediation can offer advantages in relation to family disputes in some cases although none of the major family mediation providers in England and Wales believe that it is possible to make family mediation compulsory. The court may adjourn a case for people to consider the benefits of mediation, but it has no power to compel people to take this route. Although the number of cases referred to family mediation is growing, it is not suitable for all family disputes. It is not normally appropriate to attempt to use family mediation in cases where there has been domestic violence. Regarding your concerns about the court system, I have forwarded your correspondence to the Ministry of Justice. They will reply to you directly concerning these issues. Yours sincerely Anita Dixon Public Communications Unit
Sunday, May 10, 2009
AGM Report and Newslatter
Grandparents Apart UK
A.G.M. Report. Newsletter.
Dear Friends/members,
This year our AGM is on Tuesday 2nd June 2009 7pm 8.30pm at The Pearce Institute Govan Cross Govan Glasgow G51.
Our main concern today is, the membership is not being renewed and at the rate it is falling it will be a question of just how much we can do to further our cause. A lot of enquirers who have and still receive help and support do not pay membership fees. This is unfair and limits what we can do. If you want us to keep campaigning (See what we have achieved) you must contribute your fees. Because of this we had to increase the fee to £10.00p with our free book ‘Grandparents Speak out for Vulnerable Children’ for every membership renewed this year. As you will know we are all volunteer workers and don’t have the staff to cover everything. So we ask that you check your membership card and then please act accordingly
It cost a fortune to get 600 odd letters to our contacts (all we could afford in stamps) and 4000 in emails out for people to send in to their MSPs the request for them to raise the question in parliament for ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ to be made mandatory.
The Mobile Information Centre we did with the Big Lottery grant is finished. Margaret and I did our best but with no real help we had to return around £3000.00p We covered as much of Scotland (The grant was only for Scotland) as we could and I think we done very well. The Charter for Grandchildren and Parenting Agreement is far more widely known now than ever it was.
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ being made mandatory for all professionals of all UK countries who work in the welfare of children has become our war cry and we need to keep writing to our respective members of parliament to make it happen. There is no valid reason for not making it mandatory as a government created it (with our help) and not to do this is leaving gaps and is not in the best interests of children.
We have created a Petition (enclosed) for Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland said they work on the English one. Please help to get as many signatures as possible filled in and return it to us before the 6th July 2009 to Grandparents Apart UK 22 Alness Crescent Glasgow G52 1PJ. Also we need your story for evidence to present to the petitions committee to back our claims. We have a few but we need more. And it needs to be very quickly. We need to know how grandparents have been ignored by professionals regarding their grandchildren. If you phone us and tell us how it happened to you. It will be treated in the strictest confidence by us and the government.
The demonstrations in Glasgow and Dundee went really well in getting tremendous coverage from local TV, Radio and newspapers. One of our members is planning to hold a demo in Aberdeen. It would appear demos are the best way to bring our cause to the media’s notice. Nationally Jimmy and Margaret appeared on GMTV in London and their story has appeared in several papers of the national press. Jimmy done a 30 minute BBC interview with the well known. Radio Scotland Battle Lines Interviewer. Shareen Nanjiani
GRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW PART 1,2 ,3.http://www.youtube.com/v/o7YBPu3QurY http://www.youtube.com/v/UFkj5LJX8CE http://www.youtube.com/v/QqvpRdl6Q4s
I have enclosed a letter for you to send to your respective member of parliament for them to adopt ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ as mandatory for professionals. Please send it to them if you have not done so already.
N.B. It is not us that gets the job done. It is you the constituent by your support and putting pressure on your Members of Parliaments.
Jimmy Deuchars (manager)
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Grandparents Apart UK.
Petition.
Grandparents Apart UK request the petitions committee to urge the government to make ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ mandatory for professionals who work in the welfare of children.
More info:- http://grandparentsapartuk.blogspot.com/
Name Address Tel; Signature
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/TCFGRA/
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’
It is important that parents, grandparents and other family members, speak to, and treat each other, with respect. You may not get on, but you can still be civil, for the sake of the children. Try to avoid arguing with or criticising family members in front of the children. It can be very upsetting for them.
On occasions professional organizations such as social work departments or the courts can become involved and may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s entire life. In these circumstances it is vital that the loving and supportive role that the wider family, in particular grandparents can play is respected and protected for the child…
FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO CHILDREN
Grandchildren can expect:
To be involved with and helped to understand decisions made about their lives.
To be treated fairly
To know and maintain contact with their family (except in very exceptional circumstances) and other people who are important to them.
To know that their grandparents still love them, even if they are not able to see them at the present time.
To know their family history.
The adults in their lives to put their needs first and to protect them from disputes between adults - not to use them as weapons in quarrels between adults.
Social workers , when making assessments about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
The Courts, when making decisions about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
Lawyers and other advisers to encourage relationship counseling or mediation when adults seek advice on matters affecting them and their children.
Along with others, Grandparents Apart UK put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” by demanding to be heard about the gaps in family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for our love of them why would we bother?
.............................................................................................................................................................
We are happy to promote the Charter for Grandchildren and the Parenting Agreement because they are in the best interests of children if they are used right.
letter to your member of Parliament.
Dear ……………………..,………………………
The Scottish Parliament or The House of Commons or Welsh Assembly GovernmentEdinburgh London. Cathays Park EH99 1SP SW1A 0AA Cardiff CF10 3NQ ...
I have contacted Grandparents Apart UK for support regarding losing contact with our grandchildren. With their nine years experiences and what has happened to me I feel justified in supporting this proposal and would be obliged if you would make it an issue in parliament. I believe A Government created this Charter and therefore they should ensure its effectiveness.
The Proposal:- We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ ‘ The role grandparent can play in their grandchildren’s lives’ be made Mandatory for Professionals dealing with children thereby ensuring in the absence of one or both parents that the love and protective role grandparents can play is not wasted as is the case at present because grandparents are regarded as irrelevant persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the parents or family in general…If the governments were to adopt this as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and it could be worthwhile attending mediation focusing on the best interests of the children.
Failure to implement this is criminal and neglect in providing all the possible protection for children in need and in many ways is actually encouraging child abuse I understand this statement will not be discussed or shown to anyone outside the theatre of government and will be completely confidential. I look forward to your reply.
Name…………………………………………..Address……………………………………….
Town…………………………………………..Post code…………………………………….
Phone number………………………………
E-mail…………………………………………(If you have one)
Signature……………………………………….
Grandparents Apart UK. 22 Alness Crescent, Glasgow G52 1PJ
A Scottish Registered Volunteer Charity No. SC 031558
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
There is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and there is reckoned to be a million children in Britain today living in a home with one or both parents addicted to drugs or alcohol and fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse from different partners in a child’s life
Our new proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their
Grandparents in child abuse cases are criminal neglect by the authorities and not in their best interests. Every means of protection should be used. It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse and in the care and stability of children when they are in a crisis situation especially in the middle of the night. That is if they are informed about it at all being irrelevant persons. If the crisis has been violent and very upsetting it would be in the best interests of the children to be settled as quickly as possible with someone who cares for them. What we find overall that needs to change for our children’s best interest? 1…Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child starts with
Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not to.
2....‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in Children’s welfare.
3…Children are human beings. Stop treating them as commodities like a business deal
4.....If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in line with article 8 of the un convention on the rights of the child. (should only be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5 ...Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6. …All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers. (c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Service Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are Failed
7… Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent and combat section 6 b+d)
8….More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their managers
9….Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection) 10….Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Grandparents Apart UK 2009
What we and you have achieved.
We have had a great write up in the Daily Mail, the same week we appeared on GMTV full VIP treatment. Also a radio interview on Radio 2 with Jeremy Vine. Now we are doing a Christmas show with The Sunny Govan Community Radio 103.5 FM which is fun.
Previously we have had a documentary made about us by Grampian TV and The Scottish Politics Show been on BBC radio Newcastle Radio Scotland, STV and BBC news bulletins. We must try and keep this publicity going if you want the law changed.
Please ask at your Scottish Libraries, Social works, community centres, doctor’s surgeries if they have ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ or ‘The parenting Agreement’ in fact anywhere concerning families the more we ask the more popular they will get.
In our relatively short period of existence, because we have lobbied Westminster and the Scottish Parliament and produced constant press releases through television and radio and of course with your membership and donations we have -
1. Dispelled the myth that grandparents have a right of contact with their grandchildren. Now that the problem has been identified and accepted we have attempted to raise the profile of grandparents all over the UK and show the benefits and protection they can offer grandchildren.
2. Provided a helpline service for grandparents that was not available before in Scotland. And is proving to be very successful in England too. We are very proud of our helpline‘A listening ear’ for devastated grandparents, which we know has comforted some grannies that were suicidal
3. Worked in a Stakeholder Group with the Scottish Government as a result the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ and the ‘Parenting Agreement’ were created to help families and children in particular.
4. Shown that ‘Bridge building’ is our speciality. The more grandparents that is aware of our existence the more we can fulfil our motto of ‘Bringing Families Together’
5. Became tired waiting for further improvements, we decided to take the matter into our
own hands and proposed to open an independent Family Information and Education Centre so we asked for a £½ million Big Lottery Grant but were knocked back, instead we were awarded £10, 000,00p to develop our idea as a Mobile Family Information and Education Centre and toured Scotland promoting the Charter for Grandchildren and The Parenting Agreement. See;- http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
6. highlighted the unfairness of our legal aid system and it has now been announced that new proposals from the legal aid board and the Scottish Government are to change the way solicitors are to be paid for legal aid work.
7. Risen from being seen as a complainer to the Government to being a respected source of information to allow them to gather information about families, being invited to meetings and our opinions sought.
8. Recently we have got Children 1st (NSPCC) agreeing with us on 3 points.
a) They are urging the government to give grandparents the right of information on their grandchildren's welfare.
b) That the Charter for Grandchildren and Parenting Agreement must be publicised more.
c) Family Information Centres should be available throughout the country. And for children's protection in drug and alcohol homes.
9. Adam Ingram MSP Minister for Children invited us to a meeting in June to hear our views on kinship care as we have been campaigning hard for this. On 4th December 2007 the Scottish Government announced they would be paying the granny grant of £119 to £199 to kinship granny carers. Details from our website http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
10. This year 2008 our group has been invited once more to work with the Scottish Government on 'Making Contact Work'. Our first meeting was very encouraging and we did get across that the administration of family law have become blasé in the best interests of the child and need to be tightened up and monitored.
11. Due to a demo we arranged at the Scottish Parliament in February this year. Last month September 2008 Nigel Don MSP with the backing of 22 other MSPs arranged a debate in the Scottish Parliament on injustices in family law. The Scottish Justice Minister accepted that there are injustices. A huge step in the right direction. Our policy is to ask everyone who contacts us to also contact their MSP and keep on at them as it is you the constituent contacting them that changes will be made. - --
12. Scottish Woman's Aid:-
(Quote)"! totally agree that grandparents are often best placed to detect any kind of abuse or addiction that harms children and are often left picking up the pieces with no support when things fall apart. I think resolving that bit should be a priority (i.e. offering financial and emotional support) and then perhaps there's scope to move on to greater recognition of the role grandparents play and how this could be established in law".
13, Demonstration.
Our group organised a demonstration on 4th March 2009 in George Square, Glasgow City Centre Which attracted very good media attention from The Daily Mail, Sunday Express, Sunday Herald, Scottish GMTV, The Scotsman, Sunny Govan Radio Station, STV news, A BBC ½ hour program. due to be broadcasted on Radio Scotland Battle lines at 11.30, 27th March 2009. This demo was calling for ‘The Charter for Grandparents’ to be made mandatory for professionals that work with the welfare of children and family to ensure children can have the best that grandparents can offer without treading on the toes of parents. To ignore this call is not in the best interests of children
14 Our campaign on 25th march 2009 in Dundee went very well. We were right outside the room where the directors were having registration and their morning coffee breaks and they could not help but see us as we for. waved to them. Someone heard them debating us being there so we have achieved what we came
Alan Baird the boss man in question has refused to resign over the Branden Muir case in Dundee and would not answer our phone calls to his office. His secretary refused to give us any information as to his whereabouts and even refused to speak to the media.
The media coverage was Brilliant, GMTV, STV, Radio Times, The Telegraph, The Courier and a few radio and newspaper reporters which i can't remember them all but will be posted on the blog above as they become available. We can't thank them all enough for their coverage and kindness.
A.G.M. Report. Newsletter.
Dear Friends/members,
This year our AGM is on Tuesday 2nd June 2009 7pm 8.30pm at The Pearce Institute Govan Cross Govan Glasgow G51.
Our main concern today is, the membership is not being renewed and at the rate it is falling it will be a question of just how much we can do to further our cause. A lot of enquirers who have and still receive help and support do not pay membership fees. This is unfair and limits what we can do. If you want us to keep campaigning (See what we have achieved) you must contribute your fees. Because of this we had to increase the fee to £10.00p with our free book ‘Grandparents Speak out for Vulnerable Children’ for every membership renewed this year. As you will know we are all volunteer workers and don’t have the staff to cover everything. So we ask that you check your membership card and then please act accordingly
It cost a fortune to get 600 odd letters to our contacts (all we could afford in stamps) and 4000 in emails out for people to send in to their MSPs the request for them to raise the question in parliament for ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ to be made mandatory.
The Mobile Information Centre we did with the Big Lottery grant is finished. Margaret and I did our best but with no real help we had to return around £3000.00p We covered as much of Scotland (The grant was only for Scotland) as we could and I think we done very well. The Charter for Grandchildren and Parenting Agreement is far more widely known now than ever it was.
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ being made mandatory for all professionals of all UK countries who work in the welfare of children has become our war cry and we need to keep writing to our respective members of parliament to make it happen. There is no valid reason for not making it mandatory as a government created it (with our help) and not to do this is leaving gaps and is not in the best interests of children.
We have created a Petition (enclosed) for Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland said they work on the English one. Please help to get as many signatures as possible filled in and return it to us before the 6th July 2009 to Grandparents Apart UK 22 Alness Crescent Glasgow G52 1PJ. Also we need your story for evidence to present to the petitions committee to back our claims. We have a few but we need more. And it needs to be very quickly. We need to know how grandparents have been ignored by professionals regarding their grandchildren. If you phone us and tell us how it happened to you. It will be treated in the strictest confidence by us and the government.
The demonstrations in Glasgow and Dundee went really well in getting tremendous coverage from local TV, Radio and newspapers. One of our members is planning to hold a demo in Aberdeen. It would appear demos are the best way to bring our cause to the media’s notice. Nationally Jimmy and Margaret appeared on GMTV in London and their story has appeared in several papers of the national press. Jimmy done a 30 minute BBC interview with the well known. Radio Scotland Battle Lines Interviewer. Shareen Nanjiani
GRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW PART 1,2 ,3.http://www.youtube.com/v/o7YBPu3QurY http://www.youtube.com/v/UFkj5LJX8CE http://www.youtube.com/v/QqvpRdl6Q4s
I have enclosed a letter for you to send to your respective member of parliament for them to adopt ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ as mandatory for professionals. Please send it to them if you have not done so already.
N.B. It is not us that gets the job done. It is you the constituent by your support and putting pressure on your Members of Parliaments.
Jimmy Deuchars (manager)
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Grandparents Apart UK.
Petition.
Grandparents Apart UK request the petitions committee to urge the government to make ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ mandatory for professionals who work in the welfare of children.
More info:- http://grandparentsapartuk.blogspot.com/
Name Address Tel; Signature
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/TCFGRA/
‘The Charter for Grandchildren’
It is important that parents, grandparents and other family members, speak to, and treat each other, with respect. You may not get on, but you can still be civil, for the sake of the children. Try to avoid arguing with or criticising family members in front of the children. It can be very upsetting for them.
On occasions professional organizations such as social work departments or the courts can become involved and may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s entire life. In these circumstances it is vital that the loving and supportive role that the wider family, in particular grandparents can play is respected and protected for the child…
FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO CHILDREN
Grandchildren can expect:
To be involved with and helped to understand decisions made about their lives.
To be treated fairly
To know and maintain contact with their family (except in very exceptional circumstances) and other people who are important to them.
To know that their grandparents still love them, even if they are not able to see them at the present time.
To know their family history.
The adults in their lives to put their needs first and to protect them from disputes between adults - not to use them as weapons in quarrels between adults.
Social workers , when making assessments about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
The Courts, when making decisions about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
Lawyers and other advisers to encourage relationship counseling or mediation when adults seek advice on matters affecting them and their children.
Along with others, Grandparents Apart UK put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” by demanding to be heard about the gaps in family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for our love of them why would we bother?
.............................................................................................................................................................
We are happy to promote the Charter for Grandchildren and the Parenting Agreement because they are in the best interests of children if they are used right.
letter to your member of Parliament.
Dear ……………………..,………………………
The Scottish Parliament or The House of Commons or Welsh Assembly GovernmentEdinburgh London. Cathays Park EH99 1SP SW1A 0AA Cardiff CF10 3NQ ...
I have contacted Grandparents Apart UK for support regarding losing contact with our grandchildren. With their nine years experiences and what has happened to me I feel justified in supporting this proposal and would be obliged if you would make it an issue in parliament. I believe A Government created this Charter and therefore they should ensure its effectiveness.
The Proposal:- We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ ‘ The role grandparent can play in their grandchildren’s lives’ be made Mandatory for Professionals dealing with children thereby ensuring in the absence of one or both parents that the love and protective role grandparents can play is not wasted as is the case at present because grandparents are regarded as irrelevant persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the parents or family in general…If the governments were to adopt this as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and it could be worthwhile attending mediation focusing on the best interests of the children.
Failure to implement this is criminal and neglect in providing all the possible protection for children in need and in many ways is actually encouraging child abuse I understand this statement will not be discussed or shown to anyone outside the theatre of government and will be completely confidential. I look forward to your reply.
Name…………………………………………..Address……………………………………….
Town…………………………………………..Post code…………………………………….
Phone number………………………………
E-mail…………………………………………(If you have one)
Signature……………………………………….
Grandparents Apart UK. 22 Alness Crescent, Glasgow G52 1PJ
A Scottish Registered Volunteer Charity No. SC 031558
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
There is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and there is reckoned to be a million children in Britain today living in a home with one or both parents addicted to drugs or alcohol and fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse from different partners in a child’s life
Our new proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their
Grandparents in child abuse cases are criminal neglect by the authorities and not in their best interests. Every means of protection should be used. It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse and in the care and stability of children when they are in a crisis situation especially in the middle of the night. That is if they are informed about it at all being irrelevant persons. If the crisis has been violent and very upsetting it would be in the best interests of the children to be settled as quickly as possible with someone who cares for them. What we find overall that needs to change for our children’s best interest? 1…Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child starts with
Equal parenting when there is no factually proven reason not to.
2....‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for Professionals working in Children’s welfare.
3…Children are human beings. Stop treating them as commodities like a business deal
4.....If adopted, where appropriate, child contact maintained with birth family in line with article 8 of the un convention on the rights of the child. (should only be stopped in the worst case scenario)
5 ...Kinship care before strangers to be the first choice.
6. …All below accountable to law. (a)--..False accusations. (b)-..Erroneous reporting by social workers. (c)…Flouting of court orders (d) Social Service Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are Failed
7… Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similar to police proceedings (to prevent and combat section 6 b+d)
8….More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and their managers
9….Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children. (Only the most highly experienced social workers to deal in child protection) 10….Accusations removed from record, when not proven.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Grandparents Apart UK 2009
What we and you have achieved.
We have had a great write up in the Daily Mail, the same week we appeared on GMTV full VIP treatment. Also a radio interview on Radio 2 with Jeremy Vine. Now we are doing a Christmas show with The Sunny Govan Community Radio 103.5 FM which is fun.
Previously we have had a documentary made about us by Grampian TV and The Scottish Politics Show been on BBC radio Newcastle Radio Scotland, STV and BBC news bulletins. We must try and keep this publicity going if you want the law changed.
Please ask at your Scottish Libraries, Social works, community centres, doctor’s surgeries if they have ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ or ‘The parenting Agreement’ in fact anywhere concerning families the more we ask the more popular they will get.
In our relatively short period of existence, because we have lobbied Westminster and the Scottish Parliament and produced constant press releases through television and radio and of course with your membership and donations we have -
1. Dispelled the myth that grandparents have a right of contact with their grandchildren. Now that the problem has been identified and accepted we have attempted to raise the profile of grandparents all over the UK and show the benefits and protection they can offer grandchildren.
2. Provided a helpline service for grandparents that was not available before in Scotland. And is proving to be very successful in England too. We are very proud of our helpline‘A listening ear’ for devastated grandparents, which we know has comforted some grannies that were suicidal
3. Worked in a Stakeholder Group with the Scottish Government as a result the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ and the ‘Parenting Agreement’ were created to help families and children in particular.
4. Shown that ‘Bridge building’ is our speciality. The more grandparents that is aware of our existence the more we can fulfil our motto of ‘Bringing Families Together’
5. Became tired waiting for further improvements, we decided to take the matter into our
own hands and proposed to open an independent Family Information and Education Centre so we asked for a £½ million Big Lottery Grant but were knocked back, instead we were awarded £10, 000,00p to develop our idea as a Mobile Family Information and Education Centre and toured Scotland promoting the Charter for Grandchildren and The Parenting Agreement. See;- http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
6. highlighted the unfairness of our legal aid system and it has now been announced that new proposals from the legal aid board and the Scottish Government are to change the way solicitors are to be paid for legal aid work.
7. Risen from being seen as a complainer to the Government to being a respected source of information to allow them to gather information about families, being invited to meetings and our opinions sought.
8. Recently we have got Children 1st (NSPCC) agreeing with us on 3 points.
a) They are urging the government to give grandparents the right of information on their grandchildren's welfare.
b) That the Charter for Grandchildren and Parenting Agreement must be publicised more.
c) Family Information Centres should be available throughout the country. And for children's protection in drug and alcohol homes.
9. Adam Ingram MSP Minister for Children invited us to a meeting in June to hear our views on kinship care as we have been campaigning hard for this. On 4th December 2007 the Scottish Government announced they would be paying the granny grant of £119 to £199 to kinship granny carers. Details from our website http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
10. This year 2008 our group has been invited once more to work with the Scottish Government on 'Making Contact Work'. Our first meeting was very encouraging and we did get across that the administration of family law have become blasé in the best interests of the child and need to be tightened up and monitored.
11. Due to a demo we arranged at the Scottish Parliament in February this year. Last month September 2008 Nigel Don MSP with the backing of 22 other MSPs arranged a debate in the Scottish Parliament on injustices in family law. The Scottish Justice Minister accepted that there are injustices. A huge step in the right direction. Our policy is to ask everyone who contacts us to also contact their MSP and keep on at them as it is you the constituent contacting them that changes will be made. - --
12. Scottish Woman's Aid:-
(Quote)"! totally agree that grandparents are often best placed to detect any kind of abuse or addiction that harms children and are often left picking up the pieces with no support when things fall apart. I think resolving that bit should be a priority (i.e. offering financial and emotional support) and then perhaps there's scope to move on to greater recognition of the role grandparents play and how this could be established in law".
13, Demonstration.
Our group organised a demonstration on 4th March 2009 in George Square, Glasgow City Centre Which attracted very good media attention from The Daily Mail, Sunday Express, Sunday Herald, Scottish GMTV, The Scotsman, Sunny Govan Radio Station, STV news, A BBC ½ hour program. due to be broadcasted on Radio Scotland Battle lines at 11.30, 27th March 2009. This demo was calling for ‘The Charter for Grandparents’ to be made mandatory for professionals that work with the welfare of children and family to ensure children can have the best that grandparents can offer without treading on the toes of parents. To ignore this call is not in the best interests of children
14 Our campaign on 25th march 2009 in Dundee went very well. We were right outside the room where the directors were having registration and their morning coffee breaks and they could not help but see us as we for. waved to them. Someone heard them debating us being there so we have achieved what we came
Alan Baird the boss man in question has refused to resign over the Branden Muir case in Dundee and would not answer our phone calls to his office. His secretary refused to give us any information as to his whereabouts and even refused to speak to the media.
The media coverage was Brilliant, GMTV, STV, Radio Times, The Telegraph, The Courier and a few radio and newspaper reporters which i can't remember them all but will be posted on the blog above as they become available. We can't thank them all enough for their coverage and kindness.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Scottish Court of Session
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2006CSOH194.html
OUTER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION
[2006] CSOH 194
OPINION OF LORD GLENNIE
in the cause
N S A
Pursuer;
against
M A or N
Defender:
________________
Pursuer: Scott; Russel & Aitken
Defender: Absent
15 December 2006
Introduction
[1] The pursuer and the defender were married in Lahore, Pakistan on 20 December 2001. It was an arranged marriage. The formal Rukshati, or sending off the bride, took place on 13 July 2002. Thereafter they moved to live in Scotland. They lived with the pursuer's parents at Bilston, Edinburgh. The pursuer is in regular employment in Scotland as a software engineer. While she was in Edinburgh, the defender attended a University. Their child M was born on 25 May 2004. He is now about 21/2 years old.
[2] In June 2005 the defender, with the consent of the pursuer, took M to see her family in Pakistan. She was due to return home on 18 August 2005. Having twice changed her travel arrangements, the defender did not return to Scotland. She is presently in Pakistan with M. The pursuer has not consented to her keeping M in Pakistan. He has attempted to persuade the defender to return to Scotland to live with him and to bring the child back to Scotland. Those attempts have so far been unsuccessful.
[3] The Summons in this action was signetted on 8 May 2006. In that Summons the pursuer concludes for an order ordaining the defender to return M to Scotland, for a residence order providing that M should reside with him, for an order for delivery of M into his care and control, and for interdict prohibiting the defender from removing M from his care and control or from Scotland. On 8 May 2006 Lady Smith made an interim Order (1) finding and declaring that M was born in Edinburgh and is, prima facie, habitually resident in Scotland and (2) ordaining the defender to return M to Scotland. Despite this, the defender has not returned M to Scotland. Nor has she returned.
[4] That Order and the Summons were both served on the defender in Pakistan on 13 July 2006. I am told that the reason for the delay in service was that the pursuer remained hopeful of persuading the defender to bring M back to Scotland voluntarily; and was concerned lest her knowledge that he had commenced legal proceedings in Scotland should jeopardise the prospects of an amicable resolution of the problem. Be that as it may, this delay in affecting service, though regrettable, does not render that service in any way defective. Service was acknowledged by the defender's lawyers in Pakistan. Furthermore, it is clear from letters which the defender has written to the court, as well as from proceedings which the defender herself has instituted in Pakistan, that the defender is fully aware of the proceedings in Scotland. Nonetheless, she has not entered appearance or lodged defences to the action. The action therefore proceeds formally as an undefended action. However, in any case concerning children, the court will be anxious to take into account the material presented by both parties, even if one of them has not entered the process and, as a result, his or her concerns are presented informally.
Is the defender's retention of the child in Pakistan wrongful?
(i) section 2(3) and (6) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995
[5] In the Summons the pursuer contends that the defender's retention of M in Pakistan is wrongful having regard to the terms of section 2(3) and (6) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. Section 2(3) provides as follows:
"Without prejudice to any Court order, no person shall be entitled to remove a child habitually resident in Scotland from, or to retain any such child outwith, the United Kingdom without the consent of a person described in subsection (6) below".
Subsection (6) provides as follows:
"The description of a person referred to in subsection (3) above is a person (whether or not a parent of the child) who for the time being has and is exercising in relation to him a right mentioned in paragraph (a) or (c) of subsection (1) above; except that, where both the child's parents are persons so described, the consent required for his removal or retention shall be that of them both".
The relevant paragraphs of subsection (1) mention the right to have the child living with him or otherwise to regulate the child's residence and to maintain personal relations and direct contact with the child on a regular basis. It is clear that both parents, i.e. both the pursuer and the defender, have such rights and, until the defender refused to return M from Pakistan, were exercising such rights.
[6] It follows that, subject to the question of whether the child is "habitually resident" in Scotland, the defender is not entitled to retain M outwith the United Kingdom without the consent of the pursuer.
(ii) the meaning of "habitual residence"
[7] The meaning of "habitual residence" was considered by the Inner House in Dickson v Dickson 1990 S.C.L.R. 692. That was a decision as to the meaning of those words in the context of the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, but I see no reason for thinking that a different meaning should be given to those words under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. The Opinion of the Court was delivered by the Lord President. At page 703, he considered what was meant by the expression "habitual residence". He said this:
"It is enough to say that in our opinion a habitual residence is one which is being enjoyed voluntarily for the time being and with the settled intention that it should continue for some time. ... A person can, we think, have only one habitual residence at any one time and in the case of a child, who can form no intention of his own, it is the residence which is chosen for him by his parents. If they are living together with him, then they will all have their habitual residence in the same place. Where the parents separate, as they did in this case, the child's habitual residence cannot be changed by one parent only unless the other consents to the change".
Applying that guidance, as I must, the position in the present case is as follows. The pursuer was living in Scotland before his marriage. After his marriage, he and the defender both moved to Scotland. The pursuer resumed his employment and the defender enrolled at a university course. It was, at the time of their marriage, their intention to live in Scotland. That this is so is confirmed by item 20 of the parties' Marriage Certificate, which contains a question as to whether any agreement has been reached regarding the guarantee and provision of food, clothing, etc. The answer given was: "This has to be in accordance with the British Law". That, no doubt, was because the parties intended to settle in Britain for some time at least. Given that the pursuer lived in Scotland, I can infer that the answer to question 20 reflected their joint intention to live in Scotland after the marriage. This is what they did. M was born in Edinburgh while the parties were living in Scotland. While they were all living together in Scotland, they all had the same habitual residence, namely, Scotland. The defender could not change M's habitual residence simply by bringing him to or keeping him in Pakistan. As it was put in Dickson v Dickson: "The child's habitual residence cannot be changed by one parent only unless the other consents to the change".
[8] I am therefore satisfied that M was at the time he left Scotland, and still is, habitually resident in Scotland.
[9] It follows, and I so find, that in keeping M in Pakistan without the consent of the pursuer, the defender is acting contrary to section 2(3) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
The welfare of the child - s.11 Children (Scotland) Act 1995[10] The fact that the defender is holding M in Pakistan contrary to the provisions of section 2(3) of the Act does not, of course, mean that the pursuer is entitled as of right to the Orders sought in the Summons. The power of the court to make an Order in relation to parental responsibilities, including a residence Order, is contained in section 11 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. Section 11(7) emphasises that, in considering whether or not to make an Order of that sort, and what Order to make, the Court:
"(a) shall regard the welfare of the child concerned as its paramount consideration and shall not make any such order unless it considers that it would be better for the child that the order be made than that none should be made at all".
This is an obligation imposed on the court which the court takes seriously. Any Order made, indeed any decision whether or not to make an Order, has to be made with a view to the child's welfare.
The UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol on Children Matters[11] I should, at this stage, refer to the UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol on Children Matters agreed in January 2003 between the President of the Family Division in England and Wales and the Hon. Chief Justice of Pakistan, each in consultation with members of the Family Judiciary of the UK and of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan respectively. This Protocol has been supplemented by Supplemental Judicial Guidelines on UK-Pakistan Protocol agreed in Islamabad in September 2003, to which Lady Smith has put her name on behalf of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Scotland. Although the Protocol does not have the force of law, nonetheless it represents an attempt by the judiciaries of United Kingdom and Pakistan to co-operate in matters concerning the welfare of children and, in particular, in trying to protect children from the harmful effects of wrongful removal from one country to the other.
[12] Paragraph 1 of the Protocol states that:
"In normal circumstances the welfare of a child is best determined by the courts of the country of the child's habitual/ordinary residence".
[13] Paragraph 5 of the Protocol provides as follows:
"In cases where the habitual/ordinary residence of the child is in dispute the Court to which an application is made should decide the issue of habitual/ordinary residence before making any decision on the return or the general welfare of the child, and upon determination of the preliminary issue as to habitual/ordinary residence should then apply the general principles set out above".
[14] This is an important provision. I have already found that M is habitually resident in Scotland. That finding is consistent with the interim finding by Lady Smith on 8 May 2006.
[15] On that basis, the effect of Paragraph 1 of the Protocol is that in normal circumstances any questions relating to the welfare of M should be determined by the Scottish Courts. Nothing has been brought to my attention suggesting that this case should be viewed as an exception to that rule.
[16] Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Protocol give specific instances of circumstances in which a Judge of the court of a country to which the child has been removed, or from which he should have been but has not been returned, should not ordinarily exercise jurisdiction over the child, save insofar as necessary for the Court to order the return of the child to the country of his habitual or ordinary residence. Both of those instances concern cases where the court of the child's habitual or ordinary residence has made a custody or residence order or a restraint or interdict order. They do not, in terms, therefore, apply to the present circumstances. Nonetheless the general principle in paragraph 1 applies to the present case; and it is, in any event, within the spirit of the Protocol that the Scottish courts, being the courts of the country of M's habitual residence, should determine what is best for his welfare.
[17] I must, therefore, go on to consider the applications before me.
The applications before the court
[18] There are two applications before the court.
(i) The first is an application made by the defender that the court should "stop", or sist, the proceedings in Scotland to await the outcome of proceedings in Pakistan. Although the defender has not entered the process, and although her motion was not formally enrolled with the court, I think it proper that I should deal with it. It is supported by a letter from the defender to the Court of Session dated 20 November 2006. This application came before me on 24 November 2006. The defender was not present at that hearing and I, therefore, continued that hearing until 13 December to give the defender a further opportunity of appearing or being represented. The interlocutor to this effect was served on the defender; and, indeed, in anticipation of the hearing on 13 December, she has sent a further letter to the court.
(ii) The second is an application made by the pursuer by motion heard at the same time as the application by the defender. By his motion the pursuer asks the court to make:
"a residence order limited to arrangements for the child M to reside with the Pursuer from 1pm on Friday to 1pm on Monday each week, or such other periods as the Court shall order or the parties agree, and otherwise to reside with the Defender, on the basis that the Pursuer undertakes that he will make no objection to the Defender lodging a Minute for Variation of said arrangements (if so advised) on her return to the UK".
[19] It is implicit in the pursuer's motion that the Court is being asked also to make final the interim Order made by Lady Smith on 8 May 2006 ordaining the defender to return M to Scotland. Only on this basis, and on the basis that the defender chooses to come back to Scotland, can the proposal of shared residence be made to work.
The defender's motion to sist the proceedings in Scotland
[20] Dealing first with the defender's motion to sist the proceedings in Scotland, I note that soon after the defender was served with the Scottish proceedings on 13 June 2006 she instituted proceedings in Pakistan in the form of a Guardianship Application. I understand this to be an application that she be appointed guardian of the child and, in effect, be awarded sole custody. I have been told that the Guardian Judge at Lahore passed an interim custody order in favour of the defender on 22 June 2006 restraining the present pursuer illegally removing the child from the present defender. Since the Order made by Lady Smith on 8 May 2006 was not complied with, the pursuer has filed an "Article 199 Petition" before the Lahore High Court. This appears to be in the nature of a habeas corpus application on the ground that the child is habitually resident in Scotland and has been illegally and improperly detained in Pakistan, and further that the Scottish Court has made an Order for the return of the child to Scotland. Pending the determination of that petition, the High Court in Pakistan has made an Order that "in the meantime, the minor, namely M shall not be removed from the jurisdiction of this Court".
[21] The Scottish Court has jurisdiction over this matter by virtue of the habitual residence of the child, M. Further, in terms of the UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol, it is agreed between the judicial authorities of both countries that in normal circumstances the welfare of the child is best determined by the courts of the country of the child's habitual residence. That country is Scotland. On the face of it, therefore, it is appropriate and in the interests of the child that this court should be the court which determines the matters in issue in this case. Furthermore, it is clear that no proceedings were commenced in Pakistan until after the Scottish proceedings were served on the defender. In those circumstances, it would be wrong to sist the proceedings in Scotland to await the outcome of those currently underway in Pakistan.
[22] I reach this decision to refuse to sist the Scottish proceedings without any disrespect to the courts in Pakistan before whom cases are presently pending. But those courts have only made interim orders; and I do not consider that any Order that I make runs counter to the existence of those interim orders. I recognise, however, that before M can be brought back to the UK pursuant to this Order, it will clearly be necessary that the pursuer's representatives make appropriate representations to the courts and other authorities in Pakistan, directly and/or through the liaison judge appointed in terms of the UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol. I am confident that the Protocol will be an effective tool in helping to resolve the present difficulties.
[23] I should mention two matters which have come to my attention in the course of dealing with this matter.
(1) The first is that by letter dated 12 December 2006 faxed to the Court of Session, the defender has told the court that the pursuer's Article 199 Petition in the Lahore High Court has been dismissed. She goes on to say that the High Court ordered that the parties are free to contest the guardianship of the child in the action pending before the Guardian Judge in Lahore. Counsel for the pursuer told me that her agents had contacted their lawyer in Pakistan, and that she had told them that her enquiries did not reveal that the Petition had been dismissed. I cannot decide that. However, it seems to me that that question can make no difference to the decision I have made to refuse the sist.
(2) The second point is this. I have been shown various pleadings and other documents in the proceedings before the Guardian Judge in Pakistan. In her "Written Reply of Application for Issuance of Guardianship Certificate...", the present defender has told the Guardian Judge that she had been telephoned by a representative of the Court of Session in Scotland and told that "the proceedings being conducted [in Scotland] have been completely stopped until this Learned Family Court of Pakistan decides the matter". In paragraph 5(a) of that same document, the present defender says: "The Scotland Court of Sessions has accepted the stance of the Petitioner and hence stopped the proceedings [i.e. in Scotland]". I do not know whether the defender has misunderstood something that was said to her. However, I can state categorically that the proceedings in Scotland have not been stopped at any time. Indeed, the defender has been aware that the proceedings in Scotland were continuing, since she has written to the court in Scotland in relation to the various applications made or to be made in court in these proceedings. I would not wish the Court in Pakistan to proceed on a wrong understanding of the procedural status of the Scottish proceedings.
The pursuer's motion
[24] In his motion, the pursuer seeks a final determination of these proceedings, not to the full extent claimed in the Summons but in a modified form providing for shared residence.
[25] In support of the averments in the Summons, I have had presented to me an affidavit from the pursuer as well as affidavits from his mother, SB, and from a MW who works at a residential care home in Bilston and helps in the house where the pursuer lives with his family. On the basis of those affidavits I am satisfied that the welfare of M would be best served if I were to make the Order sought by the pursuer and I shall accordingly do so. Given the possibility that the defender will wish to apply to the court to vary or recall the Order, it is better that I say no more on this matter. The Order assumes that the defender will also return to Scotland. Unless she does so, then the part of the Order providing that M reside with her for half of each week cannot take effect.
[26] I should emphasise, if it were not already sufficiently clear, that since the defender has not entered the process I have not heard her side of the story except for the general comments made in correspondence and in the court proceedings in Pakistan. This is no doubt because the defender wishes to contest jurisdiction. I should, however, make it clear that if in the light of my decision the defender wishes to apply to the court for a variation or recall of the order I have made, she is perfectly at liberty to do so and the court will consider the matter afresh and make a decision having regard to the welfare of the child as a paramount consideration. There is express provision for this in the 1995 Act and in the Rules of Court: see Rule of Court 49.63. The defender will not be prejudiced in any such application by the fact that she has not taken part in the proceedings to date. The undertaking referred to in the pursuer's motion is an express recognition by the pursuer of the fact that, whatever Order the court makes in disposing of proceedings concerning children under section 11 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, that Order may be varied at any time on the application of either party. In offering his undertaking, the pursuer has made it clear through counsel that, if the defender applies to the court in Scotland to vary the Order, the pursuer will not advance any argument to the effect that a change of circumstances is required before the Order can be varied or recalled.
OUTER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION
[2006] CSOH 194
OPINION OF LORD GLENNIE
in the cause
N S A
Pursuer;
against
M A or N
Defender:
________________
Pursuer: Scott; Russel & Aitken
Defender: Absent
15 December 2006
Introduction
[1] The pursuer and the defender were married in Lahore, Pakistan on 20 December 2001. It was an arranged marriage. The formal Rukshati, or sending off the bride, took place on 13 July 2002. Thereafter they moved to live in Scotland. They lived with the pursuer's parents at Bilston, Edinburgh. The pursuer is in regular employment in Scotland as a software engineer. While she was in Edinburgh, the defender attended a University. Their child M was born on 25 May 2004. He is now about 21/2 years old.
[2] In June 2005 the defender, with the consent of the pursuer, took M to see her family in Pakistan. She was due to return home on 18 August 2005. Having twice changed her travel arrangements, the defender did not return to Scotland. She is presently in Pakistan with M. The pursuer has not consented to her keeping M in Pakistan. He has attempted to persuade the defender to return to Scotland to live with him and to bring the child back to Scotland. Those attempts have so far been unsuccessful.
[3] The Summons in this action was signetted on 8 May 2006. In that Summons the pursuer concludes for an order ordaining the defender to return M to Scotland, for a residence order providing that M should reside with him, for an order for delivery of M into his care and control, and for interdict prohibiting the defender from removing M from his care and control or from Scotland. On 8 May 2006 Lady Smith made an interim Order (1) finding and declaring that M was born in Edinburgh and is, prima facie, habitually resident in Scotland and (2) ordaining the defender to return M to Scotland. Despite this, the defender has not returned M to Scotland. Nor has she returned.
[4] That Order and the Summons were both served on the defender in Pakistan on 13 July 2006. I am told that the reason for the delay in service was that the pursuer remained hopeful of persuading the defender to bring M back to Scotland voluntarily; and was concerned lest her knowledge that he had commenced legal proceedings in Scotland should jeopardise the prospects of an amicable resolution of the problem. Be that as it may, this delay in affecting service, though regrettable, does not render that service in any way defective. Service was acknowledged by the defender's lawyers in Pakistan. Furthermore, it is clear from letters which the defender has written to the court, as well as from proceedings which the defender herself has instituted in Pakistan, that the defender is fully aware of the proceedings in Scotland. Nonetheless, she has not entered appearance or lodged defences to the action. The action therefore proceeds formally as an undefended action. However, in any case concerning children, the court will be anxious to take into account the material presented by both parties, even if one of them has not entered the process and, as a result, his or her concerns are presented informally.
Is the defender's retention of the child in Pakistan wrongful?
(i) section 2(3) and (6) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995
[5] In the Summons the pursuer contends that the defender's retention of M in Pakistan is wrongful having regard to the terms of section 2(3) and (6) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. Section 2(3) provides as follows:
"Without prejudice to any Court order, no person shall be entitled to remove a child habitually resident in Scotland from, or to retain any such child outwith, the United Kingdom without the consent of a person described in subsection (6) below".
Subsection (6) provides as follows:
"The description of a person referred to in subsection (3) above is a person (whether or not a parent of the child) who for the time being has and is exercising in relation to him a right mentioned in paragraph (a) or (c) of subsection (1) above; except that, where both the child's parents are persons so described, the consent required for his removal or retention shall be that of them both".
The relevant paragraphs of subsection (1) mention the right to have the child living with him or otherwise to regulate the child's residence and to maintain personal relations and direct contact with the child on a regular basis. It is clear that both parents, i.e. both the pursuer and the defender, have such rights and, until the defender refused to return M from Pakistan, were exercising such rights.
[6] It follows that, subject to the question of whether the child is "habitually resident" in Scotland, the defender is not entitled to retain M outwith the United Kingdom without the consent of the pursuer.
(ii) the meaning of "habitual residence"
[7] The meaning of "habitual residence" was considered by the Inner House in Dickson v Dickson 1990 S.C.L.R. 692. That was a decision as to the meaning of those words in the context of the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, but I see no reason for thinking that a different meaning should be given to those words under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. The Opinion of the Court was delivered by the Lord President. At page 703, he considered what was meant by the expression "habitual residence". He said this:
"It is enough to say that in our opinion a habitual residence is one which is being enjoyed voluntarily for the time being and with the settled intention that it should continue for some time. ... A person can, we think, have only one habitual residence at any one time and in the case of a child, who can form no intention of his own, it is the residence which is chosen for him by his parents. If they are living together with him, then they will all have their habitual residence in the same place. Where the parents separate, as they did in this case, the child's habitual residence cannot be changed by one parent only unless the other consents to the change".
Applying that guidance, as I must, the position in the present case is as follows. The pursuer was living in Scotland before his marriage. After his marriage, he and the defender both moved to Scotland. The pursuer resumed his employment and the defender enrolled at a university course. It was, at the time of their marriage, their intention to live in Scotland. That this is so is confirmed by item 20 of the parties' Marriage Certificate, which contains a question as to whether any agreement has been reached regarding the guarantee and provision of food, clothing, etc. The answer given was: "This has to be in accordance with the British Law". That, no doubt, was because the parties intended to settle in Britain for some time at least. Given that the pursuer lived in Scotland, I can infer that the answer to question 20 reflected their joint intention to live in Scotland after the marriage. This is what they did. M was born in Edinburgh while the parties were living in Scotland. While they were all living together in Scotland, they all had the same habitual residence, namely, Scotland. The defender could not change M's habitual residence simply by bringing him to or keeping him in Pakistan. As it was put in Dickson v Dickson: "The child's habitual residence cannot be changed by one parent only unless the other consents to the change".
[8] I am therefore satisfied that M was at the time he left Scotland, and still is, habitually resident in Scotland.
[9] It follows, and I so find, that in keeping M in Pakistan without the consent of the pursuer, the defender is acting contrary to section 2(3) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
The welfare of the child - s.11 Children (Scotland) Act 1995[10] The fact that the defender is holding M in Pakistan contrary to the provisions of section 2(3) of the Act does not, of course, mean that the pursuer is entitled as of right to the Orders sought in the Summons. The power of the court to make an Order in relation to parental responsibilities, including a residence Order, is contained in section 11 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. Section 11(7) emphasises that, in considering whether or not to make an Order of that sort, and what Order to make, the Court:
"(a) shall regard the welfare of the child concerned as its paramount consideration and shall not make any such order unless it considers that it would be better for the child that the order be made than that none should be made at all".
This is an obligation imposed on the court which the court takes seriously. Any Order made, indeed any decision whether or not to make an Order, has to be made with a view to the child's welfare.
The UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol on Children Matters[11] I should, at this stage, refer to the UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol on Children Matters agreed in January 2003 between the President of the Family Division in England and Wales and the Hon. Chief Justice of Pakistan, each in consultation with members of the Family Judiciary of the UK and of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan respectively. This Protocol has been supplemented by Supplemental Judicial Guidelines on UK-Pakistan Protocol agreed in Islamabad in September 2003, to which Lady Smith has put her name on behalf of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Scotland. Although the Protocol does not have the force of law, nonetheless it represents an attempt by the judiciaries of United Kingdom and Pakistan to co-operate in matters concerning the welfare of children and, in particular, in trying to protect children from the harmful effects of wrongful removal from one country to the other.
[12] Paragraph 1 of the Protocol states that:
"In normal circumstances the welfare of a child is best determined by the courts of the country of the child's habitual/ordinary residence".
[13] Paragraph 5 of the Protocol provides as follows:
"In cases where the habitual/ordinary residence of the child is in dispute the Court to which an application is made should decide the issue of habitual/ordinary residence before making any decision on the return or the general welfare of the child, and upon determination of the preliminary issue as to habitual/ordinary residence should then apply the general principles set out above".
[14] This is an important provision. I have already found that M is habitually resident in Scotland. That finding is consistent with the interim finding by Lady Smith on 8 May 2006.
[15] On that basis, the effect of Paragraph 1 of the Protocol is that in normal circumstances any questions relating to the welfare of M should be determined by the Scottish Courts. Nothing has been brought to my attention suggesting that this case should be viewed as an exception to that rule.
[16] Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Protocol give specific instances of circumstances in which a Judge of the court of a country to which the child has been removed, or from which he should have been but has not been returned, should not ordinarily exercise jurisdiction over the child, save insofar as necessary for the Court to order the return of the child to the country of his habitual or ordinary residence. Both of those instances concern cases where the court of the child's habitual or ordinary residence has made a custody or residence order or a restraint or interdict order. They do not, in terms, therefore, apply to the present circumstances. Nonetheless the general principle in paragraph 1 applies to the present case; and it is, in any event, within the spirit of the Protocol that the Scottish courts, being the courts of the country of M's habitual residence, should determine what is best for his welfare.
[17] I must, therefore, go on to consider the applications before me.
The applications before the court
[18] There are two applications before the court.
(i) The first is an application made by the defender that the court should "stop", or sist, the proceedings in Scotland to await the outcome of proceedings in Pakistan. Although the defender has not entered the process, and although her motion was not formally enrolled with the court, I think it proper that I should deal with it. It is supported by a letter from the defender to the Court of Session dated 20 November 2006. This application came before me on 24 November 2006. The defender was not present at that hearing and I, therefore, continued that hearing until 13 December to give the defender a further opportunity of appearing or being represented. The interlocutor to this effect was served on the defender; and, indeed, in anticipation of the hearing on 13 December, she has sent a further letter to the court.
(ii) The second is an application made by the pursuer by motion heard at the same time as the application by the defender. By his motion the pursuer asks the court to make:
"a residence order limited to arrangements for the child M to reside with the Pursuer from 1pm on Friday to 1pm on Monday each week, or such other periods as the Court shall order or the parties agree, and otherwise to reside with the Defender, on the basis that the Pursuer undertakes that he will make no objection to the Defender lodging a Minute for Variation of said arrangements (if so advised) on her return to the UK".
[19] It is implicit in the pursuer's motion that the Court is being asked also to make final the interim Order made by Lady Smith on 8 May 2006 ordaining the defender to return M to Scotland. Only on this basis, and on the basis that the defender chooses to come back to Scotland, can the proposal of shared residence be made to work.
The defender's motion to sist the proceedings in Scotland
[20] Dealing first with the defender's motion to sist the proceedings in Scotland, I note that soon after the defender was served with the Scottish proceedings on 13 June 2006 she instituted proceedings in Pakistan in the form of a Guardianship Application. I understand this to be an application that she be appointed guardian of the child and, in effect, be awarded sole custody. I have been told that the Guardian Judge at Lahore passed an interim custody order in favour of the defender on 22 June 2006 restraining the present pursuer illegally removing the child from the present defender. Since the Order made by Lady Smith on 8 May 2006 was not complied with, the pursuer has filed an "Article 199 Petition" before the Lahore High Court. This appears to be in the nature of a habeas corpus application on the ground that the child is habitually resident in Scotland and has been illegally and improperly detained in Pakistan, and further that the Scottish Court has made an Order for the return of the child to Scotland. Pending the determination of that petition, the High Court in Pakistan has made an Order that "in the meantime, the minor, namely M shall not be removed from the jurisdiction of this Court".
[21] The Scottish Court has jurisdiction over this matter by virtue of the habitual residence of the child, M. Further, in terms of the UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol, it is agreed between the judicial authorities of both countries that in normal circumstances the welfare of the child is best determined by the courts of the country of the child's habitual residence. That country is Scotland. On the face of it, therefore, it is appropriate and in the interests of the child that this court should be the court which determines the matters in issue in this case. Furthermore, it is clear that no proceedings were commenced in Pakistan until after the Scottish proceedings were served on the defender. In those circumstances, it would be wrong to sist the proceedings in Scotland to await the outcome of those currently underway in Pakistan.
[22] I reach this decision to refuse to sist the Scottish proceedings without any disrespect to the courts in Pakistan before whom cases are presently pending. But those courts have only made interim orders; and I do not consider that any Order that I make runs counter to the existence of those interim orders. I recognise, however, that before M can be brought back to the UK pursuant to this Order, it will clearly be necessary that the pursuer's representatives make appropriate representations to the courts and other authorities in Pakistan, directly and/or through the liaison judge appointed in terms of the UK-Pakistan Judicial Protocol. I am confident that the Protocol will be an effective tool in helping to resolve the present difficulties.
[23] I should mention two matters which have come to my attention in the course of dealing with this matter.
(1) The first is that by letter dated 12 December 2006 faxed to the Court of Session, the defender has told the court that the pursuer's Article 199 Petition in the Lahore High Court has been dismissed. She goes on to say that the High Court ordered that the parties are free to contest the guardianship of the child in the action pending before the Guardian Judge in Lahore. Counsel for the pursuer told me that her agents had contacted their lawyer in Pakistan, and that she had told them that her enquiries did not reveal that the Petition had been dismissed. I cannot decide that. However, it seems to me that that question can make no difference to the decision I have made to refuse the sist.
(2) The second point is this. I have been shown various pleadings and other documents in the proceedings before the Guardian Judge in Pakistan. In her "Written Reply of Application for Issuance of Guardianship Certificate...", the present defender has told the Guardian Judge that she had been telephoned by a representative of the Court of Session in Scotland and told that "the proceedings being conducted [in Scotland] have been completely stopped until this Learned Family Court of Pakistan decides the matter". In paragraph 5(a) of that same document, the present defender says: "The Scotland Court of Sessions has accepted the stance of the Petitioner and hence stopped the proceedings [i.e. in Scotland]". I do not know whether the defender has misunderstood something that was said to her. However, I can state categorically that the proceedings in Scotland have not been stopped at any time. Indeed, the defender has been aware that the proceedings in Scotland were continuing, since she has written to the court in Scotland in relation to the various applications made or to be made in court in these proceedings. I would not wish the Court in Pakistan to proceed on a wrong understanding of the procedural status of the Scottish proceedings.
The pursuer's motion
[24] In his motion, the pursuer seeks a final determination of these proceedings, not to the full extent claimed in the Summons but in a modified form providing for shared residence.
[25] In support of the averments in the Summons, I have had presented to me an affidavit from the pursuer as well as affidavits from his mother, SB, and from a MW who works at a residential care home in Bilston and helps in the house where the pursuer lives with his family. On the basis of those affidavits I am satisfied that the welfare of M would be best served if I were to make the Order sought by the pursuer and I shall accordingly do so. Given the possibility that the defender will wish to apply to the court to vary or recall the Order, it is better that I say no more on this matter. The Order assumes that the defender will also return to Scotland. Unless she does so, then the part of the Order providing that M reside with her for half of each week cannot take effect.
[26] I should emphasise, if it were not already sufficiently clear, that since the defender has not entered the process I have not heard her side of the story except for the general comments made in correspondence and in the court proceedings in Pakistan. This is no doubt because the defender wishes to contest jurisdiction. I should, however, make it clear that if in the light of my decision the defender wishes to apply to the court for a variation or recall of the order I have made, she is perfectly at liberty to do so and the court will consider the matter afresh and make a decision having regard to the welfare of the child as a paramount consideration. There is express provision for this in the 1995 Act and in the Rules of Court: see Rule of Court 49.63. The defender will not be prejudiced in any such application by the fact that she has not taken part in the proceedings to date. The undertaking referred to in the pursuer's motion is an express recognition by the pursuer of the fact that, whatever Order the court makes in disposing of proceedings concerning children under section 11 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, that Order may be varied at any time on the application of either party. In offering his undertaking, the pursuer has made it clear through counsel that, if the defender applies to the court in Scotland to vary the Order, the pursuer will not advance any argument to the effect that a change of circumstances is required before the Order can be varied or recalled.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Badly flawed the child protection and children in care system
This link is to the whole report
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmchilsch/111/11102.htm Summary
For those children who come into care, it will always be a distant second best to growing up happily and safely in their own family. Time in care is generally seen by professionals and the wider public as something to be avoided at all costs. Despite the dedication and perseverance of social workers and carers, the outcomes and experiences of young people who have been 'looked after' remain poor. Far from compensating for their often extremely difficult pre-care experiences, certain features of the care system itself in fact make it harder for young people to succeed: they are moved frequently and often suddenly, miss too much schooling, and are left to fend for themselves at too early an age.
The Government has acknowledged many of these problems and has sought to be comprehensive in its response. The Care Matters White Paper and the legislation that followed it (the Children and Young Persons Act 2008) have on the whole received a positive reception from children's services authorities, voluntary sector organisations and children themselves. We welcome the priority the Government has put on improving outcomes for looked-after children, and we do not doubt its commitment to achieving this. However, success will not flow automatically from new legislation or guidance. Previous programmes of substantial reform and investment have left outcomes for looked-after children still lagging unacceptably far behind those for other children. Inconsistency in practice and underperformance against current standards show that there are significant underlying challenges to implementation of the new raft of measures, challenges which we fear the Government has not done enough to address. We also believe that Care Matters represents a missed opportunity for certain sections of the care population. It is not clear that unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, and looked-after children who enter custody, will benefit equally from the new initiatives and the principles informing them.
Relationships
Stable, reliable bonds with key individuals are fundamental to children's security and development. In all circumstances, the care system should be supportive of rather than obstructive of good relationships. Children too rarely have the sort of relationship with their social worker that they want. High staff turnover, heavy workloads and an administrative burden all militate against relationships flourishing. Vacancy rates remain high and new recruits lack support. Social workers feel disempowered and when more experienced may seek moves away from frontline work. The same factors impinge on social workers' capacity to forge constructive relationships with families before problems escalate to the point where a care order might be sought.
Continuity in relationships with foster carers depends on preventing placement breakdowns and building long-term placements into care plans; the prospect of a placement breakdown should be treated with as much concern as the prospect of a child being removed from their birth family in the first place. The quality of support foster carers receive in terms of planned respite, input from other agencies, and access to advice at times of crisis is crucial to this. We believe that there is no justification for the vast inequities of payment and conditions in the foster care sector at present. Carers—including kinship carers—must be able to have a fair and transparent expectation of the support they will receive, wherever in the country and for whomever they foster. Stronger leadership at national government level, and a greater willingness to specify the support that carers and their families should be entitled to, would strengthen the efforts of local agencies to recruit foster carers.
Placements
These recruitment efforts are vital to increasing the supply of placements, which affects children's prospects for choice, individualisation and stability. Placements are already in short supply, their quality is not consistent, and parts of the Care Matters reform programme, such as post-18 fostering, will put even greater pressure on their availability. The Government has placed a new duty on local authorities to ensure a sufficient supply of placements locally, but has not paid enough attention to strengthening local authorities' hands in achieving it.
There should be no "cheap options" in the care system. From time to time in the evidence we took there surfaced a suspicion that decisions taken by local authorities are motivated in some circumstances by costs, and that children do not get all they are entitled to because of pressure on councils' resources. We do not share this suspicion of local authorities' motives, but we are concerned that it can exist. Any option for highly vulnerable children with complex needs—whether family support, long term foster care, kinship care, or supported independence—will only be successful with intensive support and substantial resourcing.
The performance framework
Improvement in the care system must be underpinned by a performance framework that emphasises the most important things: quality of decision-making, of relationships, and of children's experiences of care. We believe that quality assessment and children's satisfaction are undervalued by the current performance regime. Processes and outcomes are both important, but if what we are primarily concerned about is how happy children are in care, then the Government must be prepared to be innovative in finding new ways to assess quality of care. Pilots of new initiatives such as social pedagogy or independent social work practices promise innovative ways of tackling some of the deficiencies in the care system, but it will ultimately be much more important to ensure that the basics of the system are implemented consistently and enforced rigorously. We seek reassurance that the inspection regime will be a sufficient and effective tool to achieve this. It is not clear what sanctions are available against authorities which fail in their duty as parents, nor what incentives are in place to encourage them to fulfil this duty.
The workforce
Three themes run through our conclusions. The first is the importance of the workforce; implementation of well-intentioned initiatives and guidance depends ultimately on the skills and capacity of staff and carers who deal with children day to day. An effective care system can only be achieved by recruiting enough of the right people, giving them access to the right training, paying them enough, backing them up with practical support, and placing them in structures that allow them to build relationships with children and influence things on the child's behalf. While the Government is seeking to address aspects of this through, for example, the Social Work Taskforce and Social Work Practices pilots, other aspects, such as delegation to foster carers, have been relatively neglected. Residential care in particular requires much greater focus on the level and type of staff qualifications so that the full potential of that type of care might be realised.
Corporate parenting
The second theme is how local authorities can come to approximate more closely the care of birth parents. Many of the things we wish would happen in the care system would follow naturally if the system and those who work within it were minded, and enabled, to act more like parents. Bureaucracy, misdirected aversion to risk, lack of autonomy and restricted resources limit the capacity of corporate parents to normalise children's experience of growing up in care. The Government's willingness to act as a "pushy parent" in ensuring that looked-after children have priority access to schools is welcome, but should not be restricted to the sphere of education; health services and housing are just as important, as are adult services when the young person is moving towards independence. A local authority that was truly acting like a parent would not contemplate allowing a vulnerable young person to strike out unsupported on their own even at age 18, much less if they were going to live, as many do, in substandard accommodation. Where the corporate parent bears some responsibility for things going wrong—such as when children in care become involved in criminal activity—it must be held to account and involved in putting things right every bit as much as the state expects of other parents. Good parenting entails making decisions that are based on the particular needs of each child, and so performance frameworks should be adjusted to focus on the quality and promptness of decision-making about individual children: making the right decision at the right time.
The voice of the child
Thirdly, there is the importance of the voice of the child. Only by setting more store by children's satisfaction with their care will we get closer to finding out how "cared about" they really feel, how stable and secure their lives seem, and whether they have both opportunities and the support and encouragement needed to take them. Initiatives that seek to give children—collectively and individually—more say about their care must be specific, robust and enforceable. The variation currently apparent in services leads us to believe that more independent support is needed for children to express their views and have them listened to.
The purpose of the care system
Large variations in care populations around the country seem to indicate that there is no consensus about the role of care in services for vulnerable children. We are convinced that in some respects the potential of the care system to make a positive difference to children's lives is dismissed too readily, but we are also concerned by how widely the quality of children's experiences in care varies, and how uneven are the experiences families have of support services prior to care. Children's services must have the tools to spot trouble in families at an early stage, and must be able to have confidence that the interventions at their disposal are of a high quality and will make a positive difference to families. We would like to envisage a care system that is seen not as a sanction against failing parents, nor as a catastrophe for children's future prospects, but as a way of supporting families that are under stress and not functioning well.
This shift in perception is only desirable if care is an integral part of a continuum of effective family support services, not an alternative to it. It is only justifiable if we are able to reassure parents that their child, when in care, will have stability and personalised attention rather than a life ruled by uncertainty and bureaucracy, will have access to all the health and therapeutic care that they need to enjoy life and develop into independent adults, will be protected from rather than exposed to risk of offending, and will not feel abandoned by children's services when they reach 16, or 18, or if they go into custody. There are some children in care who have all of this, and many more who have some of it, thanks to dedicated, compassionate carers and diligent local authorities. The question the Government must do more to answer is, how can we make sure that all looked-after children get all that they are entitled to expect from their time in care?
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmchilsch/111/11102.htm Summary
For those children who come into care, it will always be a distant second best to growing up happily and safely in their own family. Time in care is generally seen by professionals and the wider public as something to be avoided at all costs. Despite the dedication and perseverance of social workers and carers, the outcomes and experiences of young people who have been 'looked after' remain poor. Far from compensating for their often extremely difficult pre-care experiences, certain features of the care system itself in fact make it harder for young people to succeed: they are moved frequently and often suddenly, miss too much schooling, and are left to fend for themselves at too early an age.
The Government has acknowledged many of these problems and has sought to be comprehensive in its response. The Care Matters White Paper and the legislation that followed it (the Children and Young Persons Act 2008) have on the whole received a positive reception from children's services authorities, voluntary sector organisations and children themselves. We welcome the priority the Government has put on improving outcomes for looked-after children, and we do not doubt its commitment to achieving this. However, success will not flow automatically from new legislation or guidance. Previous programmes of substantial reform and investment have left outcomes for looked-after children still lagging unacceptably far behind those for other children. Inconsistency in practice and underperformance against current standards show that there are significant underlying challenges to implementation of the new raft of measures, challenges which we fear the Government has not done enough to address. We also believe that Care Matters represents a missed opportunity for certain sections of the care population. It is not clear that unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, and looked-after children who enter custody, will benefit equally from the new initiatives and the principles informing them.
Relationships
Stable, reliable bonds with key individuals are fundamental to children's security and development. In all circumstances, the care system should be supportive of rather than obstructive of good relationships. Children too rarely have the sort of relationship with their social worker that they want. High staff turnover, heavy workloads and an administrative burden all militate against relationships flourishing. Vacancy rates remain high and new recruits lack support. Social workers feel disempowered and when more experienced may seek moves away from frontline work. The same factors impinge on social workers' capacity to forge constructive relationships with families before problems escalate to the point where a care order might be sought.
Continuity in relationships with foster carers depends on preventing placement breakdowns and building long-term placements into care plans; the prospect of a placement breakdown should be treated with as much concern as the prospect of a child being removed from their birth family in the first place. The quality of support foster carers receive in terms of planned respite, input from other agencies, and access to advice at times of crisis is crucial to this. We believe that there is no justification for the vast inequities of payment and conditions in the foster care sector at present. Carers—including kinship carers—must be able to have a fair and transparent expectation of the support they will receive, wherever in the country and for whomever they foster. Stronger leadership at national government level, and a greater willingness to specify the support that carers and their families should be entitled to, would strengthen the efforts of local agencies to recruit foster carers.
Placements
These recruitment efforts are vital to increasing the supply of placements, which affects children's prospects for choice, individualisation and stability. Placements are already in short supply, their quality is not consistent, and parts of the Care Matters reform programme, such as post-18 fostering, will put even greater pressure on their availability. The Government has placed a new duty on local authorities to ensure a sufficient supply of placements locally, but has not paid enough attention to strengthening local authorities' hands in achieving it.
There should be no "cheap options" in the care system. From time to time in the evidence we took there surfaced a suspicion that decisions taken by local authorities are motivated in some circumstances by costs, and that children do not get all they are entitled to because of pressure on councils' resources. We do not share this suspicion of local authorities' motives, but we are concerned that it can exist. Any option for highly vulnerable children with complex needs—whether family support, long term foster care, kinship care, or supported independence—will only be successful with intensive support and substantial resourcing.
The performance framework
Improvement in the care system must be underpinned by a performance framework that emphasises the most important things: quality of decision-making, of relationships, and of children's experiences of care. We believe that quality assessment and children's satisfaction are undervalued by the current performance regime. Processes and outcomes are both important, but if what we are primarily concerned about is how happy children are in care, then the Government must be prepared to be innovative in finding new ways to assess quality of care. Pilots of new initiatives such as social pedagogy or independent social work practices promise innovative ways of tackling some of the deficiencies in the care system, but it will ultimately be much more important to ensure that the basics of the system are implemented consistently and enforced rigorously. We seek reassurance that the inspection regime will be a sufficient and effective tool to achieve this. It is not clear what sanctions are available against authorities which fail in their duty as parents, nor what incentives are in place to encourage them to fulfil this duty.
The workforce
Three themes run through our conclusions. The first is the importance of the workforce; implementation of well-intentioned initiatives and guidance depends ultimately on the skills and capacity of staff and carers who deal with children day to day. An effective care system can only be achieved by recruiting enough of the right people, giving them access to the right training, paying them enough, backing them up with practical support, and placing them in structures that allow them to build relationships with children and influence things on the child's behalf. While the Government is seeking to address aspects of this through, for example, the Social Work Taskforce and Social Work Practices pilots, other aspects, such as delegation to foster carers, have been relatively neglected. Residential care in particular requires much greater focus on the level and type of staff qualifications so that the full potential of that type of care might be realised.
Corporate parenting
The second theme is how local authorities can come to approximate more closely the care of birth parents. Many of the things we wish would happen in the care system would follow naturally if the system and those who work within it were minded, and enabled, to act more like parents. Bureaucracy, misdirected aversion to risk, lack of autonomy and restricted resources limit the capacity of corporate parents to normalise children's experience of growing up in care. The Government's willingness to act as a "pushy parent" in ensuring that looked-after children have priority access to schools is welcome, but should not be restricted to the sphere of education; health services and housing are just as important, as are adult services when the young person is moving towards independence. A local authority that was truly acting like a parent would not contemplate allowing a vulnerable young person to strike out unsupported on their own even at age 18, much less if they were going to live, as many do, in substandard accommodation. Where the corporate parent bears some responsibility for things going wrong—such as when children in care become involved in criminal activity—it must be held to account and involved in putting things right every bit as much as the state expects of other parents. Good parenting entails making decisions that are based on the particular needs of each child, and so performance frameworks should be adjusted to focus on the quality and promptness of decision-making about individual children: making the right decision at the right time.
The voice of the child
Thirdly, there is the importance of the voice of the child. Only by setting more store by children's satisfaction with their care will we get closer to finding out how "cared about" they really feel, how stable and secure their lives seem, and whether they have both opportunities and the support and encouragement needed to take them. Initiatives that seek to give children—collectively and individually—more say about their care must be specific, robust and enforceable. The variation currently apparent in services leads us to believe that more independent support is needed for children to express their views and have them listened to.
The purpose of the care system
Large variations in care populations around the country seem to indicate that there is no consensus about the role of care in services for vulnerable children. We are convinced that in some respects the potential of the care system to make a positive difference to children's lives is dismissed too readily, but we are also concerned by how widely the quality of children's experiences in care varies, and how uneven are the experiences families have of support services prior to care. Children's services must have the tools to spot trouble in families at an early stage, and must be able to have confidence that the interventions at their disposal are of a high quality and will make a positive difference to families. We would like to envisage a care system that is seen not as a sanction against failing parents, nor as a catastrophe for children's future prospects, but as a way of supporting families that are under stress and not functioning well.
This shift in perception is only desirable if care is an integral part of a continuum of effective family support services, not an alternative to it. It is only justifiable if we are able to reassure parents that their child, when in care, will have stability and personalised attention rather than a life ruled by uncertainty and bureaucracy, will have access to all the health and therapeutic care that they need to enjoy life and develop into independent adults, will be protected from rather than exposed to risk of offending, and will not feel abandoned by children's services when they reach 16, or 18, or if they go into custody. There are some children in care who have all of this, and many more who have some of it, thanks to dedicated, compassionate carers and diligent local authorities. The question the Government must do more to answer is, how can we make sure that all looked-after children get all that they are entitled to expect from their time in care?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)