What kind of society do we live in, when [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2517239/CHRISTOPHER-BOOKER-A-terrible-act-inhumanity-shows-justice-secret.htmlThis[/url can happen in 21st Century Britain?

Given that these nonentities are usually only seen at a press conference apologising for yet another total cockup in their proceedures and promising "lessons will be learnt," the question must be asked, why should any Court accept, without a rigorous investigation, anything they say?

Probably because that is their job.

The police turn up at the airport to find a woman in some mental angst (according to the Daily Mail story) and are then told by her mother that she has a serious mental health problem and has not taken her medication, clearly she can't be allowed on an aircraft (would you be happy to be on the same plane if the police had ignored such advice) and so under the provision of the law she is taken into the care of the local authority.

In that story the Mail reporter asks why the police "collude" so easily and quickly with social workers - because that is what they have to do is the simple answer, that is how it works.

The Mail reporter then skips the next five weeks (rather conveniently) and so we do not know what the womans mental state was when finally a court order was sought to protect her unborn child, acting on behalf of her unborn child.

Clearly this isn't a rubber stamping procedure, clearly the social workers involved would have refered this to their senior management, clearly its still not their judgement as it has to go before a court - clearly there is a lot more to this story than a gang of nazi's ripping an unborn child from a womb and sending the woman on her way, clearly the Mail don't want to or aren't capable of filling in those missing FIVE WEEKS when its so much simpler to present a story that will enrage their own readership in a way that they so desire every morning.

When I first read of this story (in the torygraph), I too felt a sense of outrage but decided to do a little more background research. If you had done the same instead of swallowing the cock & bull that Christopher Booker is famed for writing, you might have happened upon some rather less emotive and more legally constructed reasoning, like this:

[url=http://pinktape.co.uk/cases/never-let-the-facts-get-in-the-way-of-a-good-story-eh/Never let the facts get in the way of a good(?) story[/url

Or [url=http://www.essex.gov.uk/News/Pages/Essex-County-Council-responses-to-interest-in-story-headlined-Essex-removes-baby-from-mother.aspxEssex County Council statement of facts[/url. Please note the use of the word "facts", a word that has little relevance to The Torygraph, even less to The Dally Wail and virtually zero to Christopher Booker

So, far from social workers "ordering" that the child be ripped from the mother's womb, th decision was made by clinicians, with the best interests of both mother and child in mind.

But please don't let facts get in your way of a good right-wing rant

Is that what they did, then? Just a quick question, do you include Italian society and the Italian courts in this, given that the unfortunate lady concerned applied to the Italian Courts for an order to return the child to Italy in May 2013, but the Italian courts ruled that the child should remain in England?


Why are you seemingly confident that [ithis[/i child would have been just fine, and why are you better placed to judge than the court?

I'm not expecting him back anytime soon

[url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2013/20.htmlOoh look, the judgement[/url

The final comment would soften even the hardest of hearts:

[iIf in later life P reads this judgment, as she may well do, I hope that she will appreciate that her mother in particular loved her and wished for her to return to live with her and to bring her up. It is not her fault, nor P's that that was not possible and that a predictable home could only be secured by way of adoption. P should know that the mother very much wished to parent her and bring her up and I hope that that is some small comfort both to the mother and also to P. [/i

Funny, isn't it, that the stories centre on the social workers and not, for instance, the judge who okayed the moves (or the clinicians who called for it)?

Same with the baby P case: social workers got it in the neck from the bulk of the media and the imbeciles who believe what they print, but it was lawyers who blocked the removal of the child from his abusive home.

You could be forgiven for thinking that there was an agenda going on somewhere ...

Just as soon as the good [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2517144/Explain-snatched-baby-girl-birth-Judges-order-social-workers-forced-caesarean.htmlSir James[/url gets to the bottom of this story, which was incidently, picked up by most of the media. A fact which seems to have escaped the notice of the more excitable types on here.

Oh, and I'm not sure that a blog is neccessarily the fount of all knowledge either.......

Is that it?

Typical of the right-wingers on here: you quote from a known rag and when the errors of that rag are pointed out, you resort to quoting another article from the self-same rag, this time using (very) selective quotes.



A blog from a very respected Family Court barrister

Like that's an indication of veracity

Rumples is yet another of our boring little trolls, who all seem to be right wing, and who never seem to be capable of answering a question for themselves, and who don't seem to understand why they're risible.

Indeed. Given the type who would be attracted to the world of Journalism, you would be well advised to take anything Fleet St printed with a very large dose of salt. That said, they are not all phone hackers, and there is always a place for good investigative reporting.

On balance, where the most senior family Judge, Sir James Mumby makes an unprecedented intervention and demands answers from the Social workers.......where a Senior Italian Judge in Milan expresses outrage at this women's treatment......and even Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty describes it "as a dystopian science fiction unworthy of a democracy like ours"......I think I am in good company at expressing unease, and in wanting an explanation.

Closer to home, on a cheerier note, who would have thought that FA could have found his intellectual level with Big Graham? I feel a warm sense of satisfaction at being instrumental at helping this meeting of minds.

You conveniently omitted the "At first blush" that preceeded your selective quote.

Par for the course for the Wail and right-wingers in general. It would be interesting to hear what Shami Chakrabarti has to say now the real FACTS surrounding the case have been aired

You need to cheer up old girl. It's the season to be jolly and all that! Get the present Mr Mintballs to take you out for a meal and a show, and you'll soon be back on form.

We've not had a good rant for a while, and with the best will in the world, the other usual suspects are poor fayre.

Social Workers, damned no matter what they do (or don't do) in my experience.

[url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/06/observer-editorial-social-work-reinvented-childrenIndeed[/url

It's way past time for a root and branch reform of the ethos of this profession, and then you might be able to recruit and retain candidates of the calibre needed to improve the lives of those in Society who have fell by the wayside.

Nah. That doesn't count as even a quarter-way decent response to any of the points raised.

Agreed.

Not helped because the only time that the media reports something involving social workers, it's usually negative.

They don't print the story about how social workers prevented a child from being abused, for instance.

Doing my job for me Coddy!

Looks like some bugger has to

Perhaps its because it usually involves a report in the latest in a long line of cock ups, involving a particularly vile case of a young child being tortured and then killed, all of which occurs under the watchful eye of their resident social worker?



Dearie me, you are off your game Mintballs! What an utterly vacuous statement! Whatever next......a headline in the Morning Star....Lenin is Dead.........Mafeking has been relieved.......a kitten was not run over in Mrs McGinnty's driveway today?

You claim to work in the media. No doubt you could provide an explanation for your colleague's views, or is there some link which could counter all those negative views on this maligned profession?

You do realise that "bad" news is, for want of a better term, sexy, for newspapers and the media to report?

You also realise that social workers (in fact all humans except newspaper editors and the eternally outraged, it seems) are not all seeing or omnipresent? Shit happens. Its never good when it does and most social workers will be absolutely devastated when it does.

I would love to see a table of successful outcomes against unsuccessful ones mind you (don't worry I'm not going to ask you for one). But that isn't sexy enough for the media.

Come on now. What we secretly want to hear about is not the successful rescue from a tree of Mrs McGintty's pussy, but the tragic ending of when the fire brigade reversed out and straight over the animal!

Anyhows, spotted this [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/03/joseph-small-masturbated-fire-extinguisher-bottom-premier-inn_n_4377180.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopularlittle gem[/url and wondered if our Yorkshire contingent would care to comment....