Grandparents Support Group

to all non resident fathers

2010-02-09T09:33:00.000Z

by chick on Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:01 am

Gentlemen as allway's we do not mean we should be given priority over father's at no time have we stated this we are a forum for grandparent's and we have allways stated, after it was brought to our attention that in all cases provided that there is no danger to a child/ren both parent's should be involved in a there upbringing and pfcourse the same goe's for grandparents as well the reason i am writing this is to clear up any confusion that we should be given prority over fathers.it speak's for its self really as father's and of course some mother's have to work to support there child/ren plus both parent's also after working all week whether it be a mother bringing up a child/ren and visa versa off course. this is where grandparents can be both a valuble asset to both the children and the parent's so come on all resident parent's forget about the arguments he fighting you had. it doesent matter who' was to blame the children love you both if either parent is bad to there children , the oldrer kids will sort that out them selfs and wont want to go to the parent who is bad to them but please be honest and leave it up to them to choose not you. honest trust me you both will be happier with in yourselfs it' mean's you both can go out , for the sake off the children please be civil to each other for there sake and honest . you both will get on a lot better than you did when you were together please give it a try it will be a bit tense at the beginnig but it will ease off after the first two or three visit's And when the kids are happy it reflects on all so give it a go please for all our happiness and wellbeing all round.

and the father who phoned i hope this clear's up any confusion there was, and please phone me back or dont withold your number and i will phone you if you wish.

luv in friendship charlie and as usual please exscuse the spelling lol as long as you know what i am talking about i know i could use spellchecker but it takes me long enough to do my one finger typing lol.

THE DAY I WAS BORN

2010-02-07T20:10:00.001Z

Today I am one day old, I have a wonderful loving mum and dad and how they play with me, I giggle so much.

Today I am one year old I still have a mum and dad who love and play with me
Now I am a little boy/girl and I go to school to learn and I have many friends and we play oh how we play and we are so happy, I wish my mum and dad could play together and be happy just as they were the day I was born.

Now I have to live with my mother because my mum and dad no longer play together, mum tells me daddy does not want to see or play with me any more, I do miss my dad, and I am not allowed any more to see my daddies mum and dad, I did love to play with my grandparents and they told me wonderful stories, so now I only have my friends at school to play with.

I have been told if I am not good social services could take me away and send me to a knew mum and dad, I wonder if they will play with me like my mum and dad use to.

I am confused. Should I have a new mum and dad, or stay with my mum, but I do miss my dad. Why cant mums and dads stay friends like me and my friends. My nights are so lonely dad use to tell me a bedtime story, but that has gone when dad left, I do beg mum to let me see my dad and grandparents, but I have stopped asking, because my mum hates my dad and his family, and I know I could be in trouble to keep asking, because you see I am only a child and I am not given a voice and under the
International human rights even as a child I should be allowed to say what I want and who I want to live with.

I am now a very big person, and when I did find my dad, I felt as he did not want me when I was little, I did not need him now, as I turned to leave, he said, please listen to me, to hear dad tell me why we did not play when I was growing up, bought tears to my eyes and my heart full of pain. Such a waste of my little years growing up with no dad. But now I have my dad and we play and giggle just like the day I was born.

Just a thought for all dads and grandparents

MAGGIE TUTTLE

this is a posting from the forum pleas feel free to comment

2010-01-14T23:18:00.001Z

It is worth hanging in there.
by Jane on Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:52 am
Had a call this morning from a grandparent to say that she has regained contact with her two grandchildren, she and her son have not seen them for several years!It is so amazing to be able to share in her delight and happiness, so the morale is keep trying and look what can happen.All any of us want is to be able to share our lives with these special little people, and to give them all the love we have, nothing more nothing less.Lots of loveJane.x
Jane

Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:04 pm
Private message
Top
Edit post
Delete post
Report this post
Reply with quote
Re: It is worth hanging in there.
by charlesg on Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:44 pm
hi jane really good new's there is always hope but if you can advise the grandparents dont go back the way whats happened is in the past start again and i alway's advise anyone contact the resident parent/s offer the olive branch it does not matter what has happened bite your lip you are doing it for your grandchild/ren it's them that matter be civil for the sake off the child/ren and this goes for the non-resident father as well and my friend's you will never regret it and if you do and your turned down then at least you have tried and if your are turned donwn dont react violently tell them you are sorry that she/they feel that she/they cant do this for the child/rens sake but my door s always open and you have my number this may sound crazy . but i can garuntee you now if you do this aterwaeds you will feel glad that at least you tried it worked for us after 7 long years i took the advice jimmy gave me and that was charlie forget the past you are doing this for your grandson and not only have we got our grandson back he is now in contact with his son and ex dil we are all getting on great its a bit like walking on eggshells at first but we are all happy now and so is our lovely grandson dont get me wrong at 8 am in the morning and hes jumping on top off me saying come on granddad its time to get up its snowing outthere hurry and take me sledging you say to yourself what have i done lol but once you are out there you would not change it for the world tired and sore completely knackered. when see him laying there sound asleep after a great day its worth all the money in the world.PLEASE MY FRIENDS TRY IT YOU MAY THINK I AM TALKING A LOAD OFF UTTER RUBBISH BUT IF I HAD NOT DONE THIS I WOULD BE SITTING HERE SAD AND SAYING I WONDER WHAT HE GOT FOR CHRISTMAS I WONDER THIS I WONDER THAT PLEASE I AM NOT TALKING RUBBISH JUST DO IT AND DO IT NOW LEAVE OUT THE LAWYERS IF YOU WANT US TO MEDIATE ON YOUR BEHALF THEN WE WILL BUT IF YOU DO IT YOURSELF THEY KNOW IT COMES FROM YOU .THANKS FOR LISTENING CHARLIE VICE/CHAIRMAN GRANDPARENTS APART UK IF YOU AT LEAST TRY IT MAY WELL BECOME THE HAPPEST DAY OFF YOUR LIFE :D
charlesg

Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:08 am
Private message

hi all

2010-01-11T01:21:00.002Z

if any member who has not registered on the forum, if they wish can join the forum also, it is
free, we are getting a lot off hit's and it's just so the browser's are getting information from both site's thanks listening.

luv charlie vice/chairman grandparents apart uk. ( charlesg on forum)

ALL GRANDPARENTS WANT FOR THE NEW YEAR IS THEIR GRANDCHILDREN

2010-01-05T11:59:00.002Z

acknowledgement bhmgmarketing Ref: J1634 4 January 2010

Thousands of grandparents faced the New Year not seeing their grandchildren, as marriage break ups and custody battles leave them with no automatic legal right to contact. Children are losing contact with some of the most important role models in their lives, according to a leading Worcestershire solicitor.

But the grandparent/grandchild relationship has little or no legal protection, according to children’s advocate and partner at Harrison Clark Solicitors Andrew Caldicott.

“In legal terms, if a couple split up, grandparents have no automatic rights to see their grandchildren if the parent with custody decides to withhold contact,” he said.

“But in today’s society, when grandparents are often caregivers and act as a strong role model for children, this lack of contact could destroy one of the most significant relationships the child has.

“Whether it’s a beloved Nanny who babysits regularly or a Granddad who acts as a surrogate parent in the absence of a father figure, children affected by a parental split need the stability these links offer.”

In the case of a divorce or a relationship breakdown, unless the parent gives permission, grandparents have to apply for leave to seek contact with their grandchildren.

Before leave to go to court is granted, the courts look at the previous relationship the grandparents have had with the child and the family circumstances.

For example a grandparent who helps out with day to day care may have more chance of contact that one who sees their grandchildren one every few years.

If the go ahead to apply for leave is given, the court will then consider the application looking at how the contact would work within the existing custody arrangements.

“It’s not a simple process to apply for contact for grandparents and it can be further complicated by an acrimonious split,” said Andrew.

“But that’s no reason for grandparents to give up hope and not see their grandchildren.

“There are some things grandparents can do to make the process easier for everyone – the first being not to take sides.

“It can be difficult not to when your son or daughter is in the middle of a split, but it can make life very complicated for the child.

“Talk to your partner’s spouse and offer help if appropriate and encourage your child and their partner to try and work things out amicably, as it will make life easier for everyone.

“But if there are no lines of communication remain open then take legal advice at as early stage as possible.

“In my view, children need a strong relationship with both their parents and their grandparents and if at all possible, a divorce or separation shouldn’t get in the way of that.”

ENDS

Are huge charities worth the money we give them?

2009-12-09T11:42:00.001Z

Subject: Re: Contacts witheld.

I NEVER give to any of the big charities any more. When I applied for help (I have been raped and made pregnant as a result, I am a child abuse victim) I was snubbed by the NSPCC, Rape Crisis, Shelter and many more.

What's even worse, I have found out that the NSPCC has links with the forced adoption industry!

I would not give any of them a single penny. In this way, I am helping save children from abuse! If you give to "charities" who are involved in the forced adoption industry, you are actually helping child abusers. That's the way I see it. I am a Christian and strongly believe in giving, but these are wicked times and there are some very bad people who are pretending to do good, but they are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Better to help people at grass roots level.

Cambridge News > Mum who branded child is jailed

2009-12-09T11:09:00.001Z

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn%5Fnews%5Fhome/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=46968

Mum who branded child is jailed

A brutal mother who subjected six of her own children to an horrific
campaign of abuse has today been jailed for six years.

The 37-year-old woman beat the children, aged between four and 16, with
weapons including a belt, a broken coat hanger, and a meat tenderising
mallet.

She deliberately branded her 11-year-old daughter with a hot screwdriver
And scratched another with a knife and also left the two girls out on the
streets for three days.

The mother-of-eight's squalid home in Cambridge was never cleaned, the
children went unfed and the youngsters were exposed to harm from each
other.

She was found guilty of 15 counts of cruelty to a person under 16 and two
counts of witness intimidation on following a five week trial in November
at Cambridge Crown Court.

All the children have now been taken into care and during the trial it
emerged that social services had been aware of the family since 1999.

First Presbyterian Church honors grandparents

2009-12-07T13:48:00.000Z

http://www.timesleader.com/community/First_Presbyterian_Church_honors_grandparents_12-05-2009.html

December 5

A Grandparents Celebration was recently sponsored by the Deacons of First Presbyterian Church, Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre. Members of the congregation and their families and guests were treated to a buffet lunch, a special musical program by John Vaida, music director at the church, and a sharing of photographs of grandparents dating to the 1800s. Some of the participants, first row, are: Donna Sowcik and Trudy Olszewski. Second row: David Smith Jr., Jeanne Kravitz and Brianna Schraeder.

Another family solution?

2009-12-06T14:38:00.002Z

Contact anon.

Firstly; when a couple separates instead of making for the family lawyer, they should in fact sit in front of a mediator who will assess the situation and generally offer 'both' parties £500 legal aid and a single court appearance, putting the onus on a couple to find a resolution to their difficulty and to agree to a contact and financial contract which is binding in law until the youngest child leaves full time education. This should then make 'both' parents equally responsible for child welfare and maintenance! Should either parent wish to take the matter back to court beyond this, they have to fund this themselves and this should focus their minds on getting it right first time and stop 'fee earning' solicitors exacerbating matter so they can bankrupt Dad, whilst plundering the legal aid purse indefinitely for Mum!

Secondly; No intervention by CAFCASS or other social services at this stage and once a timetable (that may be allowed to vary as the child grows) and finances have been agreed with a judge (not a court reporter) if he still has a concern then the judge should be empowered to contact the family GP and schools for a report on the health and well being of a child who would have a better understanding then a 'snap shot' taken by a social worker. This will then release the social service from a duty they are ill informed to pursue and normally results in them generating future work for themselves, when they should be reformed and working harder to prevent cases such as Baby'P', Victoria Climbe and Khyra Ishaq!

This should be regarded as law and the law is Parental Responsibility which should be enforceable with the prospect of a 6 month jail term minimal for 'either' parent if they break the terms of this contract for life! (Childhood is such a short span of time)

It would also be useful to inform a child at the age of 11 that both parents on the birth certificate are responsible for their children till the age of 18, it may then focus their mind as they entre the peer and social pressures of secondary education that under age sex could have a lasting effect on their lives, not only from a personal health stand point, but also the prospect of 16 to18 years of child care when they are at an age when they probably want to do something else.This should help them wait to become mature enough to take on such an undertaking. Also if a child was to commit a crime between the age of 10 and 16 with the current perceived immunity, their parents would face the court and be prosecuted for dereliction of duty under the care of their children with a fine or if serious enough prison.

The Tory party have also announced that they wish to make Grandparents and extended family the first port of call for child care rather then social services, who should be a last resort after the possibilities have been explored for a grandparents to take charge whilst a parent resolves their difficulties offering continuity and and stability at a fraught stage in a child's life something once again social services will never do so it is better they concentrate on more extreme cases as described recently by the director of Barnardos.

I really hope Gloria Hunniford, in her capacity as patron of the parents organisation, can encourage these bastions of commonsense and stability to consider the welfare of a grandchild , niece or nephew and in turn put right this God awful law that has blighted people for so long and in my view poses a greater risk to normal society then the threat of terrorism!

£3,000 for not rearing 50 pigs,

2009-12-06T09:56:00.001Z

We are all joining. the best thing is we won't get swine flu

Rt Hon David Miliband MP
Secretary of State.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA),
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London
SW1P 3JR

16 July 2009

Dear Secretary of State,

My friend, who is in farming at the moment, recently received a cheque for £3,000 from the Rural Payments Agency for not rearing pigs.. I would now like to join the "not rearing pigs" business.

In your opinion, what is the best kind of farm not to rear pigs on, and which is the best breed of pigs not to rear? I want to be sure I approach this endeavour in keeping with all government policies, as dictated by the EU under the Common Agricultural Policy.

I would prefer not to rear bacon pigs, but if this is not the type you want not rearing, I will just as gladly not rear porkers. Are there any advantages in not rearing rare breeds such as Saddlebacks or Gloucester Old Spots, or are there too many people already not rearing these?

As I see it, the hardest part of this programme will be keeping an accurate record of how many pigs I haven't reared. Are there any Government or Local Authority courses on this?

My friend is very satisfied with this business. He has been rearing pigs for forty years or so, and the best he ever made on them was £1,422 in 1968. That is - until this year, when he received a cheque for not rearing any.

If I get £3,000 for not rearing 50 pigs, will I get £6,000 for not rearing 100? I plan to operate on a small scale at first, holding myself down to about 4,000 pigs not raised, which will mean about £240,000 for the first year. As I become more expert in not rearing pigs, I plan to be more ambitious, perhaps increasing to, say, 40,000 pigs not reared in my second year, for which I should expect about £2.4 million from your department. Incidentally, I wonder if I would be eligible to receive tradable carbon credits for all these pigs not producing harmful and polluting methane gases?

Another point: These pigs that I plan not to rear will not eat 2,000 tonnes of cereals. I understand that you also pay farmers for not growing crops. Will I qualify for payments for not growing cereals to not feed the pigs I don't rear?

I am also considering the "not milking cows" business, so please send any information you have on that too. Please could you also include the current Defra advice on set aside fields? Can this be done on an e-commerce basis with virtual fields (of which I seem to have several thousand hectares)?

In view of the above you will realise that I will be totally unemployed, and will therefore qualify for unemployment benefits. I shall of course be voting for your party at the next general election.

Yours faithfully,

Nigel Johnson-Hill

‘A Living Bereavement’

2009-12-03T11:08:00.000Z

A granny called me recently in a terrible state. She had just met her daughter-in-law and grandson aged 5 as she was shopping in the town. She had not seen him for a couple of weeks as her son and daughter-in-law had an argument. I kept out of the quarrel but I never knew they had split up, I just thought it would blow over”

The wee boy broke free from his mother and ran up to her shouting “granny, granny” and flung himself into her arms saying “I miss you granny, why do you not come to see me any more” The granny said “ I held back the tears and looked at my daughter-in-law’s face but she was very grim as she pulled him away. As they left she turned back and spat out to me” “you will never see him again.” I was devastated - what had I done?”.

Our life with our grandson was just about every day and I babysat for them whenever they needed me and watched him regularly to give her time to herself. I love my daughter-in-law and grandson to bits and he adores me. I don’t understand why she is taking it out on me and her own son because she has fallen out with my son”

“I feel as if I’ve lost him forever like a death in my family. The pain I feel is terrible and I need to speak to someone, I just want to die” My heart felt for her immediately because the pain we felt was also agonising and still is when we hear a granny’s broken hearted plea.. I listened to her for ages but there was no consoling her. “What am I to do” she kept saying, sobbing uncontrollably, “my wee grandson will be broken hearted, he’ll be missing me?” it will take a while for the initial shock to subside before we can speak to her.

It is all to common nowadays that children are used in this way to get revenge. Taking it out on a granny who was not even involved and was always there for them. It beggars belief how people can do this to their own child for at the end of the day it is the children who lose out.

We need to put a full stop to this abuse of children for revenge and the heartbreak of grandparents who only want the best for them.

Contact your Member of Parliament and Local Authority Councillor of which country you live in and tell them to raise this in parliament. Grandparents need The Charter for Grandchildren to put an end to this madness.

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness Crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658

About child contact.

2009-12-02T13:29:00.000Z

Yes guys, yet another cut and paste from the governments ( How to get off the hook) hand book has surfaced.
My thoughts are in blue text below the original.

Have you noticed how they manage to avoid a very important word in their brief:
Yes it is called EQUAL or EQUALITY!

Can anyone out there please try to tell me:

1. Why do I need to go to court to remain a loving and devoted parent for my children?

2. If I must go to court can anyone please tell me why the court action is not on-going in the background and the child / parent relationship
does not faulter?

3. Why does a judge not enforce the law?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Morris
Thank you for your email dated 16 November about child contact. On this occasion I have been asked to reply.

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.

I realise 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 brought the remaining provisions in Part 1 of the Children and Adoption Act (sections 1-5 and 8) relating to new powers for the courts to order 'contact activities' to assist people in resolving contact disputes and new enforcement powers on 8 December 2008.

The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) works with parents who have been unable to agree arrangements, to help them resolve their disputes, where it is safe to do so and in the child's best interests.
The Children and Adoption Act 2006 contains measures for the extension of the maximum duration of Family Assistance Orders from six months to 12 months which were implemented in October 2007. Beyond this, the Government plans to implement additional measures to enforce contact orders, including through the monitoring of court-ordered contact.
Denying a child contact with one of its parents is not usually in the child’s best interests, but it is for the courts to decide whether or not a child has suffered serious harm or is at risk of suffering serious harm, in the circumstances of each case.

Yours sincerely

Emma Hutchinson
Public Communications Unit
www.dcsf.gov.uk

Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0097256. To correspond by email with the Department for Children, Schools and Families please contact info@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk.
If you have any further queries why not browse our Popular Questions website. This site has been built to allow you to quickly find the answer to your question http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/popularquestions

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Morris

Thank you for your email dated 16 November about child contact. On this occasion I have been asked to reply.

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.
They may very well believe it but they do not enforce it!
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.
If this is true then how has the welfare issue shifted to the mother?
While most parents can and do resolve issues about contact and residence following separation or divorce,
Many do not and the blackmail begins.
the court becomes involved if either parent applies for an order for residence or contact.
Why do the parents need to apply for residence or contact?

The court has a wide discretion to take account of all the facts and circumstances of each individual case.
The courts need to butt out and not get involved.
Decisions are made after the judge has heard and considered all the evidence provided by both parties and any other witnesses,
Many witnesses are not allowed to give their information.
including experts.
Who needs these “So Called” experts? (If they were not required before)

Both parties are entitled to have their views heard and have the opportunity to respond to any evidence put before the court.
This is untrue and the judge will only allow what he sees fit.
If arrangements under a court order do not work out,
What do they mean If the don’t work out?
either parent may, according to the circumstances, apply to the court for the order to be varied, revoked, or enforced.
Apply all you want, the court will not enforce an order that you should need anyway.

We do not see any need to change this law,
There is no need to change the law they just need to enforce it!
but we do need to change the way parents settle disputes.
How are they going to do that?
In particular, we would like to see a reduction in the number of parents resorting to the courts,
If a mother is withholding the children, where else can a father go?
as this so often results in poorer outcomes for the children and greater dissatisfaction for the parents.
No surprise here then! How would a parent be dissatisfied if they “Owned” the children?
Where cases do come before the court, we are promoting extensive use of measures such as mediation
Mediate till the cows come home, the mother need not attend! Why should she?
and in-court conciliation to divert such cases from a full court hearing.
Why should a parent have to go to court to remain one?
Linked to this, we also want to provide a wider range of levers to ensure the proper implementation of court orders.
Implement all you like, it will make no difference! It is real enforcement that will help.
I realise there are cases where non-resident parents have difficulty
The word here should be “Impossible”
in maintaining contact with their children because of the obstructive behaviour of the parent with whom the children reside.
This happens quite simply because one parent is given “Ownership” of the children.
Where contact has been agreed or ordered by the courts, it is essential that it is adhered to.
Why did the involvement with your children stop in the first place? Just because the mother does not like you anymore?
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
Ahh you forgot something quite important here.…..The Money it costs!
£300 per hour for a family solicitor……..£10-15K to get a court order.
but, more importantly, the child is not benefiting from what the court has decided will promote their welfare.
So why do they not do their job properly?
The enforcement of contact orders is a sensitive area.
It is only sensitive for the mother and the father receives no sensitivity!

Deliberate refusal to obey any court order is contempt of court that can be punished with a fine or imprisonment.
When is this ever going to happen?

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.
Again when is this going to happen?

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.
What a cop out! This is a disgrace. So it is okay to shut out the father and all of the extended family. Is this appropriate?
The Children and Adoption Act 2006 gives courts additional powers to facilitate contact and enforce contact orders.
How?
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.
Refer the mother as much as you want, she need not attend or adhere as the government won’t enforce any measures!
The courts will also be able to award financial compensation, for example where the cost of a holiday has been lost.
I have lost lots of money due to paying for lost holidays, passports train tickets etc and how am I ever going to get this back?

These additional levers will be available to the courts in any contact case, if the court considers they would assist resolution.
They will not assist as they will not enforce anything against the mother.
The Government brought the remaining provisions in Part 1 of the Children and Adoption Act (sections 1-5 and 8) relating to new powers for the courts to order 'contact activities' to assist people in resolving contact disputes and new enforcement powers on 8 December 2008.

The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) works with parents
They work very much against the non-resident parent.
who have been unable to agree arrangements,
Who of sound mind would agree to losing their children?

to help them resolve their disputes, where it is safe to do so and in the child's best interests.
The records show that CAFCASS do not want to disobey the mother’s wishes!
The Children and Adoption Act 2006 contains measures for the extension of the maximum duration of Family Assistance Orders from six months to 12 months which were implemented in October 2007. Beyond this, the Government plans to implement additional measures to enforce contact orders, including through the monitoring of court-ordered contact.
Denying a child contact with one of its parents is not usually
Why do they use the word “Usually”? when they couldn’t care less if the children have a meaningful relationship with their father or not!
in the child’s best interests, but it is for the courts to decide whether or not a child has suffered serious harm or is at risk of suffering serious harm, in the circumstances of each case.
So let me get this right. The government want me to prove that my children are suffering serious harm or are at risk of it before I can continue to be a father to them!

Yours sincerely

Emma Hutchinson Public Communications Unit www.dcsf.gov.uk

Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0097256. To correspond by email with the Department for Children, Schools and Families please contact info@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk.
If you have any further queries why not browse our Popular Questions website. This site has been built to allow you to quickly find the answer to your question http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/popularquestions

Demo, THE SEA OF SANTA’S

2009-12-01T14:48:00.002Z

PRESS RELEASE

UNMARRIED AND SEPARATED FATHERS/FAMILIES OF IRELAND

ANNUAL PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN

WHEN: SUNDAY 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2009 @ 12:30
WHERE: MEETING AT DOLPHIN HOUSE DUBLIN FAMILY LAW COURT
AND PARADING TO O CONNELL BRIDGE

WHY:
TO CAMPAIGN FOR FATHERS WHO WILL NOT GET To
SEE THEIR CHILDREN THIS CHRISTMAS BECAUSE OF FAMILY
BREAKDOWN AND TO COMEMORATE THOSE 6 OF OUR
MEMBERS WHO HAVE TAKEN THEIR OWN LIFE BECAUSE THE
FAMILY LAW SYSTEM IN IRELAND HAS FAILED THEM BOTH
AT CHRISTMAS TIME AND THROUGHOUT THE YEAR BY
ALLOWING HEARSAY EVIDENCE IN COURT TO ENSURE
CHILDREN DO NOT GET TO SEE THEIR REAL HERO THIS
CHRISTMAS, THEIR FATHER

HOW:
EACH MEMBER WILL DRESS UP AS SANTA CLAUS AND WILL
PEACEFULLY MARCH WITH BANNERS SUCH AS ‘PUT THE
FATHER BACK INTO FATHER CHRISTMAS’. BASED ON
PREVIOUS YEARS AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF MEN, WOMEN AND
CHILDREN COME OUT TO SUPPORT THIS EVENT. WHEN THE
MARCH ENDS AT O CONNELL BRIDGE WE WILL HAVE A ONE
MINUTE SILENCE AS WE DROP 6 CHRISTMAS WREATHS INTO
THE RIVER LIFFEY TO COMMEMORATE OUR 6 FALLEN
FATHERS WHO SIMPLY COULD NOT GO THROUGH ANOTHER
CHRISTMAS WITHOUT THEIR CHILDREN.

HELP:
WE AS A NATIONAL ORGANISATION ARE CALLING ON ALL OF
THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL MEDIA TO COVER THIS EVENT
AND ASSIST US TO HIGHLIGHT THE TRAUMA BROKEN
FAMILIES GO THROUGH AT CHRISTMAS TIME, AND TO SEND A
MESSAGE ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO LETS MAKE THIS
CHRISTMAS ABOUT THE CHILDREN AND GIVE THEM THE
RIGHT TO SPEND THEIR MOST EXCITING PART OF THE YEAR
WITH BOTH PARENTS EVEN IF IT HAS TO SEPARATELY.

INFO:
PROJECT CO-ORDINATOR Mr. Ray Kelly 0868879444 ray@usfi.ie This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need java-script enabled to view it

Letter to David Cameron

2009-10-22T11:13:00.001+01:00

Dear Mr. Cameron,

A couple of weeks ago on early morning radio I heard Caroline Spellman outline the Conservatives plan for the family should you become elected. This morning I heard you stating that you hope and expect your ministers to build on achievements already gained from charities etc. rather than have a complete sweep, losing any information that is already there.

We are very much impressed by this positive move toward family unity and would like to be a part of this, building on our previous work.

Representatives of our group have attended meetings in relation to Iain Duncan Smith’s Centre for Social Justice research and we have taken part in the workshop with his Breakthrough Glasgow program.

We are a support group that helps grandparents who are denied contact with their grandchildren and our approach is building bridges within families and encouraging families to work together for the sake of the children involved as they are always the innocent victims of adult behaviour. We very much support traditional family values and believe much work is needed to rebuild the erosion of the family unit, with education in parenting and compromise as priorities. We have been working in this field for ten years now and have a varied case load with a good success rate in regaining or maintaining contact within families.

We believe you will be coming to Glasgow during the build-up to next year’s election and would appreciate it if you could spare us some time during one of your visits to discuss our proposals to help families.

Freelance Journalists

2009-08-14T11:27:00.000+01:00

Dear all,

I would like to warn you about free lance journalists who promise you payment (not even asked for) for stories then never hear from them again. The time and labour I have put into it is a big expense out of our funds for phoning our members usually at the shortest notice to take part can provide up to £1000.00p for these journalists

Two major magazines have been involved concerning £200.00p and one of £400,00p for our funds via a freelance from Stroud. The magazines knew about the deals but took nothing to do with it.

I have always went out of my way to help but how many times have you been disappointed by the stories end result, forgetting to put in your details of contact, switching the story to suit their own best interests and being told it was the editor who left it out.

What have they really done for you? Today’s internet and organisations like Facebook ‘s widespread publicity etc. Who needs freelancers when they are deceptive?

Letter from Scottish Government

2009-08-09T11:35:00.001+01:00

The Scottish Government
T 0131-244 3322 F: 0131-244 4848E:Claire.McDermott@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Mr James Deuchars22 AIness CrescentGlasgowG52 1PJ
Our ref: 2009/00243500R6 August 2009

Dear Mr Deuchars
Thank you for your emails of 30 July to Fiona Hyslop, Cabinet Secretary for Education andLifelong Learning, Minister for Children and Early Years, John Swinney, Cabinet Secretaryfor Finance and Sustainable Growth and your earlier email to my colleague Liam Rankin. I have been asked to thank you for your emails and respond on their behalf.

As you know the Scottish Government greatly valued the input made by stakeholders suchas yourself to the development of the Charter for Grandchildren, which was widelydistributed to a range of outlets. The Charter for Grandchildren was designed to be a non-legislative complement to the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006. It is a document aimed at highlighting the important role grandparents and the wider family can play in supportingchildren, particularly through difficult times. The intention is that the publication can be usedby the legal profession, family support organisations and others on a voluntary basis.

During the passage of the Family Law Bill through the Scottish Parliament, the issue of grandparents' rights was discussed and it was agreed that giving grandparents a legal rightto contact with their grandchildren might not be in their best interests in every case. Anyonewith an interest in a child such as a grandparent or other family member can apply to thecourts for contact with them. In making a decision the court will hold the welfare of the childas its principal concern.

As you know, the Scottish Government firmly believes that, if a child cannot live with theirbirth parents, the first option should be to consider the ability and capacity of kinship carersin the wider family to provide the child with a safe and permanent home. You may be interested to know that the Looked After Children (Scotland) Regulations 2009 were laid inParliament on 3 June 2009. The new regulations cover planning for all looked after children;ind set out what has to happen when a child is looked after at home, placed with a kinshipor foster carer or in a residential establishment. They also cover the assessment and approval of kinship and foster carers and the role of fostering panels within local authorities.

The overall aim of the regulations is to improve the planning and decision making process forall looked after children and their carers. The regulations will mean that, for the first time. kinship carers of looked after children will have a formal statutory role. There will be a rangeof responsibilities and duties on both the local authority and the carer to meet the needs ofthe looked after child. Subject to Parliamentary approval, the regulations will come into forceon 28 September 2009. We have also commissioned The Fostering Network and the BritishAssociation for Adoption and Fostering to jointly develop a detailed guidance package toaccompany the new regulations. A training programme will also be rolled out across all local authorities in Scotland to help them implement the new legislation In cases where adoption is considered to be the best option to provide that child with a permanent safe, secure and stable home, an adoption agency must undertake a thorough assessment. This assessment takes in the wider family circumstances and will considercontact arrangements where these are in the best interests of the child. However, the final decision on what arrangements for contact between the child and their natural family,including grandparents and siblings, is a matter for the court to decide in considering an adoption application and all the evidence presented.
Yours sincerely

Claire McDermottFamily and Property Law

St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG wwwscotland.gov.uk

FathersNotGuilty - epetition response

2009-08-06T08:51:00.000+01:00

Wednesday 5 August 2009 FathersNotGuilty - epetition response

We received a petition asking:

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prosecute women who use false accusations to restrict fathers access to children.” Details of Petition: “It is well know that many women lie to the police to prevent or restrict fathers access to their children. The Police and family courts not only turn a blind eye but their acceptance of this practice only encourages women to keep doing it. Fathers are not guilty by default! They are usually the more level headed parent, willing to put the childs interests first and yet they are criminalised by the false accusations of their ex partners. It is often the mothers who are breaking the law and putting their childs interests second to their own selfish and vindictive tendancies.” · Read the petition· Petitions homepage
Read the Government’s response Thank you for your e-petition. When considering whether to make a contact or residence order, the Children Act 1989 requires the court at all times to make the welfare of the child its paramount consideration. The Government is aware of the difficulties that can be faced by non-resident parents in maintaining contact with their children, sometimes because of the obstructive behaviour of the parent with whom the child resides. The Government believes that where it is safe and is in the child’s best interests, a child will benefit from both parents’ continued involvement in their upbringing and from regular meaningful contact with both parents. Where both parents have parental responsibility for their child they are equal before the law, and this continues after they have separated. Many parents who separate or divorce do manage to agree arrangements for their children. And only around 10% do seek a court order to resolve a disagreement. In contact cases, where one party makes allegations, or if there is reason to suppose, that a child or a party has experienced domestic violence, or that there is a risk of violence, the court must, at all stages, identify at the earliest possible opportunity the factual and welfare issues involved. The nature of the allegation or admission and extent of admission or what may be proved is also considered. The court may decide to hold a “Finding of Fact” hearing to hear the evidence from both parties about the allegations made. If the court considers that the allegations are unfounded, or less serious than suggested, it is for the court to take due account of this and the overall reliability of that party’s evidence in deciding the type and level of contact ordered. The standard of proof is the “balance of probabilities” – a lower threshold than for criminal offences that have to be proved “beyond reasonable doubt”. There are no ‘punitive’ responses to unfounded allegations and although costs can be awarded, as in any other cases, this power is not used often as it can lead to financial difficulty for the resident parent, which is contrary to the child’s best interests. The petitioner suggests that fathers are being criminalised. While breach of a non-molestation order is now a criminal offence, the focus in children’s proceedings is not on attaching blame or finding guilt but on making arrangements for children that best serve their interests and are safe for all the parties.

Are MPs immune from family problems?

2009-08-05T08:28:00.000+01:00

Would you believe if I said to you that elected members of the British Governments are immune to problems in their own families? “I don’t think so”, would be the reply. Even the Queen has her troubles

Why are the vast majority of them keeping mum on the subject? We would have thought the grandparents among them would at least speak up about the gross injustices in family law. This Is just not happening. Why! Are they all hypocrites or false prophets strutting around posing on TV and almost buying their free local papers for publicity to make a big show of doing nothing? They are a joke. What do they really do for their constituents? What can they do? Every constituent we have sent to them for help with family problems ends up being told “there is nothing I can do against social services.

Party politics is their real concern, even before their own families welfare, the proof being that there are very few of them standing up to be counted for children’s interests

On a subject as important as child welfare ‘The Best Interests of the Child’ should be paramount but not so for the government and social services. They use it for their own best interests because they are failing to use every possible means for the protection of our children.

New Study Measures Benefits of More Involved Fathers

2009-08-04T09:32:00.001+01:00

http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-31-2009/0005069573&EDATE=

Children face greater risk when agencies focus only on moms, overlook dads
SAN FRANCISCO, July 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Family service agencies are missing huge opportunities to help children by focusing only on mothers and ignoring fathers, according to a groundbreaking study by some of the nation's top family and child development researchers.

A heartbreaking plea to keep a family together.

2009-08-03T15:09:00.002+01:00

My Family Destroyed
(A mothers story)

Sobbing profusely the Scottish mother and daughter who fled to Ireland for justice has made a heartbreaking plea for legal support to keep her family together.

Her voice breaking she went on to say “Can anyone help to end this nightmare? I have no money for barristers and have been refused Irish legal aid because the Scottish social services accuse me of emotional child abuse for removing my daughter from a place where she was extremely unhappy. I have never had a court order against me. Scottish social services snatched my two children by means of lies and deceit”

“ My daughter is having nightmares at the thought of going back there again as she is so happy living with the Irish foster carers and the thought of us being together again”.

“The social workers that travelled to Ireland from Scotland were refused permission to take her back, by a judge as there was no court order against me. When they were leaving they spoke to my wee girl and put her in a state of fear and she has been having nightmares since. I’ll never forgive them for that” “I only ever wanted a fair hearing to put my case but I have always come up against a lies”

“The barrister recommended by, i think it was Irish legal aid, told me I have been refused funding and my daughter will be sent back to Scotland. A secret Woman’s Aid refuge that took me in has clammed up on me and refused me the use of their phone to call Scotland without giving me any explanation why”

Grandparents have been reporting child emotional abuse to social services in Scotland for years and they have been giving the impression, if there were no physical signs of abuse, it was all in the grandparents minds. It seems they recognise emotional abuse when it suits them.

It would appear that the social services are exercising their omnipotent power again and teaching this young mother a lesson for daring to oppose them.

To give this mother fair hearing is not in the social services best interest because they are afraid the truth would then come out. As this young mother claims she has proof of laws they have broken against her family.

A Big Thankyou.

From the Scottish mother who fled to Ireland with her daughter. “Thank you all from the bottom of my heart to everyone who has sent me support, good wishes and helpful information. Special thanks goes to, Jimmy Deuchars, Brian McNair and Ian Josephs for their kindness”.

This mother fled to the Irish republic amid claims from Scottish social services that she was an unfit mother. Her daughter sobs for her at night and pleads with her to take her back. The mother cries and says “Thank goodness the foster carers she is placed with in Ireland are two of the kindest patient people I have ever met” If you had seen this mother and daughter together you will see they were meant to be together but the Scottish social services are hell bent on persecuting this family despite having no evidence that would stand up in court.

The Irish Woman’s Aid Refuge has been very kind to her and reports about not letting her use the telephone was a misunderstanding, not surprising the stress they are under is, not knowing what lies ahead. She has not broken any Irish laws but Scottish social services claim by taking her child away she has committed emotional abuse (a joke coming from their record of snatching) The Irish courts refused to hand over the daughter to the Scottish social workers who flew over to take her back. There never has been any court orders against this mother. It is now claimed Scottish social services are being uncooperative with the Irish courts.

We say to Scottish social services. “Leave this family alone and stop interfering unnecessarily in their lives”.

Ends

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Protest

2009-08-02T22:02:00.000+01:00

Description

We have Teamed up with USFI, Grandparents Apart, New Fathers 4 Justice, Real Fathers 4 Justice, Mums House Ireland, and Change Matters (all these groups confirmed to be taking part) to protest at Ireland Courts because the only way to end all of this pain and change things is to work with each other and all stand together as one.We will arrive at the Courts at 14.00 ,

We are protesting about our rights as fathers, mothers grandparents and children, These rights are flawed across the justice system, Access, CSA, Social services, Parental Alienation, False Allegations, Child protection plus more than i could list !We all feel pain and suffer each day in our own way, all because off our governments and hostile justice systems that try to control us.

The only way to end this pain and suffering is all stand together as one voice all fighting against this inhumane system.Please contact your local press and inform them and join us.Please bring banners and everything you can to make our voices heard,

A heartbroken plea to keep a family together.

2009-07-30T21:31:00.000+01:00

My Family Destroyed
(A mothers story)

Sobbing profusely the Scottish mother and daughter who fled to Ireland for justice has made a heartbreaking plea for legal support to keep her family together.

Her voice breaking she went on to say “Can anyone help to end this nightmare? I have no money for barristers and have been refused Irish legal aid because the Scottish social services accuse me of emotional child abuse for removing my daughter from a place where she was extremely unhappy. I have never had a court order against me. Scottish social services snatched my two children by means of lies and deceit”

“ My daughter is having nightmares at the thought of going back there again as she is so happy living with the Irish foster carers and the thought of us being together again”.

“The social workers that travelled to Ireland from Scotland were refused permission to take her back, by a judge as there was no court order against me. When they were leaving they spoke to my wee girl and put her in a state of fear and she has been having nightmares since. I’ll never forgive them for that” “I only ever wanted a fair hearing to put my case but I have always come up against a lies”

“The barrister recommended by, i think it was Irish legal aid, told me I have been refused funding and my daughter will be sent back to Scotland. A secret Woman’s Aid refuge that took me in has clammed up on me and refused me the use of their phone to call Scotland without giving me any explanation why”

Grandparents have been reporting child emotional abuse to social services in Scotland for years and they have been giving the impression, if there were no physical signs of abuse, it was all in the grandparents minds. It seems they recognise emotional abuse when it suits them.

It would appear that the social services are exercising their omnipotent power again and teaching this young mother a lesson for daring to oppose them.

To give this mother fair hearing is not in the social services best interest because they are afraid the truth would then come out. As this young mother claims she has proof of laws they have broken against her family.

Please contact,

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Latest press release

2009-07-27T16:02:00.000+01:00

The Scottish Government claims “Grandparents are very important in children’s lives” so they created the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ then refuse to make it effective. They have now passed the buck to the local authorities, telling us it is their responsibility.

Councillor O’Rourke of Glasgow City Council, along with other councillors, says they have no powers to make it mandatory.
Liam Rankin, civil servant in the Scottish Government has not replied to our letter asking who really is responsible.

The amount of bad publicity throughout the whole of the UK regarding social services failing our children highlights the need for more involvement with grandparents and the extended family for the protection of our children.

The Scottish Government has created the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ because they recognised the need for it but they are dithering on backing up their own creation. They are stalling by saying they are doing this and that but nothing ever comes of it. Their actions to date have shown that they are embarrassed in knowing they are not doing everything in their power for our children’s protection. It is in a child’s best interests to make the charter at least mandatory for professionals.

The government refuses to grant any legal automatic rights to grandparents but was asked to at least make the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ mandatory for professionals, to ensure children have the best protection and benefits grandparents can offer. The amount of grandparents still being ignored by social services and professionals regarding their grandchildren’s best interests is an everyday occurrence. .

The NHS was asked to look at our programme for stress and depression relief for grandparents, fathers and others at work who could be a danger to other workers if they are not concentrating on their job. They eventually referred us to The Scottish Government. Nicola Sturgeon wrote back to me and referred us to the NHS. Talk about circles.

The Scottish Government are not interested at all in the welfare of grandparents or extended family who suffers under our unjust family laws.

Letter fron Nicola Sturgeon.

2009-07-25T10:13:00.000+01:00

Deputy First Minister & Cabinet Secretary forHealth and WelibeingNicola Sturgeon MSP
T: 0845 774 1741E: scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Mr Jimmy DeucharsGrandparents Apart UK22 AIness CrescentGLASGOW
G52 1PJ
-ffiflncwnwfls5^W^<
homecomingscotlanct2009.com

Our ref; 2009/0021232. 18th July

Dear Mr Deuchars

Thank you for your e-mail of 26 May describing the potential of Grandparents Apart toprovide a support and counseling service for use in NHS mental health services. I am sorryfor the delay in responding.

The Scottish Government recognises the valuable contribution that psychological therapiescan make to improve the quality of life for people with a mental health problem, as part of thetreatment opti2"s available. That is why we have a specific commitment to increasing theavailability of evidence based psychological therapies for all ages in a range of settings,
and through a range of providers.

To achieve this objective, we are working closely with NHS Education for Scotland, NHSBoards, and their partners, to improve and increase the service capacity needed to deliverthis commitment and meet patients' needs better and sooner. A key focus of ourcommitment is the available evidence for psychological therapies in relation to differentconditions and patient groups and we have developed a tool for the NHS Boards to use inreviewing available evidence and in considering which psychological interventions might bestbe used to meet local need and demand,

We are also committed to working with our partners to providing appropriate care andtreatment to those who suffer from depression. This is supported by an ambitiousprogramme to put in place integrated care pathways for depression that meet the standardsestablished by NHS Quality Improvement Scotland; the commitment to increase access topsychological therapies; access to online and telephone-based cognitive behavior therapyand self-help for depression; promotion of physical activity as both a treatment for, and toreduce, the risk of developing depression; and our target of increasing the range of non-pharmacological responses to depression to reduce reliance on anti-depressant medication.

In terms of your own organisation developing a new service, you should contact your localHealth Board, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, who will be able to advise you of theoptions and also the potential to apply for funding.

NICOLA STURGEON
St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG www.scotland.gov.uk "---" Wv/ Q

DE00000432700
james@grandparents.fsnet.co.uk

Dear Mr Deuchars,

Thank you for your email of 22 July to the Department of Health about matters relating to childcare. I have been asked to reply.

As you will be aware, the provision of NHS and social services in Scotland are matters for the Scottish Parliament. As such, we have forwarded your correspondence to colleagues in the Scottish Parliament where the staff are better able to answer your concerns.
If you wish to write to them, the contact details are:
Scottish ParliamentThe Office of the First MinisterSt Andrew's HouseRegent RoadEdinburghEH1 3DG
Tel: 0131 556 8400

I hope this information is helpful.

Yours sincerely,

Joanne MilesCustomer Service CentreDepartment of Health

Grandparents are best for early detection of child abuse.

2009-07-22T09:22:00.002+01:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8161101.stm

Guidance aims to spot child abuse

A watchdog has issued guidance to help healthcare workers spot early signs of child abuse to avoid another Baby P.

Experts say the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence advice could mean more referrals of children who may not be at risk.
But it will ensure more of the right children are referred early for protection from abuse and neglect.

Last year's 538,000 child referrals to social services is an underestimate of the numbers maltreated, they say.
Up to one in 10 children will suffer some form of maltreatment during their childhood, which includes neglect and emotional abuse as well as physical and sexual abuse.

But it can be difficult to spot when a child is at risk and what constitutes abuse.
The guidelines were in development long before the case of Baby Peter, who died in 2007 aged 17 months after suffering more than 50 separate injuries.

They give a summary of some of the signs to look for that should alert a healthcare worker that abuse might be occurring.

Warning signs
Unusual injuries without a suitable explanation, or a child who is consistently dressed in clothes or shoes that are inappropriate, tells the GP or other health worker to consider maltreatment and to keep a close eye, for example.

SUSPECT ABUSE IF:

Some signs, such as bruising in the shape of a hand or a child who is persistently smelly and dirty or There are unexplained bruises on non-bony parts of the face or body, including buttocks
One or more unexplained fractures with no medical cause for fragile bones
Unusual sexualised behaviors in a child before puberty

A child is persistently smelly or dirty suffering persistent infestations such as scabies or head lice, are more suspect and should prompt referral to
A child who repeatedly scavenges, steals, hoards or hides food social care, says the guidance.

This guidance is also about identifying the parents who need more help to look after their children

Dr Danya Glaser, chair of the guideline development group

The authors say the advice is to protect children and not to punish parents.
Dr Danya Glaser, chair of the guideline development group and a consultant and child and adolescent psychiatrist at London's Great Ormond Street Hospital, said: "Parenting is difficult, parents often do not intend to harm their children and this guidance is also about identifying the parents who need more help to look after their children."

Dr Sheila Shribman, the national clinical director of children, young people and maternity services, said: "Spotting the signs of child maltreatment and protecting vulnerable children is an important but often difficult challenge for healthcare professionals."

For example, a GP may be concerned that action may lead to more harm to the child or the relationship with the family.

Professor Steve Field, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, said GPs played a crucial role, as they were often the first port of call for children and their families.

Grandparents Apart UK have been saying for years that all the organisation for children only know of the abuse after it has happened “usually too late”

Who does all these guidlines any way.

Who saves more children from abuse and neglect than any other organisation yet are regarded as irrelevant persons by law in children’s lives.

Who does Woman’s Aid say can be well placed for early detection of abuse in the family.

Who does Children 1st say should have rights to information about children’s welfare for spotting abuse?

Who knows a family’s faults and weaknesses better than anyone else in the whole wide world?.

Who picks up the pieces when drugs or alcohol are involved and children are neglected?

Who can be your most valuable asset in child caring. And are available 24/7 when children are in crisis, abused or homeless?

Who are the most carers of children usually free or grossly underpaid?

!!!! Grandparents !!!!

Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Dementia Time Bomb

2009-07-21T09:38:00.001+01:00

http://www.scotsman.com/latestnews/Scientists-warning-of-dementia-timebomb.5476863.jp

Scientists warning of dementia timebomb

Earlier detection of Alzheimerâ€™s would stem the growing number of people needing health and social care. Picture: TSPL

Published Date: 21 July 2009
By LYNDSAY MOSS

THE UK is facing a "dementia timebomb" and must increase research funding urgently to stem the growing numbers who are developing the condition, experts have warned.

In an open letter, 31 of the country's leading scientists and experts have called on the government to end "years of underfunding" in dementia research.The amount that is devoted to studying conditions such as Alzheimer's disease needs to be tripled or the UK will "pay the price", it said.The letter says that within a generation the number of UK sufferers will double to 1.4 million, costing the economy Â£50 billion every year.Read Lawrence Whalley's analysis hereBy 2025, the total of those living with dementia is set to hit one million, seriously affecting the capacity of health and social care services to cope with the growing demands.Without increased investment in research, millions more people will die with dementia in the future, researchers have said. The country's top scientists are calling for the Westminster government to increase money for research into the condition to Â£96 million within five years.They said the
Â £32m awarded by the government and Medical Research Council in 2007-8 was eight times less than that spent on cancer studies and amounts to about the same as the cost of building one mile of motorway.The figure is equivalent to just 53p per person on dementia research â€“ compared with Â£1.52 in the United States.With the number of patients rising every week, the scientists have urged the government to act now, as a ministerial dementia research summit takes place in London today.In Scotland, about 67,000 people currently have dementia â€“ a figure set to rise to 114,000 by 2031. The new campaign has been co-ordinated by the

Alzheimer's Research Trust, with backing from the Alzheimer's Society and the Parkinson's Disease Society.Among the scientists who have signed the letter are Professor Lawrence Whalley, from Aberdeen University, and Dr Karen Horsburgh, of Edinburgh University.The scientists said that for every pound spent on caring for people with dementia, a fraction of a penny was spent on research into the condition."Our key weakness is lack of funding, not lack of talent," they wrote."The government must use this summit to initiate a national dementia research strategy. Most importantly, it must commit to tripling its annual support for dementia research to Â£96m within five years.

"If the government squanders this opportunity, we will all pay the price."Scientists want to speed up research in areas such as new treatments, as well as ways of diagnosing dementia earlier and preventing it.Prof Whalley said: "I am appalled that research into Alzheimer's and related diseases, which affect 700,000 people in the UK, currently receives less than 3 per cent of government medical research funding. I strongly urge the government to increase funding for dementia research as a matter of urgency."Rebecca Wood, chief executive of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said the UK had some of the world's leading dementia scientists and needed to take advantage of this with more money for research."If we don't act now on research, we will face a dementia timebomb," she said.Professor Julie Williams, the letter's lead author and chief scientific adviser to the Alzheimer's Research Trust, added: "Week after week British dementia scientists come a step closer to understanding what causes dementia, and how this might be translated into new treatments.

"The government has a great opportunity to use today's summit to formulate a national dementia research strategy, offering hope to the 700,000 people in the UK who live with dementia."Despite the current squeeze in public finances, upping our investment in dementia research would be prudent."If we can work out how to delay the onset of dementia by five years, we could halve the number of people who die with the condition."In 2007-8, the Â£32m spent on dementia research by the government and Medical Research Council was dwarfed by Â£248.5m spent on cancer research.Professor Clive Ballard, director of research at the Alzheimer's Society, said: "Dementia costs the UK more than heart disease, stroke and cancer combined, but the government invests eight times less in dementia research than cancer."Significant breakthroughs are within our grasp, but without further investment millions more people will die.

"There are 700,000 people with dementia in the UK and this will rise to more than a million people in less than 20 years."The cost of dementia will increase from Â£17bn today to over Â£27bn by 2026."The campaign has the backing of author Sir Terry Pratchett, himself a dementia patient.Sir Terry, the patron of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said: "There's only two ways it can go: researchers, with as much help you can give them, may come up with something that reduces the effects of this dreadful, inhuman disease, or we will have to face the consequences of our failure to prevent the final years of many of us being a long, bad dream."The strain on carers and their support is bad enough now; before very long the effects on the health service and society itself will be unbearable.

"The Scottish Government said it was already investing more in dementia research.A spokeswoman said: "It is vital that we improve support for people with dementia at the earliest possible stage, in areas such as early diagnosis, post-diagnostic support and information for carers, and workforce training â€“ this is driving the development of our national Dementia Strategy for Scotland." In numbers700,000 people with dementia in the UK 1.4m people predicted to have dementia by 2037 Â£17bn cost of dementia a year to the UK economy 47% Scots know someone close to them with dementia Â£32.2m spent on dementia research in 2007-8 24.2m worldwide sufferers Funding for medical research Neurological (including dementia)Â£161mCancer Â£282mInfection Â£125m Cardiovascular Â£86m Mental Health Â£57m Inflammatory and Immune Â£76m Metabolic and Endocrine Â£42m Musculoskeletal Â£10mStroke Â£21mApproximate figures on research funded in the UK (government and medical research charities) during financial year 2004-5.What it is and who is affectedDEMENTIA is used to describe the serious deterioration of mental functions, such as memory, language and judgment.Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia, but several other diseases can also cause it too.Alzheimer's accounts for about two-thirds of cases of dementia in the elderly.Other diseases that cause dementia are vascular dementia and fronto-temporal dementia, and it is not uncommon for people to have more than one form of dementia. Dementia affects about 700,000 people in the UK, with the number increasing daily.In the UK, an estimated 25 million people, or 42 per cent of the population, are affected by dementia through knowing a close friend or family member with the condition. In Scotland this rises to 47 per cent.

Dementia mainly occurs in people over the age of 65, but can also happen in younger people.At present there is no cure for Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia, though some treatments are available that can temporarily help with some of the symptoms.Last year, researchers in Scotland revealed that they were testing a treatment capable of halting Alzheimer's disease in its tracks.The drug â€“ called Rember â€“ slowed down the progression of Alzheimer's by as much as 81 per cent.Experts said they hoped the drug, expected to be widely available within four years, could initially be used in the earliest stages of Alzheimer's to stop the disease progressing.

There is no sure way to prevent dementia. However, research suggests that the risk of developing such diseases can be reduced with a healthy lifestyle and diet

In OZ Grandparents Get new powers as carers

2009-07-20T10:16:00.001+01:00

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2009/07/20/85911_news.html

Grandparents get legal powers as carers
Margaret Linley
July 20th, 2009

GRANDPARENTS caring for their grandchildren will have the legal power to enrol them in kindergarten, sign school permission slips and give permission for medical procedures under a new State Government measure announced yesterday.
The Statutory Declaration for Informal Carers, enables carers to present a legal document to verify their status.

Child Safety Commissioner Bernie Geary said the new measure would make it easier for grandparents to do what they had already been doing. "Look, it's not earth shattering. It's designed to make it easer for care givers," Mr Geary said. "It means the carers can present to services and the statutory declaration says they are who they claim to be.

"The legality of it revolves around it being a statutory declaration. It's to assist in those day-to-day difficulties the carers are saying they are having."

Community Services Minister Lisa Neville said 8000 Victorian grandparents and relatives take on the care of children who are unable to live at home with their parents. "At times these are informal arrangements and we are taking action to ensure care-givers are recognised and can access the services they need for the children," she said. "We are committed to supporting and assisting relative carers in their difficult role of taking on the care of a relative's child."

The statutory declarations can be downloaded from www.ocsc.vic.gov.au or phone the Office of the Child Safety Commissioner on 1300 78 29 78.

british Baby seized in Ireland

2009-07-17T09:08:00.001+01:00

Date: Tuesday, 16 June, 2009, 3:50 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/5459740/British-baby-siezed-in-Ireland-after-parents-flee-social-workers-over-custody-row.html

British baby siezed in Ireland after parents flee social workers over custody row
A three-day-old girl is at the centre of an emotional custody battle after a British couple fled to Ireland to have their baby only to have it siezed by social workers in the Republic.

By Andrew Alderson, Chief Reporter Published: 9:00PM BST 06 Jun 2009

On the advice of an MP, the heavily-pregnant woman and her partner gathered belongings into their car and left the UK for Ireland last week after British social workers told them their child would be taken into care within hours of birth.

However, within 24 hours of the birth of their daughter on Thursday, weighing 7 lbs 10 ozs at Wexford General Hospital, the baby was instead seized by Irish social workers in the town. Tomorrow her parents must begin what is likely to be a lengthy legal battle in Ireland for their right to bring up the child. It is understood that social workers may seek to have her adopted.

The couple have already had their first two daughters taken into care in Britain, and later adopted against their wishes, following an incident in which one of the girls was found to have been hurt. Although the parents were later cleared of any offence, their children were never returned and they have remained under the scrutiny of social services.

They were advised by John Hemming, an MP and an expert in family law, that they were unlikely to get a fair hearing at a British court. He put them in touch with a contact in Ireland, where they hoped they would be outside the jurisdiction of the British family courts. But the Wexford hospital learned about the family's troubled past when they contacted a hospital in Essex to obtain the pregnant woman's medical records.

Mr Hemming, the Liberal Democrat MP for Birmingham Yardley, said: "I am embarrassed that I have to say to people that they won't get a fair hearing in the family courts in England and Wales, and the best thing for people facing removal of their child at birth is to emigrate." He still believes the couple are likely to get a fairer hearing in Ireland than England in what may prove to be a test case.

The couple cannot be named in order to protect the identity of their baby and their two other children, who were taken into care in 2005, one aged two, the other newborn.
In an exclusive interview with The Sunday Telegraph, they said they were distraught by the events of this weekend. Speaking after they saw their then day-old baby driven away to go to a foster carer, the tearful father said: "We are completely devastated. We have done nothing wrong and yet we have lost our baby."

Speaking before the birth, the couple explained why they had gone to Ireland, where they had considered they were safe. "This has been a difficult decision but we are not prepared to lose another child. It's heartbreaking being without my other daughters - I think about them every day. This has all been very stressful but I just have to be strong," said the mother, aged 27.
"We had a meeting with social services [in Essex] who told us as soon as our daughter was born they would take her into 'temporary' foster care while they did assessments. They said that she would be at significant risk of harm. They said, if necessary, they would get an emergency protection order."

The father, 35 and a former serviceman, said: "I am very angry. I fought for my country but now I have been forced to leave it. We are not baby factories for these people just so they can get their quotas up."

In 2000, Tony Blair set a target for a 50 per cent increase in adoptions nationwide to reduce the time children spent in foster care. Councils were offered cash bonuses totalling £36 million for hitting their goals. But once a child is adopted, he or she can never be returned, even if the natural parents are later cleared of any wrongdoing.

The father added: "We have basically sold everything to get the money to move to Ireland. Under family law in England, you are guilty until proven innocent - and you can never prove your innocence."

The couple, who had been living in a rented flat in Essex, had a meeting with social services, the police, health workers and a solicitor nine days ago. Southend-on-Sea social services intervened after an anonymous tip-off that the couple were living in the area and had previously had their two daughters taken into care by Bromley social services

The two daughters were taken into care because they were considered "at risk", after the mother took the older girl to see a doctor, who diagnosed that she had had been sexually abused. The couple insist that if anyone abused their daughter, the culprit must have been a babysitter or a member of the extended family, and that the incident occurred without their knowledge.

After a police inquiry, the Crown Prosecution Service decided to take no action against them. The couple now have a framed seven-by-five-inches photograph of their two daughters in their hotel room in Ireland. They also have a "memory box" for each child, now aged five and three, in which they put birthday and Christmas cards, and other memorabilia.
The couple hope their daughters will choose to try to get in contact with them when they are adults. The father, who is the biological father of the younger adopted daughter but not the older one, also has two older children from a previous relationship.

The couple have been together for more than five years and plan to marry in September. Last week they packed some belongings into five black bin bags, loaded them into their car and drove to Fishguard, Pembrokeshire, to take the ferry to Rosslare, County Wexford. They have rented a three-bedroom flat in Ireland and intend to build a new life in the country.

The father was a Senior Aircraftsman in the RAF for four years before working as a doorman, dustman and driver. He has recently been on incapacity benefit, after being injured in a car accident. The mother, who had never been abroad before arriving in Ireland, has worked as a carer for the elderly and hopes to return to work. Mr Hemming, who has successfully campaigned for greater openness in the family courts, said: "I don't blame this couple for being angry. In England and Wales, however, we have a system that is obsessed with adoption."

Mr Hemming said that of cases in 2007 where a local authority applied for and pursued a care order, only 0.27 per cent had the application rejected. "We need to take a look at the way the family courts system operates because we need to stop the Baby Ps [the boy abused and killed in Haringey, north London] happening, while also allowing people in England and Wales to raise families without the fear or arbitrary intervention based on inadequate evidence."
Paul Greenhalgh, Southend-on-Sea Borough Council's Corporate Director for Children and Learning, said: "We are committed to making plans that are in children's best interests but we do not comment on individual social care cases."

A spokesman for Bromley council said: "In accordance with national procedures, the local authority informed the other council involved of previous child protection concerns in this case. Based on this information that council would have formulated its own child protection plan."
A spokesman for Wexford county council was unavailable for comment this weekend.

The Child Murder Epidemic

2009-07-14T16:14:00.002+01:00

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1198725/The-child-murder-epidemic-Deaths-shocking-avoidable-Baby-Ps-happen-single-week.html

The child murder epidemic: Deaths as shocking and avoidable as Baby P's happen every single weekBy Peter OborneLast updated at 3:20 AM on 10th July 2009Comments (19) Add to My Stories Tragic: Baby P shortly before his deathAs a nation, we became obsessed with the case of Baby P. We winced at the details of his unbelievably cruel death at the hands of his mother and her vicious boyfriend. We were angered by the failure of social services to protect this innocent little boy from harm. If there was any consolation in the outcry that followed, it was the thought that, in 21st-century Britain, such cases were rare. But this is a dangerously mistaken impression.

Sadly, there was nothing out of the ordinary about the ordeal of Baby P, or of eight-year-old Victoria Climbie - another notorious case of violence and neglect ten years earlier.Deaths every bit as terrible as theirs take place nearly every week in this country, largely unnoticed and unreported. The numbers are rising all the time, as a unique survey carried out for the Channel 4 Dispatches programme reveals.

For six months, researchers trawled through social service inquiries and reports from courts and inquests up and down the country.The Freedom of Information Act had to be invoked to get some councils to release key documents. In the end, we uncovered a total of 183 child killings between 2004 and 2008 attributed to a parent, a parent's partner or a carer. In 2004, there were 29.

The number doubled to 55 in 2007. The trend is upwards; shamingly so. For a supposedly civilised society, the statistics make chilling reading . Two-thirds of the 183 victims were under five. A third were less than a year old. Most were beaten to death, stabbed, smothered or strangled.In nearly three-quarters of the cases, the killers were either the child's mother or father (and on rare occasions both). One-fifth of deaths involved the mother's partner or new boyfriend. Men were twice as likely to kill as women. But look behind the figures to the reality of these tortured lives and the picture that emerges is almost Dickensian in its horror. For example, James Howson placed his 16-month-old daughter Amy - already skeletal from under-nourishment - across his knee and pressed down so hard he broke her back. A mortem revealed 40 other wounds inflicted on her in the four weeks before her death, including six fractures to her arms and legs. Howson had progressed from wife beating to child-beating - a not unusual phenomenon.

There were warning signs that, had they been picked up, might have prevented these deaths He had been expelled from school for violence, with a warning from a teacher that 'this boy will commit murder'. The research pinpoints the breakup of a marriage or live-in relationship as a particularly dangerous time for children.For example, after Lyn Philcox ended her eight-year marriage to husband Brian, he demanded custody of their children, Amy and Owen, stalked them on their way to school and put emotional pressure on them, trying to prise them from their mother.

The courts gave him limited access. On the day the divorce was finalised, he took them on an agreed outing, knocked them out with chloroform and killed them and himself with the exhaust fumes from his car. Our findings show that 20 children died on access visits like this, and the separation of parents was a factor in a quarter of all the killings.After his wife left him because of his violent and drunken ways, Chris Hawkins stabbed his 14-year-old daughter Donna and four-year-old son Ryan. Donna survived the frenzied attack, but little Ryan, with nine wounds in his arms and chest, died.But it is not just men who commit these dreadful crimes. Ms G had once been sectioned and was on medication to control her schizophrenia. Convinced that her two children were not hers, she suffocated three-year-old Keniece with clingfilm and battered ten-year-old Antoine with a hammer before strangling him.

In another case, Jael Mullings was a young and devoted mother. Living alone, with a history of depression, she could not cope. After reaching a crisis point, she stabbed her two young sons through their hearts. But blaming her entirely for that terrible double tragedy is wrong. Little has improved since Victoria Climbie was tortured and killed by her great aunt and her boyfriend We now know that she was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia.

After the birth of her second son, Dalayno, three months before the deaths, she was also suffering from post-natal depression and asked the authorities for help. But, according to her family, all she received was childcare. She wasn't given a mental health assessment. On the day of the killings, she had begged her local health centre to have her children taken into care. Her behaviour was so out of control that the police were involved. But no one acted decisively until it was too late. In her story - as in all the others quoted here - there were warning signs that, had they been picked up, might have prevented these deaths. If only health visitors who called at the Howson home to see little Amy had demanded to know why her father wouldn't let them in. If only the family courts had not authorised contact between the unstable Brian Philcox and his children.If only mental health workers had made sure that Antoine and Keneice's mother was taking her medication before she was allowed unsupervised by Peter Oborne access to them.If only Jael Mullings' mental health deterioration had been picked up sooner and acted upon. If only . . . It is a sobering fact that half the children who died were known to social services and somehow slipped through the net of officialdom to their deaths. But, just as significantly, half had never been referred to the authorities: they weren't even in the net.

This is the real nature of the crisis I believe we are facing in this country. Our obsession with Baby P has not only proved unhelpful in disguising from us the true extent of child killing, it has also distracted policymakers from asking the right questions. Because Baby P was on a child protection register, the overriding issue became the spectacular failure of Haringey social services in its legal duty to look after his welfare.Divorce is the time of maximum danger for children, especially if there is a background of violence in the householdHowever, our study showed failure of this kind was extremely unusual. There are around 30,000 children in the UK on child protection plans, yet, on average, only two of them are killed each year by parents or carers. This is two too many, of course. But the fact is that, contrary to public perception, social workers appear, on the whole, remarkably good at safeguarding children - once they are on child protection registers.But only 11 of the 163 children in our study were on registers at the time of their deaths. The vast majority - some 93 per cent of the cases we examined - involved children who were not on protection registers. The policy consequences of this are dramatic. Even if, in the aftermath of Baby P, the Government carries out its pledge that social workers won't fail those on child protection registers ever again, then we'll only ever save two, maybe three, lives a year.

What won't be addressed is the bigger problem: those thousands of children who live in deadly peril but are not identified as at risk. We need to identify them early, and protect them before it is too late. But is such a course of action possible? Official doctrine says no. Whenever a child dies and abuse or neglect is suspected, local authorities are obliged to carry out what is known as a 'serious case review', many of which we examined in our survey. But, as we discovered, it is commonplace for these reviews to shy away from apportioning blame, and to conclude that the particular child's death was impossible to predict - and therefore impossible to prevent. The implication is that child killing is random. It might happen to anyone, anywhere, and at any time. However, I strongly challenge this view. Brother and sister Owen and Amy Philcox: Killed by their father on the day his divorce from their mother was finalisedThis new research shows that deaths very rarely come 'out of the blue'. The vast majority of child killings fall into clear categories - and almost all the ones we examined had clear lessons for preventing such tragedies happening again. For example, the figures show quite clearly that children of violent parents are most at risk. In nearly half the cases, parents who killed had a history of violence to their adult partners. Most were known to the police, health visitors or social workers for their uncontrolled behaviour.

Yet only two of these children were deemed sufficiently at risk to be registered as needing protection. Toddler Ryan Hawkins was not one of them. Yet when we talked to his big sisters (something that, apart from one brief phone call, social services never did), we discovered repeated warning signs that their father, Chris, could be a danger to children. He once gripped his daughter Natalie around the neck, and social services were alerted after her sister Donna confided to a school nurse that her father had hit her and that she was so afraid of him that she felt suicidal.

The key agencies say they don't have the money to make all the changes demanded But no proper risk assessment was done, despite the fact that Hawkins had also been charged by the police with raping his own wife, Val. Val felt let down because social services never warned her of the extra risk to children when parents split up. If they had, she would have done something to stop Ryan going to see his dad. All agencies need to realise that separation is the time of maximum danger for children, especially if there is a background of violence in the household. Nor does barring a violent parent from the family home necessarily mean that children are safe. As we have seen, 20 children were killed on access visits, four of them on unsupervised visits ordered by the courts. The message is simple: when mothers leave violent or obsessively controlling partners, the children need special protection, particularly if that partner is unable to accept the break-up.

The arrival of a new partner can be another danger point. Twenty-two children were killed by the mother's new boyfriend, usually within three months of moving in.Most of these new men had known the mother for less than six months. It is clear, too, that the authorities should be alert to parents with serious mental health problems, which was an issue in one in four of the child homicide cases we examined.Drugs were another factor. One in five died at the hands of addict parents. The fact that some were undergoing treatment for their addiction was no safeguard.

More from Peter Oborne... PETER OBORNE: Amoral spiv or true traditional Tory? Will the REAL Cameron please stand up 10/07/09 PETER OBORNE: Our Right Honorable liars and the debauching of democracy 03/07/09 PETER OBORNE: This reveals both moral and economic bankruptcy 30/06/09 PETER OBORNE: Why David Cameron won't sack these expenses cheats 27/06/09 PETER OBORNE: Labour's sinister revolution will tear Britain's 700-year-old constitution to shreds 23/06/09 PETER OBORNE: Europe and a squalid Blair, Cameron pact 19/06/09 PETER OBORNE:

Most candidates have had their hands in the till - this grubby race to become Speaker reveals MPs have learnt nothing 13/06/09 PETER OBORNE: How a Labour vacuum let in the bigots 09/06/09 VIEW FULL ARCHIVE Seven children died after ingesting methadone - the heroin substitute offered to addicts. Six years have now passed since Lord Laming's very thorough report into the murder of Victoria Climbie (who was tortured by her great aunt and her boyfriend in 2000) made 108 recommendations.A 'progress report' following Baby P's death made another 50 or so recommendations earlier this year. But these recommendations are not necessarily being acted upon. The key agencies say they don't have the money to make all the changes demanded. But lack of resources is not the principal issue here. What matters is a change of attitude. Social workers, health visitors, police, GPs, the probation service, school teachers and members of the public must take on board the plain fact that far too many children are failing to get the protection they need. If we are to prevent many more from dying, we must first acknowledge the seriousness of domestic violence. Most children living in violent homes are known to the authorities, yet most do not qualify for child protection.

This is a scandal. Then we must recognise that the vast majority of these killings are behind closed doors - and that perhaps it's time we prised open these doors. Persistent failure to attend routine medical check-ups featured in 20 of the killings we studied, and yet there was no follow-up. Missed appointments should trigger concern. Perhaps it should also be made compulsory for children to be seen in their homes by health visitors at least once a year. Above all, social workers need to listen if they are to save lives.It was stunning to discover that in 11 deaths, parents had specifically warned relatives, friends, colleagues, GPs or psychiatrists that they intended to kill their children and themselves.Yet no one took them seriously enough to do anything.

There also needs to be more listening after the event. In the reports we saw of internal social services inquiries into what went wrong in particular cases, it was rare that anyone had bothered to ask relatives of the dead children for their opinion. When consultation did take place, it was usually superficial - as if the views of the people in the best position to advise on how to prevent these horrors happening again were immaterial.This arrogant refusal to include those most intimately involved in child homicide cases seems to run throughout the whole system. It must stop.What must also stop is the purely advisory nature of official guidelines for child protection.

They need to be mandatory on local authorities, with sanctions if they are not followed. Only then can we begin to stem this tragic tidal wave of easily preventable deaths among the most vulnerable in our society. Dispatches:

The Children Britain Betrayed is on Channel 4 on Monday at 8pm.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1198725/The-child-murder-epidemic-Deaths-shocking-avoidable-Baby-Ps-happen-single-week.html#ixzz0LEDONnNu&D

My Family Destroyed (A mothers story)

2009-07-13T09:44:00.003+01:00

We were once a happy family of four until 'April 2005' our happy family was forced to become three and then two by 'May 2007'. Following this destruction we were then forced to become one, which came finally on 'March 2008’. Each one of us ripped apart from what was a family of four when my children were taken from school by two policemen and a social worker without any explanation.

I naively went ahead and put up a fight demanding answers and the wrongs against me to be put right. "No one has told me why. No one has answered my questions. No charges have been brought against me, only just dumb silence.

“How dare they or anyone take my children from me breaking up my family and home”. They made one thing clear to me, “give up” they said, as you will never win, so many have tried before you and not one has beaten this system” Sadly what they said is oh so true because if they cannot win fairly they concoct a winning plan.

I blame myself; if I hadn’t argued and challenged them then maybe I would not have lost my kids.

My then partner’s mother was the one that the authorities dealt with; all communication was going to her address. Her other two daughters-in-law worked with them and I naively thought they were doing right by me and put my trust in them. I was not told half of what was going on. I lost my son to my partner when we split up because of this cloak and dagger stuff and the result was I was declared an unfit mother and banned from my kids.

My daughter’s daddy is different from my son’s dad and his granny also works with the authorities.. Because of this other charade I have lost my daughter too, the granny has been given my daughter and gets full foster allowance for her every week.

I know now I was too trusting with people I thought I could trust them and went by their guidance. That naive trust has left me branded an unfit mother and has lost me my family. The authorities have written me off and will not even grant me a hearing because I have fought so hard for my children they have branded me as mentally disturbed. I have never been diagnosed by any doctor or psychiatrist or anyone. Would you be angry if your family was removed from you without just cause?

The unjustified devastating treatment my family has suffered in Scotland has caused me go to Ireland in search of justice and take my daughter. Now she will not leave my side and wants to be near me all the time every minute.
It broke my heart to leave my son behind as our happiness would have been complete if he had come but I could not force him, he has been through so much.

Note:-
A fair hearing is all she has ever wanted but it has been denied to her all along. She is regarded as an alien in this country.

Sue has made getting her family back an obsession as she has educated herself on family law and has created dossiers as thick as phone books in an effort to be with her kids again; She has tape recordings, prepared proof of laws that have been broken against her and her kids but no one will listen.

We have known Sue for a few short months and when you observe this mother and daughter and listen to them you just know their hearts and souls are meant to be together.

We were told she was going to visit a childhood friend in Belfast but in desperation to be as a family again has driven her underground to the Republic of Ireland where she has been given residency and has been told she will get justice in Ireland because their family laws are fairer than in Scotland.

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/

My Weekly

2009-07-12T16:40:00.007+01:00

Margaret & Jimmy Nicola & Joanne

My Weekly.
July 11th 2009

What happens when a parent dies or a relationship breaks down? These courageous grandparent s' stories offer fresh hope to others.

Susan, Jimmy and Margaret Deuchars’ daughter, had just given birth to her youngest daughter, Nicola, when she was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer.

From her hospital bed, she made a heartbreaking plea to her parents: "I'm not going to make it. Please help Joe with the girls." "It was such a difficult time but we told her that we would always be there for them," says Jimmy. "We loved them and they were our last link to our daughter."

For three years after Susan passed away, Nicola and her older sister, Joanne, enjoyed the stability of their grandparents' home with regular visits. But then everything changed. Joe met a new partner and announced that he and thegirls were moving from Glasgow to Liverpool to be closer to her.

Margaret continues. "We were told we could see them every month, but then contact just slipped away.

For at least six months we did not see them at all, which broke our hearts. I could not believe anyone would do this. We were the girls' security. They loved their dad, but they relied on us." After six months seeing the children, the couple grew desperate. "We thought that was it — we were being denied contact altogether," says Jimmy.

Remembering the promise they had made to their daughter they hired a lawyer but were shocked to learn that they had no legal rights to see their grandchildren. "In the eyes of

the law, we were classed as irrelevant persons," says Jimmy.

The couple turned to the family court in Liverpool, who arranged a mediation session, with both sides getting the chance to air their views.

Eventually an agreement was reached and we were able to see Nicola and Joanne once a month and have them to stay during the school holidays "It was heart-breaking, but better than nothing," Jimmy says. "When we saw them again after all that time, wewere all crying. We met up halfway between Glasgow and Liverpool, at Carlisle Castle, and as they came running up to us with their arms outstretched, we both burst into tears."

After three years, Joe's relationship sadly broke up but visits became far more frequent and relaxed.

Now that Nicola and Joanne are older, how do they feel about their grandparents'struggle for access to them that they were too young to understand at the time? "I think they're proud. They appreciate the fact that we put up a fight for them," says Jimmy.

Grandparents Apart UK provides support, advice and counseling for grandparents in this situation, and campaigns for a change in the law to recognize grandparents more.

Visit http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/ or call 0141 882 5658

Clarification of our aima.

2009-07-12T12:10:00.000+01:00

Two persons complained that we did nothing for families, only for the care system.

Nobody sees the hours we spend talking to distressed grandparents comforting them and in a few cases talking them round from suicide as well as trying to help them back into their grandchildren’s lives. Attached are guidelines we have produced with our experience for grandparents and parents let us know what you think of them we are always open for improvement.

As far as legal rights of contact for grandparents is concerned we have campaigned for just that for years and eventually it has went cold and nobody in government is interested. Where is the point of flogging a dead horse? We need to change tact.

We firmly believe we should have some sort of official contact for the safety of our ‘Forgotten Grandchildren’ especially in danger homes. We will still battle on for the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be made mandatory for professionals. This would ensure by law that grandparents are recognised for the support and protection they can give their grandchildren. The government’s failure to do this is not using every possible effort in a child’s best interest.

We are now gathering support from MSPs and MPs and City Councillors.

A grandparent’s most concern is the children, without them why would we bother. Some grandparents demand rights for themselves just because they say so. Grandparents have reared a family and proud of it and quite rightly so but they need to be careful not to patronise the young parents. If they feel uncomfortable in visiting the grandparents they will eventually stop altogether then animosity creeps in... Parents need to make their own mistakes and do it their way.

When problems arise in a family there must be change, something is going wrong and needs to be nipped in the bud and Mediation is excellent for doing just that. It can stop a molehill becoming a mountain.

Grandparents must learn to let their son/daughter go as their child and they will surely return as a friend looking for loving advice and help but only when asked for. When they say to you “I want to do it my way” it should respected. They will, do it anyway and you won’t be there to pick up the pieces. You can’t control them all their lives.

Would you have put up with being told what to do or made to feel you are not doing it right when you were young? Think about it!

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Who1!

2009-07-12T12:06:00.000+01:00

Who saves more children from abuse and neglect
than any other organisation yet are regarded as
irrelevant persons by law in children’s lives.

Who knows a family’s faults and weaknesses
better than anyone else in the whole
wide world.

Who can be your most valuable asset in child
caring.

Who picks up the pieces when drugs or alcohol
are involved and children are neglected.

Who is available 24/7 when children are in crisis,
homeless, or abused?

Who are the most carers of children and the most
underpaid.

Who does Woman’s Aid say can be well placed to
spot abuse in the family.

Who does Children 1st say should have rights to
information about children’s welfare.

They are not just for Christmas or babysitting, or buying prezzies, or taking children to school, or paying for
holidays or only available when you need them.

But they still love to be needed.

Think hard now!!!!!!!....Can you guess?
You would not be here without them.

Show them the love and respect they deserve.

Click on www.grandparentsapart.co.uk for the answer.

Folloow up of. A tree bends with the wing.

2009-07-06T09:30:00.000+01:00

I agree 100% with your correspondent below. My son has decided, based on a single instance of corporal punishment in 1984 that he was abused physically, verbally and emotionally as a child. The fact that it took him to age 34 after accepting many years and many thousands of pounds worth of our help including child-care - looking after our grandson on a weekly basis for all of his 6 years to decide this and despite the fact that no one apart from his lovely Asian wife agrees with him really doesn't square with his convictions. Out of the blue, BY EMAIL no less he tells us that we are banned from his house and denied access to our two grandchildren. I do not know what the triggering event for this has been but we have been subjected to an avalanche of (completely unfounded) accusations all delivered via email as he won't face us. Your organisation seems to focus on families within the care system - what about folks like us. Since this happened, I have become aware of may people in similar family circumstances - none within the care system. I work within the care system as a children's panel member and am aware that the care system offers us nothing. Our only route is to go to court and that solves nothing, has a low chance of success and just keeps family lawyers in a job. Like your correspondent below I WANT LEGAL ACCESS TO MY GRANDCHILDREN! So what does Grandparents apart offer folks like us? Bill Mason

First of all. We don't offer you anything you need to work at it yourself or are you one of the millions who sit back and expect others to use their time and do it fot you.

We have helped a lot of grandparents get back in their grandchildren's lives by a little education on how to fit in with their new grandparental role and it has worked wonders and this is outwith the care system.

We are a voluntary non-funded organisation and spend what time we can to help others. We have family lives too which we have fought for and are trying to pass on our experience and help others when we can.

The government refuses point blank to grant grandparents any legal rights and the feed back is also resentment from parents if we did get legal rights, so we are trying to work round it. As i said to the other lady if you can do better, help yourself. If the grandparents that are affected got off their backsides and supported us like we asked i think we would be a lot closer to a resolution. We can bring it to the notice of the government but it is you the constituent that changes things. Changes are brought about by people like you by lobbying your member of parliament so don't put the blame on us. We have in the past ten years raised the profile of grandparents tremendously and have gained the 'Charter for Grandchildren' which we are trying to bring forward to raise our profile even further. If you find it is not going the way you want you seem to be a reasonably well educated. Do it yourself!..

We are volunteers.

Grandparents ready for the battle to secure justice

2009-07-06T08:38:00.001+01:00

They hold a gun to your head," says Jessie Harvey, and the others round the table murmur a resigned chorus of, "But what can you do?" Their unflinching belief that children need and deserve the love of their own families rather than being cared for by strangers is one of the twin certainties in their lives. The other is poverty.

The majority of them are grandmothers, plus a grandfather or two, an auntie, and a couple of great grandmothers. All are caring for young children in their mature years, long after they had expected to be free of the daily demands of parenting.

Many have stepped back in to the role of parent because of the heroin addiction of a son or daughter.

Their stories are heartbreaking: a four-year-old trying to look after a baby and toddler; social workers arriving with starving children and an ultimatum: "Take them in or they'll go into care"; social workers appearing with a newborn whose mother was found injecting on the maternity ward.

For the relatives who have already lost one generation of their family, there is only one reaction. They open the door, open their arms, give up their bed for the children and spend the night on the sofa worrying over how they are going to provide a cot, a bed, food, clothing. That first sleepless night can be followed by months, if not years, of broken nights soothing infants who were born addicted to methadone or dealing with the fears of children who have been abused

The discovery that there are now thousands of others in the same position with little or no financial help, despite saving millions of pounds for councils who would otherwise have to pay the costs of foster or residential care, has turned these unsung carers into campaigners determined to secure justice for their children.

Relatives taking on the role of parents have now become so numerous - largely because of drug-addicted parents, but also as a result of death or illness - that a new term, "kinship carer", has been coined to describe them.

Most hope the children will eventually be able to be cared for by their own parents. Mrs Harvey, for instance, looks after her five-year-old grandson whose father, her youngest son, was a promising young footballer before turning to drugs 18 years ago.
She hoped the birth of a baby would help her son and his partner to live a drug-free life, albeit with the help of methadone. They managed three months before Mrs Harvey felt she had to step in.

Since then, she has only had a full night's sleep when the child is staying with his other grandmother. "He's a healthy, outgoing wee boy, but he was born a methadone baby and he has sleep problems."Both grandmothers encourage visits from the parents, but enforce a strict rule of no access if they are under the influence of drugs.

The unpredictable behavior of addict parents is the subject of bitter tales at the support groups kinship carers have formed across Scotland.There are parents who refuse to transfer child benefit, even though the child is not living with them; the mother who takes a teenage daughter into town and is arrested for shoplifting; the mother found comatose after being entrusted with the care of her toddler. Despite provocations of this kind, Mrs Harvey says: "You never hear a granny say anything bad about a parent to a child."

What has turned their stoicism to anger, however, is a feeling of injustice, that the children they are caring for are being condemned to poverty while unrelated foster parents and the children placed with them are given allowances of several times as much, plus extra payments for holidays and birthdays.

Some kinship carers' support groups have enabled children to go on holiday by holding money-raising events while the kinship care network has access to a caravan. For some, however, the cost of £40 a week, plus £10 for each child, is prohibitive.

Moreover, Mrs Harvey, and the hundreds of others in her situation, now fear that without adequate support in the form of psychological services, the children in their care will become damaged adults and, in turn, incapable themselves of competent parenting.

There is a huge demand for access to support services for children affected by traumatic early experiences, and deep anger that children placed with foster families are given priority while kinship children are "at the back of the queue".

The discrepancies are because in most cases these children live with members of their extended family though a private, voluntary agreement with their parents. However, some are placed on supervision orders through the children's panel, and others have residency orders by which the grandparents or other relatives have parental rights.

As with the allowances paid to foster parents, different councils pay varying rates to kinship carers, which range from nothing in Stirling, to £405.02 a fortnight in Perth and Kinross, for 16 to 18-year-olds who are formally "looked after" by the council, and £161.70 for those in informal arrangements.

Even the recommendation that there should be a minimum allowance paid throughout Scotland causes problems. The chief obstacle is such payments reduce other benefits. For that reason, Glasgow City Council has taken a policy decision not to make payments that reduce entitlement to state benefits. When it introduced kinship care payments at the beginning of this year they were limited to £40 a week.

Even that, however, has negative consequences for carers, who now find they have to pay fees for nursery school or after-school care, from which they were previously exempt.
The anomalies are recognised by the Scottish Government. Research for the previous Executive recommended there should be a separate official category of children looked after through kinship care, and they should be entitled to a welfare benefit through the Department of Work and Pensions.

The potential dangers of informal arrangements where the suitability of carers has not been assessed has prompted suggestions kinship carers should be offered similar training to foster parents, leading to a more formal arrangement and allowances. It appears such training is not geared toward the challenges of damaged children.

Mrs Harvey says: "They wanted me to take a training course, which involved learning how to cook mince and potatoes and change a nappy." At 58, with four children and six grandchildren, Mrs Harvey mastered those skills long ago and can't help being angry at what she sees as a misuse of public money so desperately needed by so many kinship carers.

They have been a marginalised group, but their voice is increasingly being heard by people with influence. The process began with a presentation to the Poverty Truth Commission set up to bring together people from some of Scotland's poorest neighbourhoods with influential figures from government, churches and universities. They have just put their case to the Minister For Children, Adam Ingram.

They emphasise they feel cheated after expecting to receive payments related to foster allowances last April, as a result of money released to local authorities.

Scottish Government policy now states councils should move towards paying the same as fostering allowances, minus child benefit, by 2011. The carers have been heard.

'A tree must bend with the wind'

2009-07-04T11:05:00.002+01:00

Your opinion is required here.

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 can and do suffer the indignity of being ignored as irrelevant persons by the social services and the law. 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 appears to be attracting the wrong kind of people. A lot of grandparents 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 an effect which carries with them through-out their whole lives.

The Ten Commandments of Family Law. The Forgotten Children. + (Scroll down for) The Charter for Grandchildren + The Way Forward. http://gapukfamilyinformation.blogspot.com/

Question

Hallo Jimmy,Thankyou for you e-mail, but I am a grandmother, who has been denied accssesss to my grandchildren by my son and the childrens mother,They do not have any isssues with abuse or drugs or any thing of that nature.I do want the goverment to give legal rights of access for it is my grandchildrens rights to know their grandmother, they love me dearly and cannot see me because of their parents. it is now six months since i have seen them and its breaking my heart.Not all families have problems with drugs ectra and feel the grandparents association are ignoring simple acssesss problems which is just as important.too much emphasis is given to "problem families . SO I WANT LEGAL ACCESSS TO MY GRANDCHILDREN.If you are not pushing for this please do not contact me again I will start my own campaign !!!!!!!!!

Jimmy’s answer

There is so much opposition to grandparents getting legal access to their grandchildren that we are alienating ourselselves from parents as well as SS and the law. We have tried for 10years and came up against it all. The project we are trying now is getting grandparents recognised more by making the Charter for Grandchildren mandatory for professionals in children's lives wich is a back door attempt for grandparents and not standing on on anyones toes. This is gathering support from Glasgows local authority city councillors and 3 MSPs have joined in to take it forward. 3/4 of the grandparents we represent do not help themselves. If they all stood up to be counted we would not have a problem So if you can do that better than us good luck. Taking them head on is just not getting support. If you still don't want me to contact you again then i will remove you from our list. Jimmy

Question

Dear Jimmy,

Why should we as grandparents , be alienated by parents for wanting accssess to our own grandchildren. Divorced parents have accsesss rights, why not grandparents. You claim youve been fighting for 10 YEARS for these rights and you have not been recognised ?????? WHY ????? Now you are using the childrens charter to slip in the back door you said> BE UP FRONT AND STATE WHAT SHOULD BE GRANDPARENTS RIGHTS......ACCSESS TO OUR OWN GRANDCHILDREN !!!!!!!You suggested that maybe I could do better , I found that sarcastic, obviously thats why I contacted " The Grandparent Association " but you have given up the cause... WHY???? Can you give me a name of any other body that may help me with this matter ???

"A tree must bend with the wind or it will break”

We have been up front as you put it and achieved the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’. We created that in a stakeholders group with the Scottish Government and toured Scotland in a caravan to promote it. A vote was taken in parliament for grandparents to have legal rights and it was shot down in flames. I started off like you stating "black and White" and one of our founder members said we would need to compromise. I said firmly no! We wanted rights to our own grandchildren. I am not too proud to say i was wrong. It took a while to clear the grey area and now we are compromising. Our MSP and others are backing our cause now, whereas after the charter was created no-one was listening to us. You obviously feel we are not doing it properly with your sarcastic remark of quote ..."If you are not pushing for this please do not contact me again I will start my own campaign !!!!!!!!!" unquote So don't condem others that have the experience until you have exhausted the process yourself. You can help by doing what you think should be done there is room for all. The more the merrier to take up the cause. We do it as we see how it should be done. You can too. What we produce is for use for anyone to further the cause if they want to use it.

So can I welcome you to the fold.

Jimmy

Grandparents Opposition.

2009-07-03T11:19:00.002+01:00

Grandparents have much opposition to having any rights to their own grandchildren.

How this problem has arisen?

We have to blame social services here. They are the people who highlight and say “you are irrelevant persons”. “We don’t need to speak to you” The concern shown is assumed as anti social services and against their omnipotent way of thinking and used to ignore grandparents altogether.

This very strong message of irrelevance transmits to the general public and the courts and the professionals, encouraging them into alienating grandparents from their own families.

This can be reversed by making the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ mandatory for professionals only and will send out a new message, that will not step on the toes of anyone, that grandparents are important in children’s lives and encourage people to resolve their own problems rather than turning so easily to the courts.

This problem does not usually arise in families who put the 'Best Interests of the Children' first and act like sensible caring adults. But when the authorities lead as they do, people are quick to take the easier way out rather than at the first sign of problems not bothering to seek assistance by contacting groups like ours or mediation to prevent a molehill becoming a mountain. Most family problems can be resolved in the early stages by getting round a table and being honest.

There is not much point in hammering away at a fantasy for years like some other groups
It is the welfare of our children that encourages us to think again at the problem and to look at the situation practically taking into account the opposition that are against grandparents having rights. There must be compromise.

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article6582689.ece

We need to get parents social services and the governments thinking differently about us. Present ourselves to them that we are not a threat but could be the savour of children’s sanity. We can give you tried and tested guidelines that have worked for hundreds of grandparents on how to be a grandparent. “We know you have brought up a family already but being a grandparent is a new experience. The children are not yours and you need to work with the parents, not your way, but their way”.

Our first and main concern is that our grandchildren are safe and well and not in danger as millions are with drug and alcohol abuse etc (The Forgotten Children) and in a multitude of cases children need someone who is close to them to keep them safe and capable of early detection of abuse and to care for them If their parents are unable to.

Who is better than their own grandparents to care for them with security love and comfort? rather than strangers where children lose their identity, self worth, become resentful and aggressive and low achievers and seek that family security in gangs becoming the thugs of the future..

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658

BBCHeather Stott Show Manchester.

2009-07-03T09:24:00.001+01:00

Hello Jimmy,
Further to our conversation we are hoping we can get a representative from Grandparents Apart UK on the Heather Stott show. BBC Manchester

Thanks Jimmy, I have confirmed with Dr Start and she will be on the Heather Stott Show on Monday at 12.10 (you can listen online or listen again on iplayer if you wish).

Thanks for your help,

Katie Hamilton
BBC Radio Manchester.

Change Matters in the Republic of Ireland

2009-07-02T18:00:00.000+01:00

I work for Change Matters here in the Republic of Ireland. We are helping parents and kids who feel they have to flee UK in order to get a fair hearing here. Anybody who has any info, letters, records etc of child drugging please send copies to me at Rosie Hughes, Putiaghan Upper, Belturbet, Republic of Ireland.

You can contact me at rosie-hughes@changematters.vpweb.ie or phone 00353 871210480We have a case going through to the Eurpopean court of Human Rights and a recent success in the UK family courts. I know it's a lot to ask when people are still fighting for justice there and your papers WILL NOT be used without written consent.Our main aim at present is to get all the facts we can with an aim to take them to Strasbourg when we have sufficient evidence.

Rosie x

Grandparents left out to often. Jimmy & Margaret.

2009-06-27T08:55:00.003+01:00

From The Times
June 27, 2009

Grandparents are left out of the family picture too often

When parents separate, grandparents can find themselves cut off from grandchildren with no rights. The law should change

Joan Bakewell

Stage lights sway beside the tall trees in Regents Park theatre on Saturday night, casting a golden glow on Beatrice and her reluctant wooer, Benedick. It was shivering cold, but our hearts were warm, first because of the play, but also because I was there in the company of my grandson. Much Ado had been a set text at school so he got the plot and understood the rude jokes as much as I did. The following morning we were off again, just the two of us, grandma and grandson, heading for the British Library and its exhibition of Henry VIII. Yes, my grandson is already in his teens and enjoys these one-to-one weekends almost as much as I do.
Jimmy and Margaret Deuchars in Glasgow had a fine time with their granddaughters at half-term, too. The two teenagers stayed over in their home and went on outings to Loch Lomond and such, just the sort of treats grandparents enjoy sharing. But in Jimmy and Margaret’s case it hasn’t always been that easy.

The Deuchars lost their daughter to breast cancer only weeks after her second baby was born. Her husband soon married again and moved away to Liverpool. His new family took precedence in his life and the grandparents found contact hard. Their requests to keep in touch came to nothing. They realised that they had lost more than their daughter. But they weren’t willing to accept the situation, and went to court. The laws of this country do not acknowledge any legal relationship between grandparents and grandchildren. However, after a somewhat heated negotiation, the families came to an agreement. In the years that followed they would meet their granddaughters once a month at Carlisle Castle or the Tesco near by. It wasn’t much of a family life, but it would have to do. However, they didn’t stop there.

When I was first a grandparent, about 17 years ago, grandparents didn’t have much of a profile. They were simply bundled in with the general family background and not expected to have much of a role. All that has changed, and people such as Miriam Stoppard are writing delicious books about the joys and rewards, but also about the skills and pitfalls of what I suppose must be called “grand parenting”. Being a grandparent, it seems to me, can be gloriously free of rule books and restrictions. There is only one qualification — parentage — and after that you make it up as you go along.

These days, grandparents are altogether more important in the community of families, a consequence, no doubt, of the fact there are more and more of us — 14 million at last count. The sad thing is that as many as a million of us have lost touch as a result of our children’s divorce or separation. Paternal grandparents are usually the most deprived because women — mothers — are awarded custody of their children in 90 per cent of divorce cases. So the fathers’ parents lose out. A report by the Grandparents Association of an admittedly small sample found that while 55 per cent of grandparents were directly involved in their grandchildren’s care before the separation, 67 per cent found themselves excluded from care afterwards and 42 per cent lost all face-to-face contact.

This is a regrettable situation. But the law — currently the Children Act 1989 — is framed to put the interests of the child foremost. So let’s consider the child’s needs: first the worst-case scenario, there are desperate families where drugs and drink are wrecking the lives of young children. I know of situations where the intervention of a grandparent offers exactly the support that young children need. Less dramatically, 20 per cent of children are growing up in a one-parent family: again the presence of older role models broadens their social horizons.
More positively still, research last year by the University of Oxford in collaboration with the Institute of Education found that “involved grandparents” had a major impact on adolescent wellbeing. The research’s principal investigator, Professor Ann Buchanan, said: “What was especially interesting was the links we found between ‘involved grandparents’ and adolescent wellbeing. Closeness was not enough: only grandparents who got stuck in and did things with their grandchildren had this positive impact on them.”

This is where Jimmy Deuchars comes in again. So distressed were he and Margaret over the struggle to gain access to their granddaughters that they founded Grandparents Apart UK, a support group to help others in the same plight. That was five years ago.
They have seen great improvements. The group consulted with the Scottish Executive to shape a Charter for Grandchildren, which was introduced in Scotland in May 2006.

This says that “on occasions professional organisations such as social work departments or the courts . . . may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s life. In these circumstances it is vital in touch with her young grandchildren. She is being refused the easy and regular access she would like. She has written to her MP, Andrew Dismore, of Lab Hendon, who referred it for a reply to Baroness of Dreflin Morgan, the minister responsible for this policy area.

Speaking of Scotland’s Charter for Grandchildren, Lady Morgan wrote: “Although we have no plans to produce a similar document in England, I think it is fair to say that the principles of the charter are already well established through case law, government policy and the Children Act 1989 itself.”

That isn’t enough. A report this week from the Grandparents Association, the Family Matters Institute and Families Need Fathers demonstrates that grandparents have scarcely more rights over their grandchildren than complete strangers. They certainly have fewer than step-parents who, if they have lived with a child for more than three years, have an automatic right of access.
Grandparents who are determined to reach their grandchildren must be prepared to embark on lengthy and sometimes expensive legal proceedings. Given that grandparents are likely to be getting on in years, this isn’t an appropriate action. The law needs to be changed to provide for grandparent access as a right. Nothing less will do.

www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Have your say

It is time people put children first, internal family wars bring unstability in childrens lifes, and money for the courts. Kids world wide are one of the biggest industries. So untill families get it right which will not happen kids will continue to be abused in all ways. LET KIDS HAVE A VOICE.
Maggie Tuttle, Essex, UK

I was just saying to my husband this morning - "how important grandparents are to their grandchildren"; - after noticing a granddad in a garage, explaining a woodwork project with his grandson...I commented on how grandparents can offer patience and wisdom when the parents are short of both.
Anna, Florida, USA,

Regardless of whether you get on with your parents/in-laws children need to be allowed to enjoy their grandparents. Where are people's priorities? Grandparents are priceless. Change the law and take the decision out of bitter parent's hands. My parents have spent 2 1/2 years in court-its very sad.
Angela, London,

I agree with Melanie, we do not need any more laws. I would rather the police concentrate on what they should be doing - catching criminals. These matters need to be resolved within the family.

Charles, Warrington,
My kids grandparents couldnt care less to see my 5 children. They are well behaved, funny and old enough to not need nappy changes. They never babysit, never visit, forget birthdays! I bought presents and forged their names for the kids. And yes we stopped asking for involvment from then long ago.
Lisa, SLC,

My kids grandparents couldnt care less to see my 5 children. They are well behaved, funny and old enough to not need nappy changes. They never babysit, never visit, forget birthdays! I bought presents and forged their names for the kids. And yes we stopped asking for involvment from then long ago.
Lisa, SLC,

Why is the reaction always to create more legislation? Why can't it remain just what it is - a family matter to be determined and resolved within families? Bringing in laws, enforcement, police, etc etc will not create a happy and healthy environment for children to be brought up in.
Melanie, Preston,
Joan, be thankful you are blissfully unaware of how poisonous some grandmothers can be. To give such self-centred meddlers legal rights would be a terrible injustice inflicted upon otherwise happy families.
jasper, chelmsford,

My mother is an interfering, undermining, meddling, manipulative and insufferable woman. I do not trust her near my children. It is mine and my partners choice, as parents, to have nothing to do with her or to have her anywhere near our children. Our lives would be a misery.
ian, Edinburgh, Scotland
In the US as I understand it there are laws that allow 30 days a year access to grandchildren. My eldest daughter over a row over a bottle of wine while on holiday with us has not spoken to me for 3 years and has forbidden her teenage children from any further holidays with me or any contact with me
john, Brighton, UK

What about grandparents who really can't be bothered? Why assume they're all eager to spend time with their grandchildren and help their offspring with childcare? In my experience, they're more interested in their pets, alcohol or hobbies than some noisy messy child. Typical selfish babyboomers.
Jackie, Worcestershire, UK

You cannot legislate for this kind of thing. Joan Bakewell, sense of entitlement firmly fixed, completely ignores the fact that contact with a grandparent is not always desirable. What if a grandfather is a paedophile who has never been caught? They would be delighted to have such a law.
Emily, London,

Over-entitled women, having manipulated family law to their advantage in their youth and middle age, want to amend it to their advantage now that they are grandmothers. The only surprise is how little they appreciate the damage they have done, even now they're real victims themselves.
Rob, Reading, UK

Why should we be forced to play happy families? My mother is interfering, manipulative and divisive. If my husband, our children and I chose to exclude her from our lives that is, and must remain, our decision.
isobel, ashford, uk

The essential role that grandparents do play in children’s lives. Dedicated Grandparents are the huge army that are 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 that often attracts 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 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.
Jimmy Deuchars, Glasgow, Scotland

I have seen a number of situations where grandparents have put so much pressure on the parental relationship (usually be criticising son or daughter in law) that the marriage breaks down. In that situation, grandparents should have no right to be involved with the children at all. Lucy, London,

Sally -I'm a grandfather.Like so many grandparents we've had to help both my children financially.We're unpaid childminders 5 days a week,and the Bank of Mum and Dad has helped with mortgages,and food and clothing for the grandkids. Don't talk about maintenance,it cost thousands each year already,
Mike, Dunstable, England

Sally, why should grand parents rights depend on maintenance? They should be there as part of the family background of the child not how much money they can cough up. And, Selena, why is it repelent that a grandparent should have rights of access to his or her own grandchildren.
Gareth James, Cardiff, Wales

Hang on, if grandparents want "rights" from the outset in divorce proceedings then they must also take responsibility. That means maintenance. And if then they have this responsibility it will apply to all grandparents regardless of whether they want contact or not. It is not so simple.
sally, uk,
I would like some involvement from my children's paternal grandparents and great-grandmother, but sadly, my husband's family have shown no interest in seeing their grandchildren at all. My mother is the only grandparent our children have ever known. My husband will never forgive his family for this.
Elisabeth, UK,
While it may often be desirable for grandparents to be a part of their grandchildren's lives, I find the suggestion that they should have any legal rights whatsoever repellent.
Selena, Sydney,

STV News

2009-06-25T16:14:00.001+01:00

Debate on Scotland's child protection system urged
Scottish Labour's Iain Gray challenges First Minister to do more to help vulnerable children in wake of Brandon Muir case and damning report.
25 June 2009 13:33 PM
96 Views

104875
Labour has called on the First Minister to launch a national debate and inquiry into Scotland's child protection system following the death of a Dundee toddler and a damning report into that city's support network.

Iain Gray, Scottish Labour leader in Holyrood, challenged Alex Salmond to "change the orthodoxy which underpins our system".

Mr Gray indicated as many as 20,000 children in Scotland were living with a parent addicted to drugs. He urged faster action to remove these youngsters, saying: "We need to change the balance between leaving these children with their family and keeping them safe".
In First Minister's Questions at Holyrood on Thursday, Mr Salmond defended the child protection services and said a rigorous inspection system had identified five areas, including Dundee, where there had been "serious deficiencies."
He told Mr Gray: "We have a very good child protection system in Scotland which is identifying deficiencies, authority by authority, and remedying these deficiencies."

Mr Salmond would not accept suggestions the Scottish Government is "doing anything other than improving protection for the children".

The calls from Labour came after a critical report into child protection services in Dundee. The report, issued on Tuesday and based on findings before the case of toddler Brandon Muir, found vulnerable children only received help once they reached "crisis point". Inspectors warned of "major weaknesses" in identifying children who needed protection.

BRANDON

Twenty-three-month-old Brandon died last year at the hands of one of his caretakers. Robert Cunningham, 23, was subsequently convicted of the toddler's culpable homicide. Brandon's mother, Heather Boyd, was acquitted.
Mr Gray added: "His mother was a heroin addict, and Brandon's short life brutal and chaotic."
Mr Salmond said former Fife chief constable Peter Wilson was conducting an independent inquiry into the Brandon case, and there was also an independently chaired "significant case review".

"Off the strenuous and stringent system of inspections being carried out of all local authorities, we have identified five where there are serious deficiencies, of which Dundee has been one," the First Minister said.

Mr Gray said it was known that between 10,000 and 20,000 children in Scotland lived with drug-addicted parents - and perhaps up to 100,000 lived with parents addicted to alcohol.
"We have heard these same figures from the Scottish Government for two years now," said Mr Gray. "I have been saying for months now that we don't need to count them but to find them, and find them quickly so we can protect them."

Morayshire and Aberdeen City councils have also received harsh reports on their social services departments in the past year. A follow-up inspectors' report on Aberdeen released on Wednesday found "substantial" progress had been made.

"Not just in one tragic case where an inquiry is pending, but across social work protection for children across Scotland, this government and I hope all of this Parliament applaud the action being taken to make the children of Scotland safer," Mr Salmond said.
He agreed with Mr Gray that social workers were hard-pressed but cited newly released figures that show a "record" number of social workers - 5,072, up 126 on the previous year.
There was also a record number of social workers in child protection services, up 59 to 2,349, while vacancy rates for social workers had dropped to a six-year low.

APOLOGY

During Question Time, the Scottish Conservative leader Annabel Goldie called for Mr Salmond to apologise to the nation over the SNP's "broken promises". She brandished a copy of the SNP manifesto and said: "This is evidence, hard evidence of Alex Salmond's broken promises over the last two years."

The First Minister, however, insisted the recent European election results showed that Scots were happy with his party's performance.

The Conservative said Mr Salmond's Nationalist administration had failed to fulfil election promises on a number of issues, including class sizes, ditching student debt, grants to first-time buyers, and scrapping the council tax.

Mr Salmond responded by listing some of the commitments his government has achieved, including freezing the council tax, reducing rates for small businesses, abolishing tolls on the Forth and Tay bridges, funding 1,000 more police officers and reversing the decision to close accident and emergency units at Monklands and Ayr hospitals.
Last updated: 25 June 2009, 14:44

A round up of news on families

2009-06-25T09:13:00.001+01:00

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Babysnatch-fuels-call-for-review.2784305.jp

Baby-snatch fuels call for review
Published Date: 16 June 2006
By SHÂN ROSS
SHONA Robison, the SNP's health spokeswoman, last night called for an urgent external review into the case of Corellie Bonhomme, whose newborn baby was removed by social workers minutes after the umbilical cord was cut.
In The Scotsman yesterday, Ms Bonhomme, 34, from Dumfries, told how social workers had entered the labour room to seize her baby while she was giving birth in order to seize her baby. She was reunited with her daughter Fifi last month following a five-month legal battle with Dumfries and Galloway Council. Ms Robison said: "There needs to be an external look into this case to make sure such a thing never happens to a mother and child in Scotland again. "Such a review should look at working practices in hospitals, health boards and local authorities and any external agencies involved in a particular case. "We need to establish a framework for good practice which works and is accountable to the public." Fifi was taken into council care on 15 December last year after social workers in Dumfries received background reports from the London Borough of Camden. The English legal proceedings were questioned and the original decision to take Fifi into care was overruled by Sheriff Kenneth Ross at Dumfries Sheriff Court. Meanwhile, Jean Robinson, the honorary research officer for the Association for Improvements in Maternity Services, a maternity care pressure group, said: "The details of what happened to Corellie Bonhomme are appalling and the most serious case we've seen in the UK."

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Calls-to-drug-test-parents.2760317.jp

Calls to drug test parents of children 'at risk' in home
""I think this is a well-intentioned idea but it may well be open to abuse in the future" JOHN SCOTT"
Published Date: 20 March 2006
By IAN SWANSON
SCOTTISH POLITICAL EDITOR
SENIOR social workers want parents to be drug-tested to help decide whether children should be taken into care.
The call comes in the wake of recent tragedies involving children being cared for by drug-addicted parents. The Association of Directors of Social Work (ADSW) has put forward the plan, which would mean parents with a history of drug abuse could be required to undergo tests to see whether they were still taking illegal substances. Two weeks ago there was an outcry when it emerged two-year-old East Lothian boy Derek Doran died after drinking his parents' methadone. He had been found dead in his bed by his mother last December at their home at Elphinstone, near Tranent. And last year three-year-old Michael McGarrity was found alone in a Leith flat with the body of his drug-addict mother, having survived for six weeks on scraps of food. First Minister Jack McConnell has since spoken of his belief that the authorities have often been too slow to remove children from homes where they may be at risk. He has insisted that the interests of the child should be paramount in all cases, even if that means splitting up a family. Under the ADSW proposals, children's hearings would be able to order parents to undergo drug tests in cases where children were considered at risk of "significant harm". The test results could then be taken into consideration in deciding what should happen to the children. Representatives of the ADSW have discussed the proposals with Education Minister Peter Peacock. Bernadette Docherty, chairwoman of the ADSW's children and family care committee, said drug tests would be "extremely useful in helping child protection workers to obtain better information on which to make decisions about children". And ADSW president Colin Mackenzie said Mr Peacock had been interested in the proposal and said he would raise it in Cabinet. But human rights lawyer John Scott expressed concern about a growing "nanny state" approach to such matters. He said: "Are we going to see a situation where the state forbids people to have kids unless they fulfil certain conditions? "Is it possible that in future people who are too fat or who drink more than a specified amount will be barred from looking after children? "I think this is a well-intentioned idea but it may well be open to abuse in the future and we must guard against that." Tory justice spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell also voiced some concerns about the proposals. She said: "I have reservations about this becoming a carte blanche approach so that anyone who fails the test is automatically barred from looking after children. It has to be done case by case. "But the welfare of the child is paramount and it may be that drug testing would be useful in certain cases where there were genuine concerns." An Executive spokesman confirmed Mr Peacock had met social work leaders. "It was an informal discussion looking at a number of issues and no commitment to introduce the measures has been made."

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Vow-to-stop-social-work.2815379.jp

Child Reporter cases double
Published Date: 16 November 2006
THE number of youngsters being referred to the Children's Reporter has doubled in the last ten years, according to a report released today.
In 2005/06, 53,883 children were referred to the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration (SCRA), compared to 26,862 in 1996/97, when the SCRA assumed full responsibility for organising Children's Hearings in Scotland. The main reason for this is the rise in the number of children being referred on 'care and protection' grounds, such as where children are alleged to be victims of cruelty, sexual offences, domestic abuse and neglect. This year, 40,931 children were referred to the Reporter on this basis. SCRA chairman Douglas Bulloch said: "The needs of children - and those of their families and communities - must be addressed much earlier."

Could this happen in your town?
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
At risk children left in danger if abuse.
At-risk children left in danger of abusehttp://www.scotsman.com/latestnews/Atrisk-children-left-in-danger.5394219.jpToddler Brandon Muir was killed by his mother’s drug addict boyfriend. It was later revealed that he died two days before a possible decision to remove him from his homePublished Date: 24 June 2009By Frank UrquhartTHE aunt of toddler Brandon Muir called last night for senior council officials and social workers to be sacked following the release of the most scathing report into child protection services ever published in Scotland.The damning report from a government watchdog highlighted the failures of public agencies in Dundee to protect vulnerable children from "significant harm" in the homes of drug addicts and alcoholics.Publication of the study was brought forward after the death of 23-month-old
Brandon.He was killed by his mother's drug addict boyfriend, Robert Cunningham, who was sentenced to ten years in prison.

Investigators from HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIe) said they had "no confidence" that young people at risk in Dundee were being fully protected.

They also condemned front-line services for their failure to help many youngsters until their plight had reached crisis point.Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray called yesterday for a national inquiry into child protection services throughout Scotland, insisting that it was a national issue."There is a crisis at the heart of child protection services in parts of Scotland," he said.

"This damning report in Dundee quickly follows similar reports in both Aberdeen and Moray. "We were told after the death of Brandon Muir that changes would be made. I have no confidence that that is happening. This is not a localised issue, but a national one. Doing nothing cannot be an
option.

"Brandon's aunt, Dayna Garty, told The Scotsman she was "appalled" at the report's conclusions. "Nothing that they can say or do is ever going to bring Brandon back or stop the suffering that they have let these other kids go through. It is absolutely shocking what has happened."I am absolutely raging about the findings. They are absolutely appalling. I am just staggered about the failures and weaknesses they found."Although the report does not set out to blame individuals, she demanded that Alan Baird, the city council's director of social work, who is also the new chairman of the city's child protection committee, should quit his post."If he had any decency, he would resign," she said. "Somebody should be held responsible, and he is the top man."She went on: "It's not just Brandon they have let down. "Obviously, Brandon died through it all, but other kids are still at risk and they are doing absolutely nothing until it's too late. Apologies are not worth the paper they are written on."The report on Dundee follows strong criticism directed against child protection services in both Aberdeen and Moray in earlier inspections by HMIe.In this case, inspectors examined the workings of the city council, police, NHS Tayside, the Scottish Children's Reporter administration and voluntary and independent groups in February and March of this year.The Brandon Muir trial was taking place at that time, although the case was not considered by inspectors. It will be the subject of a second independent report this summer by Peter Wilson, a former chief constable of Fife.The HMIe report found that Dundee was "weak" in eight of the 18 "quality indicators" examined. Services were rated "satisfactory" in six areas and "good" in three.Child protection services were rated "unsatisfactory" – which meant there were major weaknesses – in one area: that of making sure that children were helped in immediate response to concerns.The report stated: "Inspectors were not confident that all children who were at risk of harm, abuse or neglect, and in need of protection, were identified and received the help and support they needed." The latest figures showed 99 youngsters were on the child protection register in Dundee. In 48 per cent of those cases, drug abuse was a problem in the family. Alcohol addiction was an issue in 33 per cent of cases. In response to the report, Mr Baird said that four additional social workers, some of them agency staff, had already been employed. He added that the council was also spending up to £500,000 to make improvements to the service. The NHS, the city council and police also promised to make improvements. Mr Baird said: "You can never guarantee 100 per cent safety of our most vulnerable children – no council or health authority or police authority can do that. "We will work tirelessly to ensure the improvements identified by HMIe will be put in place at an early stage. "Staff from all the agencies involved in child protection are dedicated individuals who work in an extremely challenging environment. The contribution made by these staff must be recognised."Scotland's children's minister Adam Ingram said: "This report … plainly shows that child protection services in Dundee are simply not good enough and must be urgently improved."Clearly, everyone has a responsibility to keep our children and young people safe, including the public. "However, what we and they expect is that local services are doing all they can to protect the most vulnerable. "As a government, we have continued to set out that we will not protect local systems if they are failing our children, and where this is found to be the case, we will expect robust and rapid action."But he warned: "It is now for those agencies to build on that progress."The Scottish Government and HMIe will be closely monitoring the implementation of that action plan to ensure that vulnerable children in Dundee are not let down by the shortcomings identified in today's report."For our part, we have made clear that we will not fail to act if child protection lessons nationally are to be learned from Brandon's death. However, it is right that we await the outcome of the independent reviews so that we have a full picture of any action that may be required."The agencies involved in child protection have been told by HMIe to prepare an action plan outlining how they will address the problems in the service. They have been given four months to submit a report to inspectors detailing the progress they have made on the action plan.

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Early-warning-system-set-to.2739707.jp

Early warning system set to revolutionise child protection
Published Date: 06 January 2006
By LINDA SUMMERHAYES
HEALTH REPORTER
A COMPUTER system designed to warn doctors, teachers, social workers and police when a child is at risk is set to be launched in the Lothians.
The introduction of the "e-care" children's information system - the first of its kind in Scotland - follows a series of high profile cases in which authorities were heavily criticised for failing youngsters who were in their care. The sophisticated software will be piloted in West Lothian, before being rolled out across the rest of the Lothians, and will allow authorised professionals to see if a child is already a concern to other agencies. It will also allow key workers to see if the child is on the child protection register, has a significant medical problem or if the child has been missing school or hospital appointments on a regular basis. Dr Helen Hammond, a consultant paediatrician with NHS Lothian, is leading the project which has been developed in collaboration with the local council, police and justice department. She said the need for information sharing was first identified in Scotland following the death of three-year-old Kennedy MacFarlane, who was murdered by her mother's boyfriend in Dumfries and Galloway almost six years ago. In Edinburgh, the inquiry into the death of Caleb Ness in 2003 and the case of three-year-old Michael McGarrity, who was found in a flat in Leith beside his mother's dead body in November, had also raised serious concerns. "Each of those inquiries had raised the importance of sharing information and of, I think in particular, the issue of getting in early and realising the accumulated concerns across the agencies," said Dr Hammond. "Personally, since the Kennedy MacFarlane inquiry, I have been very concerned about the sharing of information and, when the funding from the Scottish Executive came up, it was something I saw as really important for us in moving the different work we were already doing forward." Around £300,000 of Scottish Executive money has been spent on the system's development and talks are on-going to roll the system out in Edinburgh and East Lothian. This is the first time a system has been used to promote child protection in Scotland but similar projects have been developed in England in the wake of the murder of eight-year-old Victoria Climbie, whose plight was overlooked by police, social workers and medical staff. Dr Hammond explained that the level of access depended on the person's job, where they worked. For example, teachers would only have access to information about children attending their school. She said: "There are three levels to the system. The first level will be purely identity information. "The second level allows us to see what professionals are involved with the child already and when they saw the child and how we can get in touch with them. We don't need to know why they are in contact with that child. "We are also developing a third level which is a chronology which allows us to see the pattern of care for the child. "That will show major incidents such as the child going on the child protection register." In West Lothian, child protection workers from the police, social work and health departments will begin training in the next few weeks. Although the dates have yet to be confirmed, Dr Hammond said the public will get a chance to view the system at a series of meetings at the end of this month. "We want to make the public aware of what we are trying to do and how we are going to do it," she said. She added: "I think probably the most important thing is early intervention so that people get the help they need when they need it. It is just a tool for us and it's not intended in any way to replace people working together on the phone or face to face. This should just make it easier for people to do their job."

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Family-protection-experts-join-forces.2783201.jp

Family protection experts join forces under one roof
""Now we can work in a much more co-ordinated fashion to provide better outcomes for children" DI Kevin Cassidy"
Published Date: 12 June 2006
By LINDA SUMMERHAYES
HEALTH REPORTER
SCOTLAND'S first dedicated family protection centre is to be established in the Capital by police, health workers and social workers.
The special operations police unit which investigates incidents of child sex abuse and neglect has already moved to the building and it will soon be joined by health visitors and forensic medical examiners. The move follows high-profile inquiries such as the one into the death of baby Caleb Ness, who was in the care of his brain-damaged father and recovering drug addict mother. Authorities were heavily criticised by the inquiry because vital information about the infant's situation was not shared between police, health and social workers. Temporary Detective Inspector Kevin Cassidy co-ordinated the project and explained that if a vulnerable child comes to the attention of the authorities, it was vital that health, social work and police meet to discuss the case. "That's the key element of any child protection investigation - you have to get that right," he said. "Because we were located in different parts of the town, these were seldom face-to-face discussions. "By co-locating the key professionals under the one roof, the sharing of information can take place much more quickly and much more effectively to enable us to work in a much more co-ordinated and integrated fashion and ultimately to provide better outcomes for children." More than 50 police officers have moved from St Leonard's Police Station to the new centre in the west of the city. As well as providing office space, there are interview rooms and a medical examination suite. The police officers also investigate sex crimes involving adult victims and keep track of people on the sex offenders register. Because victims can be interviewed and medically examined in one place, there is no need for them to give a statement in a police station and then go to hospital. DI Cassidy said: "We are providing bespoke facilities that are designed for purpose. For the public, it means a single point of contact so people do not have to be moved across the city from pillar to post." Sex offences against children and adults in Edinburgh are on the increase and last year the special operations unit investigated 600 cases. Health workers believe there are around 12,000 vulnerable children in the Lothians and a computer system was launched recently to warn doctors, teachers, social workers and police when a child is at risk. NHS Lothian child health commissioner Cathy Orr said: "We welcome the fact that staff are to be co-located in the new unit. By working together with the police and social work department we are able to offer greater support to vulnerable children and adults." The council's children and families department will be basing a team leader and six senior social workers at the centre. A worker will also be responsible for developing programmes to develop personal safety in schools. A spokeswoman said: "The shared response will ensure a balance between investigation and providing assistance to children and families who are in need. "This is a great opportunity for all the agencies to work together to promote the safety and welfare of the children of Edinburgh."

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Fightforlife-baby-may-never-go.2745461.jp

Fight-for-life baby may never go home
Published Date: 26 January 2006
By RUSSELL JACKSON
CHARLOTTE Wyatt, the desperately ill child whose fight for life went to the High Court, may never be allowed home from hospital because of social workers' concerns about the ability of her parents to cope.
The couple, Darren, 34, and Debbie, 24, say an assessment is under way to look at both their housing needs and their ability to look after Charlotte, two. Her condition has improved significantly in recent months and she was allowed home unsupervised for the first time on Christmas Day. Mrs Wyatt said: "They have said we can't have her home even if we did have a bigger home because they say we can't look after her. But that's not true and we can provide the proof now after taping ourselves looking after her. "Charlotte has proved them wrong so far and we have proved them wrong, and I do not think they like it." The unemployed couple, who have three other children, talk about their case in a BBC Radio 4 documentary, It's My Story, to be aired tonight. Mr Wyatt said: "They haven't rehoused us to a place big enough to take Charlotte and all her medical equipment, and now they're saying we can't have her anyway." A spokesman for Portsmouth social services said that a full assessment of the family was under way.

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/How-many-more-will-die.2749068.jp

How many more will die?
Published Date: 08 February 2006
WITH great fanfare, the Executive yesterday announced what it termed the biggest reform of the Scottish social work system in 40 years.
However, we have been here several times before - to no avail. Exactly two years ago, the First Minister announced - also with great fanfare - that no child in Scotland should ever again die because of failings in social services. At that point, he u...The full article contains 379 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Protection-for-atrisk-youngsters.2772985.jp
Protection for at-risk youngsters
Published Date: 06 May 2006
By LINDA SUMMERHAYES
HEALTH REPORTER
A NEW computer system designed to warn doctors, teachers, social workers and police when a child is at risk is set to go live this week.
The early warning system, called C-me, is the first of its kind in Scotland and is set to be launched in West Lothian on Tuesday. If successful, the scheme, which has seen records of almost 37,000 children entered into the system, will be extended so that professionals throughout the Lothians can see if a child is already of concern to other agencies. The need for information sharing in the Lothians was identified following an inquiry into the death of baby Caleb Ness who was left in the care of his brain-damaged father and recovering drug addict mother. The case of three-year-old Michael McGarrity, who was found in a flat in Leith beside his mother's dead body in November, has also raised serious concerns. Dr Helen Hammond, a consultant paediatrician with NHS Lothian, is leading the project which has been developed in collaboration with the local council, police and justice departments. She said: "It has been three years since we started working on this and it has been quite challenging. We need to be sure the information kept is secure and safe and accurate so it can help to protect children and help them to meet their full potential. But on the other hand, if we keep information too safe and secure then we can't do that so there is a real balance to be met." So far, 76 child-protection workers, including police, social workers and health visitors, have been trained to use the system. Eventually all children's workers, including teachers and school nurses, will have access to information about the children in their care. Staff who work with children with complex behavioural needs or disabilities at a centre in Armadale will also be using the system to assess the future care needs for the child. The level of access they have to the system depends on their job and where they work and teachers, for example, will only have access to basic information about pupils attending their school. A second level of access allows the professionals involved with the child to see who else is dealing with the case and how they can be contacted. The highest level of access will allow workers using a secure connection to exchange information about a youngster on the child-protection register. As documents are currently posted between agencies, the computer system will also mean that information can be exchanged far more quickly. Detective chief inspector Willie Guild said the system will mean that police, social work and health officials will work together more efficiently. He said: "It's going to enable us to share the key information and record it and it's going to prevent duplication of work and standardise inter-agency recording procedures." lsummerhayes@edinburghnews.com

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Review-offers-clear-direction-for.2749056.jp

Review offers clear direction for long-term future of social work profession
ANALYSIS

Published Date: 08 February 2006
By COLIN MACKENZIE
SOCIAL work has been described by some as "society's conscience", stepping in to ensure that a person or child lives in a safe and healthy environment. It attempts to balance the competing demands of the individual, communities and finite resources.
Demographic and societal changes over the next 20 years will be a major test for social work, while rising public expectation and an increasingly risk-averse society will continue to add new dimensions and pressures to the service. What the publi...
The full article contains 497 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Social-work-shakeup-delayed.2749018.jp

Social work shake-up delayed
""We are disappointed that the legislation will be after the 2007 elections""
Published Date: 08 February 2006
By ALISON HARDIE
Key points
• It will take until 2008 to get the legislation on the statute books• Recomendations included giving social workers in Scotland more autonomy• “Para-professionals” are to be introduced for administration dutiesKey quote"We need action, not words, to address the problems facing social work departments around the country if we are to have a service fit for the 21st century." - Adam Ingram SNPStory in full THE Scottish Executive yesterday announced the biggest shake-up in Scotland's troubled social work services for 40 years, but admitted it would take until at least 2008 to get the legislation on the statute books. Despite having 15 months' notice of the publication of a wide-ranging report into how social work is delivered, no legal changes will be brought in by ministers until after the Scottish elections in 2007. Among the key planks of yesterday's report was the recommendation that the 7,000 social workers in Scotland should have more autonomy to do their work. So-called "para-professionals" - working along similar lines to classroom assistants - will also be introduced to the social work service to carry out administrative duties and give qualified social workers more time at "the coal face". People who use social work services and their carers would be given greater involvement in decisions about their own care under the plans, which also include a review of education and training for the profession. A new performance assessment process to promote continuous improvement is also due to be introduced, along with greater investment in professional leadership, including a strengthening of the chief social work officer's role. Peter Peacock, the education minister, ordered the review after high-profile cases involving the systematic abuse of children at risk who had slipped off the social work radar. He said yesterday the report put ministers on "the starting line" for making changes, as it outlined how outdated services in Scotland had become. He also admitted the £2.4 billion social work budget in Scotland was not being spent "efficiently or effectively" and that red tape was preventing social workers doing their job properly. But he said there was no time in the current parliamentary legislative programme to consider changes to the 1968 Social Work Act. However, Mr Peacock rejected criticisms yesterday that the Executive's long delay in responding formally to the Changing Lives review of social work was a missed opportunity. Adam Ingram, of the SNP, said: "There is an immediate crisis with the funding of social work by the Scottish Executive, with under-funding in social work provision for children and families reported to be as high as £135 million. "We need action, not words, to address the problems facing social work departments around the country if we are to have a service fit for the 21st century." Mr Ingram said that in general the SNP welcomed the Changing Lives report, which was drawn up by the 21st Century Social Work Review expert group. However, he added: "We are disappointed that the legislation the Executive is proposing and which they say will consolidate reforms to social work services will not be introduced until after the 2007 elections - it is an unacceptable delay and the minister is being typically presumptuous that Labour will be in power at that point." The main triggers for the review were two damning reports in 2004 into the performance of individuals and managers in Scottish Borders social work department in handling sexual abuse complaints over 30 years. Other cases, including the killing of Edinburgh toddler Caleb Ness by his father in 2001, also raised questions over the abilities of social workers to address modern risks. Mr Peacock said failures had occurred because the service, which is still operating under a framework drawn up in 1968, was "overmanaged and underled". However, he said the Executive planned to enshrine in legislation standards social workers will be expected to meet to make sure there was "a stick as well as a carrot" to ensure reforms. He also dropped a hint that the legislation will give ministers powers to sack any social workers not up to the grade. Willy Roe, a public service consultant who chaired the review group, said a recurrent message throughout the evidence-gathering was that "doing more of the same won't work". The report highlighted "unreasonable expectations" of social workers' ability to resolve society's problems. Mr Roe said a debate was needed over the things society required from social services and the responsibilities of individuals, families, other agencies or others in the community. Mr Peacock said the Executive would respond fully to the report by publishing an implementation plan before the summer following talks with key interest groups. He will also reveal at that point how much extra cash the Executive is prepared to put into social work to meet the recommendations contained in the report.The key elements• Set national priorities for social work • Develop and improve professional standards through a strong framework for continuous professional development • Invest more resources in social work leadership • Strengthen the role of the chief social work officer in providing professional leadership and in maintaining standards of professional practice • Devolve more responsibility to frontline social workers • Create so-called para-professionals, similar to classroom assistants in their remit, under the direction of social workers • Keep the best social workers in key frontline jobs by enabling them to advance their career without having to take a managerial job • Give users and carers more say in decisions about their care and the design and delivery of services • Review education and training programmes with universities and colleges to make sure they are turning out graduates well equipped to fulfil their responsibilities as social workers • Legislate to provide the framework for national priorities and continuous improvement. • The Changing Lives report also highlighted the need for a fundamental change in how society viewed social workers and the work they do. It said social workers were struggling to live up to "unreasonable expectations" and urged ministers to cut red tape to allow them to concentrate on protecting vulnerable members of society.

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Review-offers-clear-direction-for.2749056.jp

Review offers clear direction for long-term future of social work profession
ANALYSIS

Published Date: 08 February 2006
By COLIN MACKENZIE
SOCIAL work has been described by some as "society's conscience", stepping in to ensure that a person or child lives in a safe and healthy environment. It attempts to balance the competing demands of the individual, communities and finite resources.
Demographic and societal changes over the next 20 years will be a major test for social work, while rising public expectation and an increasingly risk-averse society will continue to add new dimensions and pressures to the service. What the publi...
The full article contains 497 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Social-work-shakeup-delayed.2749018.jp

Social work shake-up delayed
""We are disappointed that the legislation will be after the 2007 elections""
Published Date: 08 February 2006
By ALISON HARDIE
Key points
• It will take until 2008 to get the legislation on the statute books• Recomendations included giving social workers in Scotland more autonomy• “Para-professionals” are to be introduced for administration dutiesKey quote"We need action, not words, to address the problems facing social work departments around the country if we are to have a service fit for the 21st century." - Adam Ingram SNPStory in full THE Scottish Executive yesterday announced the biggest shake-up in Scotland's troubled social work services for 40 years, but admitted it would take until at least 2008 to get the legislation on the statute books. Despite having 15 months' notice of the publication of a wide-ranging report into how social work is delivered, no legal changes will be brought in by ministers until after the Scottish elections in 2007. Among the key planks of yesterday's report was the recommendation that the 7,000 social workers in Scotland should have more autonomy to do their work. So-called "para-professionals" - working along similar lines to classroom assistants - will also be introduced to the social work service to carry out administrative duties and give qualified social workers more time at "the coal face". People who use social work services and their carers would be given greater involvement in decisions about their own care under the plans, which also include a review of education and training for the profession. A new performance assessment process to promote continuous improvement is also due to be introduced, along with greater investment in professional leadership, including a strengthening of the chief social work officer's role. Peter Peacock, the education minister, ordered the review after high-profile cases involving the systematic abuse of children at risk who had slipped off the social work radar. He said yesterday the report put ministers on "the starting line" for making changes, as it outlined how outdated services in Scotland had become. He also admitted the £2.4 billion social work budget in Scotland was not being spent "efficiently or effectively" and that red tape was preventing social workers doing their job properly. But he said there was no time in the current parliamentary legislative programme to consider changes to the 1968 Social Work Act. However, Mr Peacock rejected criticisms yesterday that the Executive's long delay in responding formally to the Changing Lives review of social work was a missed opportunity. Adam Ingram, of the SNP, said: "There is an immediate crisis with the funding of social work by the Scottish Executive, with under-funding in social work provision for children and families reported to be as high as £135 million. "We need action, not words, to address the problems facing social work departments around the country if we are to have a service fit for the 21st century." Mr Ingram said that in general the SNP welcomed the Changing Lives report, which was drawn up by the 21st Century Social Work Review expert group. However, he added: "We are disappointed that the legislation the Executive is proposing and which they say will consolidate reforms to social work services will not be introduced until after the 2007 elections - it is an unacceptable delay and the minister is being typically presumptuous that Labour will be in power at that point." The main triggers for the review were two damning reports in 2004 into the performance of individuals and managers in Scottish Borders social work department in handling sexual abuse complaints over 30 years. Other cases, including the killing of Edinburgh toddler Caleb Ness by his father in 2001, also raised questions over the abilities of social workers to address modern risks. Mr Peacock said failures had occurred because the service, which is still operating under a framework drawn up in 1968, was "overmanaged and underled". However, he said the Executive planned to enshrine in legislation standards social workers will be expected to meet to make sure there was "a stick as well as a carrot" to ensure reforms. He also dropped a hint that the legislation will give ministers powers to sack any social workers not up to the grade. Willy Roe, a public service consultant who chaired the review group, said a recurrent message throughout the evidence-gathering was that "doing more of the same won't work". The report highlighted "unreasonable expectations" of social workers' ability to resolve society's problems. Mr Roe said a debate was needed over the things society required from social services and the responsibilities of individuals, families, other agencies or others in the community. Mr Peacock said the Executive would respond fully to the report by publishing an implementation plan before the summer following talks with key interest groups. He will also reveal at that point how much extra cash the Executive is prepared to put into social work to meet the recommendations contained in the report.The key elements• Set national priorities for social work • Develop and improve professional standards through a strong framework for continuous professional development • Invest more resources in social work leadership

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Vow-to-stop-social-work.2815379.jp

Vow to stop 'social work snatch squads'
Published Date: 02 October 2006
THE Shadow Health Secretary today promised that a Tory government would stop "snatch squads of social workers" taking children into care unnecessarily.
Andrew Lansley said a Conservative government would instead back the family. The father-of-five used the party conference in Bournemouth to start a debate on how public services work for children. He attacked Prime Minister Tony Blair and Social Exclusion Minister Hilary Armstrong's suggestion that the state and social workers should identify potential problem children soon after or even before birth to support the families and in extreme cases take the babies into care. And he also capitalised on Education Secretary Alan Johnson's admission to the Labour conference that too often the state was not a good parent to children in care and action needed to be taken. He said: "Children matter to us, first and foremost. The education they receive, their health, that they get the opportunities in life we enjoyed and more. "One of our aims will be to support the family and marriage as the best environment in which to bring up children. "Mr Blair appears to believe that snatch squads of social workers, taking children into care, is preferable to putting every effort in to support children to stay with their family. He is wrong. The state is a poor parent."

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Mother-wins-fight-to-get.2784120.jp

Mother wins fight to get her baby back
Published Date: 15 June 2006
By SHAN ROSS
Social workers condemned after newly born child was taken from mother Woman was in last stages of giving birth Sheriff rules social workers action as 'wrong'

Key quote
"I was in the throes of labour, quite dilated and about to deliver. My back was bent backwards, the head was sticking out and I was just about to push the rest of the body out. I raised my head and saw two men and two women walk into the birthing room." - Corellie Bonhomme Story in fullA SHERIFF has condemned social workers who removed a newborn baby from her mother only minutes after the child's umbilical cord was cut. Two social workers and two sheriff officers entered the birthing suite as Corellie Bonhomme went into the final stages of labour. Immediately after her daughter, Fifi, was born, they took her away after obtaining a sheriff's order giving them permission to take custody. But after a five-month fight and a lengthy hearing, another sheriff has ruled the decision and the way it was enforced was wrong, and he ordered the child to be reunited with her mother. Ms Bonhomme, 34, has also received an apology from NHS Dumfries and Galloway over the incident at Dumfries Royal Infirmary last December. The trust has promised to change its working practices. Now reunited with Fifi, Ms Bonhomme, who lives in Dumfries, said only the baby's head had appeared when the door opened and social workers accompanied by sheriff officers came into the room at the hospital to serve a Child Protection Order to take the baby into care. She said medical staff restrained her as she tried to clamber down from the delivery table to stop Fifi, now aged six months, being taken away. "I had a needle in my arm and was on morphine and was having gas and air when I heard a midwife say, 'oh, there's social work involvement'. "I was in the throes of labour, quite dilated and about to deliver. My back was bent backwards, the head was sticking out and I was just about to push the rest of the body out. I raised my head and saw two men and two women walk into the birthing room. "I pushed Fi out and the doctor took her away. I never got to touch her. I tried to get up. I was trying to get hold of the baby. But the staff said 'get back on the bed, get back on the bed'. The doctor put his hand just above my chest and pushed me down, saying the placenta was still to come out. It was horrific. I was going 'where's my baby, I want my baby'. "I spent Christmas alone, crying and crying and wondering how I could get Fifi back." The original child protection order was issued by Sheriff Kenneth Barr on 15 December last year, the day baby Fifi was born. But Ms Bonhomme, who has had two previous children removed by social services in the London borough of Camden, was determined to win back her daughter. Last month, Sheriff Kenneth Ross overruled the legal order and granted her custody. He said Ms Bonhomme's long-running dispute with social workers in Camden had led to the authorities in Scotland taking the baby into care unnecessarily. He also criticised the way Fifi was taken. Commenting on the incident in the birthing suite, Sheriff Ross said: "Fifi was removed very soon after birth. It was not clear to me why that was necessary. She was in hospital in the secure care of the staff there. There was no evidence that Ms Bonhomme was intending to leave precipitately." He also questioned Dumfries and Galloway Council for basing the Child Protection Order on "extremely contentious" English proceedings. He said Camden social work department's approach of viewing "Fifi's welfare entirely through the prism of their experience and perception" of Ms Bonhomme's care of her other two children had transmitted itself to Dumfries and Galloway's social work department and that had led them to apply for the Child Protection Order. A child protection case conference in Camden last September placed the unborn Fifi on the Child Protection Register under the category 'neglect'. It also recommended the child be placed under police protection at birth and removed from her mother, with care proceedings to be initiated immediately. Dumfries and Galloway Council instigated legal proceedings after Camden's legal move was communicated to them. Camden had become involved after Ms Bonhomme left hospital early after the birth of her second child in 2003 against medical advice. They initiated proceedings because of what they claim was her erratic behaviour, failure to provide appropriate and satisfactory care for her children and hostility towards professional staff. But Sheriff Ross said the report did not present a full picture of Ms Bonhomme's current life circumstances, in particular her two-year relationship with a new partner, Derek Bryden, and offers from his family to help with Fifi's upbringing. A spokesman for Dumfries and Galloway Council said they had followed normal procedure in cases like this and would abide by the judgment of the court. He added: "As Ms Bonhomme has made a complaint to the council, it would be inappropriate to make any further comment." NHS Dumfries and Galloway said: "A complaint was received from the individual concerned and responded to in accordance with the NHS complaints procedure. The complaint remains part of the complaints process and, accordingly, it would be inappropriate to comment further."
Actions 'may breach human rights law'
THE treatment of Ms Bonhomme in the birthing suite at Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary was last night described as a potential breach of human rights legislation. John Scott, the chairman of the Scottish Human Rights Centre, said: "This could be seen as a breach of Article 8 which guarantees the right to privacy and family life. "It is certainly a breach of common decency and completely unacceptable. "There should not be anyone in a birthing room except the woman, her husband or partner and medical staff. "There needs to be proper guidance issued to make sure it never happens again." Shona Robison, SNP health spokeswoman, said: "This appears to have been very heavy-handed and a breach of privacy and dignity." However, a spokeswoman for the Royal College of Midwives said that in such circumstances medical staff were being put in an extremely difficult position. "The guiding principle for us is the wellbeing of the mother and child and we would not do anything to jeopardise that relationship. "But if two legal officers appear on the scene and are present at, for example, ten minutes after the birth, which would be regarded as 'post natal', we wouldn't have a choice. We would strongly object if they appeared while the woman was giving birth as we would not want them around at the point of delivery."

http://news.scotsman.com/socialwork/Vast-pay-rises-after-council.2795427.jp

Vast pay rises after council shake-up
Published Date: 26 July 2006
By AURA SABADUS
SENIOR council officials received pay rises of up to £31,581 as part of a shake-up of Edinburgh's education and social work departments, The Scotsman has learned.
One employee received a 64 per cent wage increase to more than £80,000 after being appointed to a new role. Eight senior officers in the council's fledgling children and families department shared pay increases totalling £109,198 last year.
The creation of the department followed a scathing report into the death of 11-week-old Caleb Ness at the hands of his brain-damaged father, which highlighted failings across the city's child protection system. One of the top winners of the department's overhaul was Alan Jackson - a former "service manager" who was appointed to the new post of "neighbourhood manager". His salary increased from £48,883 to £80,464. Paul Highet - who was promoted to neighbourhood manager - was offered a £28,000 increase, also to £80,464. Christine Ferguson, formerly senior education officer, now manager of schools services, received a 36 per cent rise, from £51,207 to nearly £70,000. A council source last night questioned why the wage increases were "given out so freely". The source said: "What new responsibilities are involved here that such massive salaries are needed? Only government ministers earn £80,000." John Ross, a spokesman for trade union Unison, said the officials were experienced workers who had been appointed to new jobs with wider responsibilities. He said the created posts required officers to take up additional duties related to children's education and health on top of their existing work in social services. Iain Whyte, the leader of the council's Tory group, said the "very large increases" would surprise the public. "People will wonder what is going on in the council," he said. "I hope these people will have more responsibilities and that there will be a slimming down in the structure elsewhere. If that's not the case, then the council will have failed." Steve Cardownie, a councillor who recently quit Labour for the SNP, said the packages seemed "fairly generous" but would not comment on individual cases. "I don't know what those individuals have done to merit these increases, but I suppose they are doing an altogether different job that would justify that." A council spokeswoman said the officers had applied for the jobs after they were advertised internally. She added: "These were new posts that were created and are not pay rises. These posts were created following a major council review and staff were appointed to these posts by the director of children and families in accordance with normal council procedures which had been agreed with the unions involved." The new department brings together all the services previously provided by the education department and the children and families part of the social work department

At risk children left in danger if abuse.

2009-06-24T08:04:00.002+01:00

At-risk children left in danger of abuse

http://www.scotsman.com/latestnews/Atrisk-children-left-in-danger.5394219.jp

Toddler Brandon Muir was killed by his mother’s drug addict boyfriend. It was later revealed that he died two days before a possible decision to remove him from his home
Published Date: 24 June 2009
By Frank Urquhart

THE aunt of toddler Brandon Muir called last night for senior council officials and social workers to be sacked following the release of the most scathing report into child protection services ever published in Scotland.

The damning report from a government watchdog highlighted the failures of public agencies in Dundee to protect vulnerable children from "significant harm" in the homes of drug addicts and alcoholics.Publication of the study was brought forward after the death of 23-month-old
Brandon.He was killed by his mother's drug addict boyfriend, Robert Cunningham, who was sentenced to ten years in prison.Investigators from HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIe) said they had "no confidence" that young people at risk in Dundee were being fully protected.They also condemned front-line services for their failure to help many youngsters until their plight had reached crisis point.Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray called yesterday for a national inquiry into child protection services throughout Scotland, insisting that it was a national issue."There is a crisis at the heart of child protection services in parts of Scotland," he said. "This damning report in Dundee quickly follows similar reports in both Aberdeen and Moray. "We were told after the death of Brandon Muir that changes would be made. I have no confidence that that is happening. This is not a localised issue, but a national one. Doing nothing cannot be an option."Brandon's aunt, Dayna Garty, told The Scotsman she was "appalled" at the report's conclusions. "Nothing that they can say or do is ever going to bring Brandon back or stop the suffering that they have let these other kids go through. It is absolutely shocking what has happened."I am absolutely raging about the findings. They are absolutely appalling. I am just staggered about the failures and weaknesses they found."Although the report does not set out to blame individuals, she demanded that Alan Baird, the city council's director of social work, who is also the new chairman of the city's child protection committee, should quit his post."If he had any decency, he would resign," she said. "Somebody should be held responsible, and he is the top man."She went on: "It's not just Brandon they have let down. "Obviously, Brandon died through it all, but other kids are still at risk and they are doing absolutely nothing until it's too late. Apologies are not worth the paper they are written on.

"The report on Dundee follows strong criticism directed against child protection services in both Aberdeen and Moray in earlier inspections by HMIe.In this case, inspectors examined the workings of the city council, police, NHS Tayside, the Scottish Children's Reporter administration and voluntary and independent groups in February and March of this year.The Brandon Muir trial was taking place at that time, although the case was not considered by inspectors. It will be the subject of a second independent report this summer by Peter Wilson, a former chief constable of Fife.The HMIe report found that Dundee was "weak" in eight of the 18 "quality indicators" examined. Services were rated "satisfactory" in six areas and "good" in three.Child protection services were rated "unsatisfactory" – which meant there were major weaknesses – in one area: that of making sure that children were helped in immediate response to concerns.

The report stated: "Inspectors were not confident that all children who were at risk of harm, abuse or neglect, and in need of protection, were identified and received the help and support they needed." The latest figures showed 99 youngsters were on the child protection register in Dundee. In 48 per cent of those cases, drug abuse was a problem in the family. Alcohol addiction was an issue in 33 per cent of cases. In response to the report, Mr Baird said that four additional social workers, some of them agency staff, had already been employed. He added that the council was also spending up to £500,000 to make improvements to the service. The NHS, the city council and police also promised to make improvements.Mr Baird said: "You can never guarantee 100 per cent safety of our most vulnerable children – no council or health authority or police authority can do that. "We will work tirelessly to ensure the improvements identified by HMIe will be put in place at an early stage. "Staff from all the agencies involved in child protection are dedicated individuals who work in an extremely challenging environment. The contribution made by these staff must be recognised."Scotland's children's minister Adam Ingram said: "This report … plainly shows that child protection services in Dundee are simply not good enough and must be urgently improved."Clearly, everyone has a responsibility to keep our children and young people safe, including the public. "However, what we and they expect is that local services are doing all they can to protect the most vulnerable. "As a government, we have continued to set out that we will not protect local systems if they are failing our children, and where this is found to be the case, we will expect robust and rapid action."But he warned: "It is now for those agencies to build on that progress.

"The Scottish Government and HMIe will be closely monitoring the implementation of that action plan to ensure that vulnerable children in Dundee are not let down by the shortcomings identified in today's report."For our part, we have made clear that we will not fail to act if child protection lessons nationally are to be learned from Brandon's death. However, it is right that we await the outcome of the independent reviews so that we have a full picture of any action that may be required."The agencies involved in child protection have been told by HMIe to prepare an action plan outlining how they will address the problems in the service. They have been given four months to submit a report to inspectors detailing the progress they have made on the action plan.

President Obama, of the USA

2009-06-23T08:22:00.001+01:00

Dear Friend,

Last week, I announced United We Serve – a nationwide call to service challenging you and all Americans to volunteer this summer and be part of building a new foundation for America. And when I say “all,” I mean everyone – young and old, from every background, all across the country. We need individuals, community organizations, corporations, foundations, and our government to be part of this effort. Today, for the official kick off of United We Serve, members of my administration have fanned out across America to participate in service events and encourage all Americans to join them. The First Lady is rolling up her sleeves and getting to work too. But before she headed out today, she asked me to share this message with you.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/UnitedWeServeKickOff/

Our nation faces some of the greatest challenges it has in generations and we know it’s going to take a lot of hard work to get us back on track. While Michelle and I are calling on every American to participate in United We Serve, the call to service doesn’t end this fall. We need to stay involved in our towns and communities for a long time to come. After all, America’s new foundation will be built one neighborhood at a time – and that starts with you. Thank you, President Barack Obama

This email was sent to james@grandparents.fsnet.co.uk

Michelle Obama

2009-06-21T22:57:00.008+01:00

Happy Father's Day,

I’m writing to share a special video of Barack talking about fatherhood, but first I want to share some thoughts of my own. My father, Frasier Robinson, was the rock of our family. Although he was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in his early thirties, he was our provider, our champion and our hero. He worked tirelessly through good days and bad to make sure my brother and I had every opportunity he didn't -- to go to college and pursue our dreams. His example continues to guide me every day. Barack didn't have my good fortune -- his father left when he was just two years old. But he has always been determined to give our daughters what he never had, and he values being a good father more than any other accomplishment in his life. On Friday, Barack brought some men (and a bunch of kids!) to the White House to talk about fatherhood. Check out a video of the event: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Responsible-Fatherhood/

We all know the remarkable impact fathers can have in our children's lives. So today, on this 100th anniversary of Father's Day, take a moment to celebrate responsible fatherhood and the men who've had the courage to step up, be there for our families, and provide our children with the guidance, love and support they need to fulfill their dreams. Thanks,

Michelle

Grandparents Apart UK Publishings

2009-06-19T13:03:00.001+01:00

Letter for Councillors, MSPs MPs, Clients.

The previous Scottish Government created the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ and the present government has now passed the responsibility for implementing it to local authorities.

Grandparents Apart UK, Anne McLaughlin MSP, Willie Coffey MSP, Kenny Gibson MSP and Bailie Iris Gibson Glasgow City councillor are heading this campaign to have the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ made mandatory for professionals involved in the welfare of children. Our sincere request is for them to have your support for the best interests of our children.

The Charter for Grandchildren, which is for guidance only, was created by the Scottish Government along with Grandparents Apart UK and others, to accompany the Scottish Family Law Act (Scotland) 2006. This has not been as successful as everyone hoped and is largely being ignored by Social Services, courts, lawyers and professionals working in the welfare of children. This has arisen because of the attitude of Social Services towards grandparents when they dare to comment on how their grandchildren are treated. Social Service’s reaction is to cut them off as uncooperative and tell them they are irrelevant persons and don’t need to be kept informed.

Our request now is to have the Charter for Grandchildren made mandatory for professionals in order that children cannot be denied the love and protection that their grandparents can offer. Cross party MSPs, wide ranging family groups and representatives of various authorities support the Charter for Grandchildren, but without proper backing, guidance for best practice it is being ignored.

In the Charter for Grandchildren grandparents do not have any legal rights. It states that the role grandparents can play in children’s lives must be taken seriously, e.g. in early detection of abuse and offering stability and emotional security in crisis situations. It is the thousands of little things children get from their grandparents that comfort them the most, instead of being shunted to strangers and from pillar to post when family members are available.

The reason for our campaign is because grandparents are regarded in law as irrelevant persons in their grandchildren’s lives, and it can happen to you. You can be cut out of your grandchildren’s lives at a whim because of family problems, fall outs or bereavement. Being cut out of your grandchildren’s lives happens all too easily and our authorities too often hinder, rather than help support families. Evidence shows our children benefit from the support of their family members. They must be allowed that support.

In our personal case we regained contact and consider ourselves very fortunate but cannot forget the devastation we and our grandchildren went through. This is why we set up this group to offer support and guidance to others which was not available when we needed it.

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness Crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

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 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 counselling 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 for 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

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

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/ to see hard petition

Equal shared parenting bill June 16 2009

2009-06-16T20:24:00.000+01:00

Mr. Vellacott introduced a Private Member’s Bill this morning that would require a presumption of equal parenting. This is a BILL, not a MOTION. It’s # is C-422. Don’t refer to it as M-483 if contacting others such as politicians or media about this bill because M-483 as an equal parenting measure was terminated with the last election call, as most of you already know, so nobody will know what you are talking about if you refer to it incorrectly. Mr. Vellacott’s introductory statement in introducing this bill this morning was as follows: Intro Statement –

Equal Shared Parenting PMB – June 16, 2009 Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be introducing a

Private Member’s Bill today which would direct courts in regard to divorce, to make equal shared parenting the presumptive arrangement in the best interests of the child, except in proven cases of abuse or neglect.

Over 10 years ago, a Joint House-Senate committee presented to Parliament a report entitled “For the Sake of the Children.” That report urged Parliament to amend the Divorce Act to make equal shared parenting the normative determination by courts dealing with situations of divorce involving children. This non-partisan recommendation from that Joint House-Senate was based on compelling research made available to the committee members. Over the past ten years, the best research has continued to demonstrate the far superior outcomes for children, in general, when both parents – mom AND dad – are actively involved in their children's lives, even if the parents divorce or separate.

Polling from the past two years demonstrates overwhelming support from Canadians for equal shared parenting. There is, in fact, slightly more support among women than men for equal parenting. This strong support from almost 80% of Canadians exists across the country, with the strongest regional support coming from Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

Canadians claiming to be Liberal and Bloc supporters, expressed the strongest endorsement for equal shared parenting, at 80.6% among Liberals and 82.9% among Bloc Quebecois supporters.

A variety of countries, such as Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Australia, and various U.S. states, have implemented equal parenting, joint custody or shared parenting presumptive legislation, which has resulted in lowered court costs, less conflict and improved social outcomes for the children of divorce.

This bill is one of the most a-political, non-partisan pieces of legislation introduced in this current Parliament. I look forward to strong support for this important piece of legislation from all Members of Parliament who are committed to the best interests of our Canadian children.

Glassop's fued with Geldof.

2009-06-16T10:12:00.000+01:00

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1193156/Michael-Hutchences-mum-reignites-feud-Bob-Geldof-lack-contact-Tiger-Lily.html

By Daily Mail ReporterLast updated at 3:25 PM on 15th June 2009

The mother of the late rock star Michael Hutchence today reignited her feud with Bob Geldof over her granddaughter.

Pat Glassop claims Geldof hasn’t let her see 12-year-old Tiger Lily for three years and said she 'barely knows' her.

Tiger Lily is the former INXS frontman’s child with Geldof’s ex-wife Paula Yates. Hutchence died in 1997, aged 37.

Feud: Mother of the late rock star Michael Hutchence claims Bob Geldof has not let her see granddaughter Tiger Lily for three years

He was found hanged in a hotel room in Sydney. Three years later, Yates, 41, died from an accidental overdose of heroin in London.

Geldof became Tiger Lily’s legal guardian and she lives with him and her half-sisters Fifi Trixibelle, 26, Peaches, 23, and Pixie, 18, in London.

Ms Glassop fears she may never see her again. 'I don’t know what Tiger Lily’s favourite colour is, what movies she likes or what fashion she’s into,' she said. 'I don’t know anything, yet she is my son’s daughter.'

No contact: Bob and Tiger Lily at the premiere for the DVD release of the Live 8 concert in July 2005

Ms Glassop says she last saw Tiger Lily in 2006 when she was allowed to visit for five days, but on condition she brought a nanny.

Then, two years ago, she called Geldof 'Satan' after he reportedly severed all ties.

And she hit out at the former Boomtown Rat for refusing to let Tiger Lily see her grandfather Ross last month before he died
Family bond: Michael Hutchence and Paula Yates with newborn Tiger Lily in 1996

Ms Glassop, who lives on Australia’s Gold Coast, said: 'I explained that Ross was seriously ill but I never heard back.

'Now it’s too late. I don’t understand how any man could do that.

'It’s not only hurting us, it’s hurting Tiger Lily.'

Bob Geldof was not available for comment today.

Bob Geldof agreed to be our honorary patron a good few years ago. But said he would be to busy to attend any wee do’s or fete’s. I said I would not expect him to as he was such a busy man. Asking Bob Geldof to be our Honorary Patron got us attention from the media but he has never done anything else for us.

We published a book “Grandparents Speak out for Vulnerable Children” and asked Bob to write a couple of words on the intro but he did not answer.

Mrs Glassop joined our group in order to blacken. Bob but at the time the version that was feasible was Paula Yates asked him to keep the children together which he did. He has given Mrs Glassop contact but only in London as far as i know because he was afraid she would keep her in Australia if she was to go there. And that would be against Paula's wishes. Mrs Glassop has given me a hard time about this and i have received letters from all over the world on the hate campaign against him which i sent on to him.

The last communication i had from Bobs PR at Ten-alps-events was to remove her from my email list which i have done.

Another Social Service blunder

2009-06-15T20:08:00.000+01:00

Press release, immediate.

A granny that we have been supporting is demented by the treatment her daughter and granddaughter have been receiving at the hands of social services.

The granddaughter has been put into the care of someone who did not get on with her at all. Because of her unhappiness she lost weight, threatened to run away and was self harming. After numerous letters stating social services were interfering unnecessarily in the lives of this family. We finally got an answer from the chief executive of the council saying everything we asked for was now in place. The wee girl was back with her mother and the granny was in support of them a happy family once again.

The family was delighted, the wee girl was over the moon to be back home.

But !!! The nightmare goes on.

You can imagine the horror when two days after the good news letter social workers accompanied by two police officers went to the two youngest children’s school and removed them to a social services place of what you could only call interrogation. The older girl was also taken later on and put through the mill..

The accusation was the ex husband who has never been on the scene since they split up was said to have battered the children in retaliation for being dropped from the marriage.

This turned out to be an untrue malicious complainer and the social services could not apologise enough for the hassle caused.

TOO late!!! For apologies, the blundering social services ride again. Typically snatching children without real proof and putting them through hell. The children were terrified being taken away by all these people without their mother or granny.

This is the reason why we need the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ made mandatory for professionals. The granny was perfectly able to look after her granddaughter, she is in full health, fit and has perfect accommodation but she was being ignored because she is an irrelevant person in her grandchildren’s lives and was repeatedly told so. When the granny spoke out about the treatment she was immediately labelled as uncooperative and ignored but this feisty granny was determined her family was going to get justice. With our support we hope this has come to pass.

Ends

For more info contact:-
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Scottish Woman's Aid, Mission Statement.

2009-06-13T08:30:00.000+01:00

Our vision

Scottish Women's Aid’s vision is of a society in which women, children and young people are full and equal participants, unconstrained by the threat of domestic abuse or other forms of violence or oppression.

Our mission

We believe that ending violence against women means tackling its root cause, which is gender inequality.

We will do this by:

· Promoting women’s equality and children’s rights
· Campaigning for policy and practice responses that actively prevent violence against women
· Working to ensure appropriate service responses are available for women children and young people with experience of domestic abuse
· Providing services and advice to our members

Regards Heather

Heather Coady
Children's Policy

Scottish Women's Aid
2nd Floor
132 Rose Street
Edinburgh
EH2 3JD
Tel: +44(0)131 226 4958
Heather.Coady@scottishwomensaid.org.uk

Grandmother to give grandson to criminal father

2009-06-12T10:58:00.000+01:00

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1192391/Grandmother-devoted-life-grandson-5-forced-hand-criminal-father.html

By Daily Mail ReporterLast updated at 7:01 PM on 11th June 2009

A woman who has devoted her life to caring for her five-year-old grandson must give him up to his criminal father after judges ruled he should be with his natural parents.

The woman has cared for the boy since his birth and has fought his father, who has recently served time for racially aggravated assault, to keep the youngster.

But Appeal Court judges today upheld 'the immutable principle that children should live with their natural parents' when they ordered the grandmother to hand over the boy.

However, the court heard that the grandmother is refusing to give in and is determined to take her case to the House of Lords.

She will be able to hold on to the boy - referred to in court only as 'H' - until the Law Lords have considered her plea.

In a bid to defuse the family war, Lord Justice Wall told the court: 'The mother, father and H all owe the grandmother an enormous debt in this case.

'Nothing can take away from what she has given to H. Indeed, without her, H may have been taken into care and adopted.

'Whatever happens in the future, the grandmother will continue to play an important role in H's life'.

Urging an end to the bitter litigation, the judge added: 'Of course the future is uncertain, but we very much hope that the parties will now be able to cooperate over H and his future. It is very much in H's interest that they should do so.

'Dragging up the past and making criticisms of each other...is no substitute for H growing up in a family in which there is mutual respect and co-operation and in which H can move between family members without ill ease or disloyalty.'

But, ruling in favour of the father, the judge said it was the 'right result' that his rights as a natural parent should take precedence and the woman who has looked after him all her life 'should now resume her proper role as grandmother'.

Urging the grandmother to hold back from taking her case to the House of Lords, Lord Justice Wall said: 'Our hope remains that she will, for H's sake, say that enough is enough and will negotiate a sensible handover of H to the father's care'.

At Norwich High Court earlier this year, Judge Richards ruled that the grandmother should give up the boy.

He said: 'It has been said that wise or foolish, rich or poor, it is the right of the child to be brought up in the home of his or her natural parent'

He added that the courts 'should always have in mind, in the ordinary way, that the rearing of a child by his or her biological parents can be expected to be in the child's best interests, both in the short term and, importantly, in the long term'.

As the father - now married - was capable of being a 'good enough' parent to the boy, Judge Richards said he was entitled to precedence as the natural father.

In his decision today, Lord Justice Wall said: 'We have to doubt, as a matter of principle, whether or not 'good enough' parenting by a natural parent is necessarily more in a child's best interests than first rate parenting by a grandmother.'

But, despite arguments that the grandmother is H's 'psychological parent' and it would be in the boy's best interests to stay with her, the judge said that the courts 'must beware of what has been described as 'social engineering''.

Dismissing the grandmother's appeal, the judge, sitting with Lord Justice Elias, said he could find nothing 'plainly wrong' in Judge Richards' decision and he had exercised his discretion 'to achieve what we think is the right result'.

The Appeal Court's order that the grandmother hand over the boy to his father was stayed pending her application for leave to appeal to the House of Lords.

Her barrister, Peter Horrocks, said a petition would be delivered to the Law Lords by the end of next week

2009-06-10T13:15:00.000+01:00

The Times
June 9, 2009

Don’t exclude the grandparents
Almost half of grandparents lose contact with their grandchildren after family break-up — but when Susannah Hickling lost her French partner, she found that she needed her in-laws’ help more than ever
Susannah Hickling

I had known about Richard’s death for all of one minute when his mother started to scream repeatedly: “She’ll go back to England and we’ll never see the baby again!” Submerged in an ocean of grief with an icy numbness already creeping over me, I can honestly say that the thought of taking our 15-day-old son from our home in France back to London had not even entered my head.

In the weeks and months that followed, my mother and sister urged me to do just that. I did eventually go back — but not for another four years and not before I was satisfied that my son had built a meaningful relationship with his father’s family.
Even amid the most terrible sorrow, something told me that it was important for Joshua to get to know his paternal grandparents, his aunt and uncle and his half-brother and half-sister — people I barely knew myself, as a relative newcomer to their small village in Provence. They were a close family in an area where blood ties are so strong that they often exclude friendships. Joshua would also need to speak French, as Richard’s relatives spoke no English. And, anyway, having lost my soulmate, who was shot accidentally by a game hunter on a hillside near our home, when our child was barely two weeks old, I reasoned that I would be unhappy wherever I was.

The Grandparents’ Association estimates that more than a million children in Britain are not allowed to see their grandparents because of divorce or family tragedy. And a recent report published by pressure groups including the Family Matters Institute and Families Need Fathers pointed out that, while the law grants an automatic right to step-parents who have lived as part of a family for three years to apply to the family courts for contact, the same right is not given to grandparents.

In contrast to the UK — where 42 per cent of grandparents lose contact with their grandchildren after a family break-up — grandparents’ rights are enshrined in French law. I never wanted it to come to that, not because I thought that Richard’s family would take me to court but because it seemed clear to me that a mother has to act in the best interests of her child.
But I’d be lying if I pretended that it was easy. There were big differences in our views on child-rearing and in our cultural attitudes. I was in a village that even locals from nearby towns derided as “backward”. The advice from friends, family and parenting books was in stark contrast to the accepted practices there. It is common for the wider family to help to bring up the children in Provence, and mine interfered as only a Mediterranean family could. I was often a lone dissenting voice against their collective belief system.

When they urged me to put sugar on Joshua’s dummy to stop him crying, I told them that it was bad for his teeth. “But he doesn’t have any,” said his grandmother. “They’re there in his gums,” I insisted politely. Later, I saw the tell-tale sugary sheen around his mouth and felt the stickiness on his dummy. “Who did this?” I asked. My mother-in-law and sister-in-law looked sheepish. “You don’t want him to have sugar on his dummy — you deal with it,” warned my sister-in-law when we took a bawling Joshua out in his buggy later. I will, I thought. He is, after all, my baby.

It infuriated me that I could be entrusted to manage a team of people and a six-figure budget in the job I gave up to move to Provence, yet apparently I was an incompetent mother. But I kept my usually big mouth shut. I was trying to build a relationship, not engage in active warfare. And I was well aware that my partner’s family, like me, were mad with grief.
They were adamant that the good old ways were the best. These dictated that, for example, you should never let a baby take a nap under a fig or walnut tree (I had both) for fear of toxins in the leaves, but that you should feed him lambs’ brains.

I realised that being undermined was par for the course, but some of their ideas were terrifying. Richard’s mother and sister told me that if Joshua misbehaved he would be punished with the martinet, a whip with leather lashes. This was kept for disciplining their dogs but Joshua’s halfsister had once been hit with it as a little girl. Only once, mind you, they said. “I think that’s barbaric,” I said.

At one stage I was too frightened to leave Joshua alone at his grandparents’ home for more than a few minutes in case he was naughty — yet soon I saw that, far from being strict disciplinarians, the family doted on my son and spoilt him rotten. It helped that he was the spitting image of Richard, right down to the fair hair and the little triangles under his eyes when he was tired. Richard’s mother and sister even enjoyed changing his messy nappies.
Although they wanted to look after him all the time, it always had to be at their house, the hub of the family. A few months after Richard’s death I decided to return to the local drama group — but it started at 9pm, and getting both of us fed and out of the house with all the baby paraphernalia took two hours. By the time I had dropped Joshua at his grandparents’ home, I was too exhausted to be theatrical in French. And after I had collected him at 11pm and driven him, tired and cranky, back home, I was a shell. After two sessions I gave up drama and the hope of a life outside my home and my partner’s family. This is my life now, I told myself grimly. But it won’t always be like this.

Gradually things got better. As time passed, Richard’s family and I came to understand each other. They realised that I could care for a baby despite all that had happened, and our total misery at Richard’s death mellowed into the dull pain of missing him. We all became a bit more sane and Joshua, now 5, grew into a sociable and well-balanced bilingual child.
By the time I moved back to London 18 months ago, I knew that I had done the right thing by staying so long. I had proved that it is possible to maintain a relationship with your partner’s family even when that partner is no longer there. That proof is in the birthday card that his sister sent me a few months before I left: “To a wonderful sister-in-law who came into our family like a gift.” I felt guilty for all the mean things I’d thought over the years and was glad that I’d left them unsaid.

“Grandparents act as a link with the past,” says the sociologist Clifford Hill, research director of the Family Matters Institute. “They are very important to a child’s identity and stability. The absence of grandparents is a major reason why so many children are unstable.”
The Family Matters Institute, Families Need Fathers and the Grandparents’ Association are campaigning for a simplification of the tortuous and costly legal process that grandparents in the UK have to endure to see estranged grandchildren. A letter-writing campaign is urging MPs to include the issue in their party manifestos.

My son adores his father’s family and particularly his grandmother, who has always had the time to play with him that I, as a lone working parent, have not. He goes to a Saturday school to keep up his French, we Skype the in-laws every Sunday and go to see them in Provence twice a year. They, in turn, make an annual pilgrimage to London. Thanks to their love for Joshua and my ability, for once, to see the bigger picture, we have created an unbreakable link to the father my son never knew.

For further information and support, grandparents can Grandparents Apart UK 0141 882 5658

Mother sent to prison for non-compliance

2009-06-08T17:01:00.000+01:00

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Mother-sent-to-prison-in.5341020.jp

Mother sent to prison in child-access row with ex-partner

Published Date: 06 June 2009
By JOHN ROBERTSON
LAW CORRESPONDENT

A MOTHER has been jailed for three months and warned she could face longer in prison for repeatedly obstructing contact between her former partner and their daughter.
Tina Monem, 26, was held to be in contempt of court by a sheriff but was released after a couple of days pending an appeal against the three-month sentence, which she claimed was "harsh and oppressive".Her challenge was rejected by three judges
in the Court of Session, who said Ms Monem tried the sheriff's patience "beyond endurance".

They ordered her return to jail to complete the sentence.However, they made a finding against Ms Monem that she had committed contempt before them too, and she will be sentenced for that in due course.Lord Gill, the Lord Justice-Clerk, who headed the appeal court, said: "If we were to pass sentence for that contempt now, the sentence might be severe. "I think that we should give her the opportunity to reflect on the gravity of her conduct and to desist from it. I therefore propose that we should defer sentence for the contempt of this court for six months."Ms Monem's battle with her ex-partner over their seven-year-old child was heard by

Sheriff Richard Davidson in Dundee. The partner was granted six hours' contact a week, but it did not take place and Ms Monem made allegations against the partner, which were checked but found to be unsubstantiated.Sheriff Davidson held Ms Monem, from Carnoustie, Angus, to be in contempt of court for failing to obey the orders for contact. He delayed imposing any sentence to see whether new contact arrangements would be successful.

Reply from A Salmond and Jim Mather MSP

2009-06-08T13:27:00.001+01:00

Constitution, Law ana Courts DirectorateCivil Law Division
The-ScottishGovernment

T:0131-2443322 F: 0131-244 4848E: Claire.McDermott@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Mr Jimmy Deuchars22 AIness CrescentGlasgowG521PJ
Our Ref: 2009/00137360R 6Th June 2009

Dear Mr Deuchars

Thank you for your letter of 27 April to the First Minister, Alex Salmond. He has asked me tothank you for your letter and respond on his behalf. Your email of 20 May to Jim MatherMSP has also been passed to me to respond.
I can appreciate the upset caused to the individuals involved in the cases detailed in yourletter but as you know the Scottish Government cannot comment on or intervene in these.This government believes that it is usually best if a child can have the loving involvement ofboth parents and wider family in his or her life, as long as this is safe and in the child's best
interests.

As you know the Scottish Government greatly valued the input made by stakeholders suchas yourself to the development of the Charter for Grandchildren, which was widelydistributed to a range of outlets. The Charter for Grandchildren was designed to be a non-legislative complement to the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006. It is a document aimed athighlighting the important role grandparents and the wider family can play in supportingchildren, particularly through difficult times. During the passage of the Family Law Billthrough the Scottish Parliament, the issue of grandparents' rights was discussed and it wasagreed that giving grandparents a legal right to contact with their grandchildren might not bein their best interests in every case. Anyone with an interest in a child such as a grandparentor other family member can apply to the courts for contact with them. In making a decisionthe court will hold the welfare of the child as its principal concern.

The Scottish Government firmly believes that, if a child cannot live with their birth parents,the first option should be to consider the ability and capacity of kinship carers in the widerfamily to provide the child with a safe and permanent home. You may be interested to knowthat we will shortly lay the new regulations relating to looked after children at the ScottishParliament, The new regulations cover planning for all looked after children and set outwhat has to happen when a child is looked after at home, placed with a kinship or foster
carer or in a residential establishment. They also cover the assessment and approval ofkinship and foster carers and the role of fostering panels within local authorities.

The overall aim of the regulations is to improve the planning and decision making process forall looked after children and their carers. The regulations will mean that, for the first time,kinship carers of looked after children will have a formal statutory role. There will be a rangeof responsibilities and duties on both the local authority and the carer to meet the needs ofthe looked after child. Subject to Parliamentary approval, the regulations will come into forceon 28 September 2009. We have also commissioned The Fostering Network and the BritishAssociation for Adoption and Fostering to jointly develop a detailed guidance package toaccompany the new regulations. A training programme will also be rolled out across all localauthorities in Scotland to help them implement the new legislation.

In cases where adoption is considered to be the best option to provide that child with apermanent safe, secure and stable home, an adoption agency must undertake a thoroughassessment. This assessment takes in the wider family circumstances and will considercontact arrangements where these are in the best interests of the child. However, the fina!decision on what arrangements for contact between the child and their natural family,including grandparents and siblings, is a matter for the court to decide in considering anadoption application and all the evidence presented.

Yours sincerely

Claire McDermottFamily and Property Law

The Charter for Grandchildren.

2009-05-09T09:52:00.002+01:00

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 put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” demanding to be heard about the gaps in the family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for love of them why would we bother?

We are happy to promote the Charter for Grandchildren and the Parenting Agreement because they are essential for the welfare of children.

Grandparents Apart Uk Revised proposal for the protection of children.

Our revised proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child neglect and abuse cases is devastating to them and not at all in their best interests. In this revised proposal we have listened to the government and strive to work towards their wishes as much as possible.

The Governments of the UK have refused point blank to give grandparents legal rights of contact with their grandchildren. Their wishes are that grandparents should not have individual legal rights, the say it would cause more problems than it would resolve because grandparents would have more rights than fathers and it is not the answer for every child. (Neither are existing polocies)

Further wishes of the governments are that families get together without legislation and The Charter for Grandchildren was produced for that purpose but there has been no encouragement from the government and the situation is not improving and grandparents are being by-passed for strangers like the wee girl given to two men when the she was afraid of men...The grandparents in this case were willing and available..

We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ in Scotland should be adopted UK wide and ‘and be 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 (not important) persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…(despite the social services statements to the contrary)

Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the rights of parents as was stated if they had individual rights. If the governments were to adopt this proposal as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and inspire mediation focusing on the best interests of the children especially when there is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse, and amid the fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse. There cannot be a more child centered proposal.

It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are very important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse (children 1st) 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, this is not always the case. 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 they know cares for them.

In any event, the following statements are proof enough that there is common ground to build on for the benefit of our children and the governments should act without delay.

Responses from concerned parties.

Children 1st. Response to PE 1156
Grandparents should be given the right of information about their grandchildren’s welfare.
Grandchildren’s Charter which is not about grandparents’ right to contact with their grandchildren, but about their grandchildren’s interests – these documents are available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/Civil/17867/10388

CHILDREN 1ST is a strong supporter of this approach. The Committee may want to ask the Government about how widely these documents are used, and whether any further non-legislative measures are needed to help embed their use. Children 1st. Response to PE 1120

I 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.
H. C. Woman’s Aids recent communication. Not necessarily the final word of W. A.

You are totally right: grandparents are among the most skilled professionals when it comes to looking after children. Grandparents can play an essential role in not only boosting their grandchildren's well- being. But also - as you rightly say - in detecting child abuse. MS Miller has kindly agreed to this quote in firm belief that grandparents have a crucial role to play in a child’s life in the over whelming majority of circumstances.
Maria Miller MP

Thank you for your email. I have much sympathy with your case and have
noted that my fellow Hampshire MP and frontbench colleague, Maria
Miller, has made a point which I fully endorse.
Gerald Howarth MP
Member of Parliament for Aldershot & Shadow Defence Minister

Making the Grandparents' Charter mandatory for professionals effectively means that you create legal duties - in other words individuals cannot enforce rights directly but can expect state institutions to follow the principles of the Charter. It might be worth you exploring the implications of this with the government.
Robert Brown Euro MSP

Former Justice Minister Cathy Jamieson MSP, also a former social worker, said
“Grandparents play a hugely significant role in children's lives. They are often the people who step in to care for children when parents can't cope due to drug or alcohol misuse and many find themselves struggling financially as a result. I would expect every social work department to look at what they can do to help in these situations, to ensure that the best interests of the child are promoted at all times. Supporting grandparents is often the best way to support the children."
Cathy Jamieson MSP Shadow Justice Minister

During my four year term as an MSP (2003-2007) I encountered many problems relative to grandparents and their grandchildren. I regularly raised the issue of 'Kinship Carers' in Parliament and complained about the lack of funding for grandparents who had their grandchildren given into their care by social workers.

The new proposals by the 'Grandparents Apart UK organisation' would act as yet another safeguard in the welfare and wellbeing of vulnerable youngsters. It is imperative that the Government acts now to help to reduce the chance of any more children becoming the focus of media attention due to abuse which has gone unnoticed by social workers and allow the Charter for Grandchildren to be mandatory by professionals.
This is a cost free simple way to help to bring to an end this new trend in society whereby vulnerable children become helpless victims. All too often there is drugs at the root of the problem. Social workers need all the help they can get therefore should welcome this new proposal NOW!
John Swinburne. Leader of the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party.

Get every thing on file from all sources.

2009-04-29T21:21:00.000+01:00

Trevor et al,

The first thing I advise anyone who is embroiled with Social Services is to get everything on file from all sources – Social Services, Health Services, school documentation, doctors’ documentation, credit report, CRB, police reports, the Children’s Database, etc. etc. It is absolutely amazing what is on file about individuals and their families, and how much is often either very wrong or woefully distorted.

It is a lot of effort and, yes, it is difficult and frustrating, and very often you will be fobbed off. The police reports are also often not complete. The only way to get a complete report is to apply to a state school for some position (because you can’t get the CRB report yourself, it has to be through an agency). The agency is then obliged to provide you with a copy. Very revealing…!

In our own case, our “User File” at Barnet Social Services was never provided to us, despite several formal letters as per the Data Protection Act. We were, however, allowed limited “access” to the file (which was edited), but only for a few hours at a time, and only when a social worker was available to supervise us. (I did manage to sneak in a small digital camera and got most of it that way.)

It was extraordinarily revealing how much rubbish was written about us, but stated as fact. And it was no wonder, therefore, that anyone who read the file (children’s guardian, psychologist, replacement social workers, etc.) became markedly prejudiced against us.

But most importantly, there was evidence buried in the file that countered several serious allegations against me. Allegations that determined whether I (or indeed my wife) was allowed to see our children unsupervised or not. (We were not allowed any unsupervised “contact” because of how “manipulative” I was. And my wife, being so totally “under my thumb”, couldn’t be trusted to prevent me from seeing our children if she had them unsupervised. It really became quite ridiculous.)

I was accused of fraud. Of criminally forging a change to an agreement made with a social worker at the beginning of the proceedings. I had a copy, which I provided as evidence, but the Social Services didn’t have a copy that had the amendments. I had “doctored” my copy, was the response. More “evidence” of my devious and manipulative nature. A “fact” that the expert psychologist took into account when making his diagnosis about me.

Behold! I found that the same (amended) copy was right there in the User File. I mentioned this to the Children’s Guardian, who subsequently looked at the original file held by Social Services. (Luckily, before the manager had time to cover it all up and simply accuse me of doctoring the User File as well!) it was only under cross-examination at the final hearing that the social worker admitted that they did have the amended agreement on file after all, but they conveniently failed to disclose this fact 20 months earlier when the ruling to keep the children in foster care was made. The ruling that hinged on this act of fraud that I had committed… (Allegedly?)

Another time I failed to get a copy of documentation when formally requested was when I asked for the notes and records from Legard, the residential assessment centre (5 months at £15,000 per month!) It was noted in the court papers that I spent an inordinate amount of time examining the files in our room when I should have been preparing for our imminent departure “back into the community”. What they didn’t know was that I was furiously photographing the 800-odd pages as quickly as possible, knowing that I’d probably never get a copy, whatever the “law” says about my rights in this matter.

Finally, although I obtained a copy of my police report, there was nothing of note on file about me. However, some time later, when I applied for a job as a teacher, I was told that I had failed my CRB check. I could never work in any kind of state institution (like a school) that involved working with children. The copy I got from the agency was very revealing. Selected accusations made in court and my psychological diagnosis, not to mention that we had “accepted threshold” with respect to neglecting our children, were all there in the report. Put there by the Child Protection Officer…

When I subsequently complained to various police authorities, I was told that what is entered into the police report is at the officer’s discretion and cannot be removed or edited by anyone else, no matter how high in the police force. So, false or distorted information will remain on police file for life. And there appears to be no law or procedure that will rectify it.

It was a blessing in disguise, nonetheless. I ended up by providing corporate training and earned as much in one day as I would have earned in a month working full time as a school teacher! J

I support any endeavour that obliges the authorities to disclose all information kept on record (long) before being allowed to take any action, and certainly before any court can make any ruling. The only proviso is in an emergency where it is strongly suspected (and good supporting evidence needs to be to hand or face stiff financial & career penalties) that a child is in serious danger of abuse. Not mamby-pamby stuff like not getting a sufficient breakfast or suffering “emotional” abuse or “neglect”. It would have to be something really serious, like risk of death or maiming or serious starvation (that can’t be rectified by simply giving the kids 3 meals a day at a community centre!)

If pigs had wings…

Gary

From: trevor jones [mailto:parentsagainstinjustice@hotmail.co.uk]
We are looking at gathering evidence regards the DPA issues raised by PAIN in the Times today - any assistance gratefully received. Family courts system is hiding evidence http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6188481.ece Regards Trevor PAIN

Forms for contacting your MSP.

2009-03-31T10:28:00.009+01:00

Dear Friends.

The past demonstrations that we have done has given us loads of publicity through the media. If you can get access to a computer you will see it all by using this link. http://gapukinfo.blogspot.com/

We have raised the profile of the need for grandparents to be in their children’s lives.

It now requires you to send to your MSP the letter I have enclosed with ‘What needs to change for our grandchildren’s best interests’ on the reverse. For them to bring it up in parliament. What transpires between you and your MSP is confidential and will not put you at any risk.

The demonstration we organised on 4th March 2009 in George Square, Glasgow City Centre 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 was broadcasted on Radio Scotland Battle lines at 11.30, 27th March 2009.

This demo was calling for ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ to be made mandatory for professionals that work with the welfare of children and families to ensure children can have the best that grandparents can offer without treading on the toes of parents.

Our campaign on 25th March 2009 in Dundee was brilliant. We were right outside the room where the directors of social services were having registration and their morning coffee breaks. They could not help but see us as we waved to them. Someone heard them debating us being there so we have achieved what we came

Alan Baird the Director of Dundee social services has refused to resign over the Branden Muir case in Dundee. His secretary refused to give us any information as to his whereabouts and even refused to speak to the media. What are they hiding?

The media coverage was super, GMTV, STV, Radio Times, The Telegraph, The Courier and radio and newspaper reporters will be posted our blog http://gapukinfo.blogspot.com/ as they become available, and photos too. We can't thank them all enough for their coverage and kindness.

Jimmy

Stop Press.

As I was sorting out these 600+ letters to you all that does not have computors(which is an all out effort that our funds can afford. Please contact me if you are going to do it on line, to save us the expence of postage),

An MSP contacted me with this email below and my own MSP is very interested as well. We all need to get our own MSP interested. This is up to you, the more that does it the more of them that will take it forward and support it.. If you want things to change send the form to them now or do it on line.
Forms can be had on our blog http://grandparentsapartuk.blogspot.com/
To find your MSP and address on line enter you’re your address bar then click on contacts http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msp/membersPages/MSPAddressPostcodeFinder.htm in your address bar and pt in your post code.
The more that sends the more will take not just interest but actually take it forward.

Dear James,

I am looking into the issue you have raised with J—T----- MSP about Grandparents' rights. I am looking into the possibility of tabling some questions to the government on this matter. Although I cannot say if this will definitely go ahead, I was wondering if you could tell me if Grandparents Apart UK have submitted their proposal to the Scottish Government and if so, when and have they had a response?
Yours,

Fill in form below and copy and paste all below this line to your MSP
---------------------------------------------------------------

Dear ………………………………………………………MSP,

The Scottish Parliament
Edinburgh
EH99 1SP

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 bring it up in parliament for consideration.
The proposal:-

‘What needs to change for our grandchildren’s best interests’

Failure to implement ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ for mandatory use by professionals who work in children’s welfare is neglect in providing all the possible protection children 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…………………………………………………………………….

……………………………………………………………………………….

Post code……………………

Phone number…………………………………………………………….

E-mail………………………………………………………………………

Signature………………………………………………………………….
(If you have one)

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 Grandparents Apart UK have considered a new proposal in the best interests of children.

Our new proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child abuse cases is criminal neglect by the authorities and not in their best interests. Every means of protection should be used.

We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ ‘ The role grandparent can play in their grandchildren’s lives’ must be 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 focussing on the best interests of the children.

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 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

Why Grans are picking up the bill for childcare

2009-03-28T11:03:00.002Z

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/laurence-white/why-grans-are-picking-up-the-bill-for-childcare-14246647.html

By Laurence WhiteFriday, 27 March 2009

Grandparents should be paid for looking after their grandchildren, according to a new report.
And 60% of parents agree. I must confess to a vested interest here. I am a grandparent with three adorable grandchildren. My wife and I would happily look after them for nothing — and the Government knows that is the case in ten of thousands of similar households.
Parents can get help through benefits with the fees for leaving their children in nurseries or with registered childminders. That is the only practical option for one of my daughters who lives in another part of the province from us.

She has to use the local nursery for her two young daughters and very good it is too. But it doesn't come cheap. If she lived locally, she would gladly use her mum as the childminder while she and her husband went to work.
Our other grandchild is with us every day. Payment for looking after him is never an issue. His sheer presence is beyond recompense. He is happy, his mum is happy and my wife is happy with the arrangement.

Charity, Grandparents Plus, which campaigns on behalf of the 300,000 grandparents who regularly look after their grandchildren, reckons us old folk save the Government £3.9bn a week — almost enough to bail out a bank. One in four of families and around half of single parents rely on grandparents for childcare. In one respect that is a heartening statistic in an era when the nuclear family is under threat as never before. Grandchildren are the glue that keeps some families together. But it is also a cynical exploitation of family values by the Government.

Ministers know well that grannies (the burden falls mostly on them) are saving them a fortune in childcare tax credits. And the grandparents are likely to play an even bigger role as the recession continues to bite. Many parents will be unable to afford childcare in nurseries or with registered minders and will seek out their own parents to help.
It is surely in the interest of governments, even in times of recession, to ensure that as many people get the opportunity to work as possible. Young children can make that difficult, especially, but not solely, for single parents.

With the working day seemingly getting longer and longer, who will look after the children if parents cannot afford official childcare.
In principle, what is the difference between the care given by grandparents and that given by owners of commercial nurseries or childminders? If any, then the balance must surely go towards the grandparents. If you cannot love your own grandchildren then who can you love?
So what then is the principle that stops grandparents being paid if they perform childcare duties?

The Government believes that trained childminders and nurseries give young children a better start in life than keeping them with grandparents or family members. Its policies have centred on expanding formal childcare.
Some research apparently says that young children reared with grandparents struggle to socialise with peers, are behind at certain early developmental stages and have more behavioural problems. The only benefit is their good vocabulary. The Government says paying grandparents would be a step too far but it will look at other ways of helping.
That sounds very rich coming from politicians who have no difficulty spending billions of taxpayers money bailing out beleaguered banks which were the authors of their own downfall.
Maybe it is time for the grey generation to start standing up for their own rights.

The costs of children in care.

2009-03-26T18:37:00.002Z

Approximately 1 in 20 children have been taken into care, some adopted, at some point in their lives. Nearly 60,000 children are taken into care each year. That's the entire population of 100 primary schools. Each case costs the taxpayer an average of £70K in legal fees, many cost over £350K. There are other costs, costs that needlessly drain the resources of local authorities, central government and charities. Private children's homes charge up to '£7000 per week per child' and foster parents in Slough for example get '£400 per week per child' Children in care cost the taxpayer over £830 million pounds a year. That's an average of £2,500 per child, per week-more than four times what it would cost to send a child to Eton

The poor and the most vulnerable are paying dearly

2009-03-26T15:16:00.000Z

From Times Online
March 25, 2009
Family courts: the poor and most vulnerable are paying dearly
Anthony Hayden, QC

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article5927985.ece

Mr Hayden comments:
"The Legal Aid Act 1949 celebrates its 60th birthday this year. Its provisions embody core beliefs that most of us still subscribe to, central to which is the principle that access to justice is not the privilege of those who can afford it but the entitlement of anybody fighting for the care of their child or for their financial security on the breakdown of their marriage."

"On this 60th anniversary the Government is proposing to drastically reduce funding for family lawyers, both solicitors and barristers.

"That is a tragedy on many levels. It will leave some of our most vulnerable adults and children without a strong, competent, professional voice in some of the most serious cases that any court has to determine."

The Government's proposed cuts to funding family law legal aided cases as well as their intention to increase court costs hugely in private law cases to supposedly help self fund the system will mean, as alluded to by Anthony Hayden QC, that justice will not be accessible to those coping with family breakdown who need recourse to the family courts.

Surely this cannot be the way forward for a caring and socially committed Government?

Sharing with each other. Thanks to Karen.

2009-03-26T11:39:00.002Z

A holy man was having a conversation with God one day and said, ' God , I would like to know what Heaven and Hell are like.' God led the holy man to two doors. He opened one of the doors and the holy man looked in. In the middle of the room was a large round table. In the middle of the table was a large pot of stew, which smelled delicious and made the holy man's mouth water.

The people sitting around the table were thin and sickly. They appeared
to be famished. They were holding spoons with very long handles, that were strapped to their arms and each found it impossible to reach into the pot of stew and take a spoonful. But because the handle was longer than their arms, they could not get the spoons back into their mouths.

The holy man shuddered at the sight of their misery and suffering. God said, 'You have seen Hell.'

They went to the next room and opened the door.. It was exactly the same as the first one. There was the large round table with the large pot of stew which made the holy man's mouth water.

The people were equipped with the same long-handled spoons, but here the people were well nourished and plump, laughing and talking. The holy man said, 'I don't understand..' It is simple,' said God . 'It requires but one skill.

You see they have learned to feed each other, while the greedy think only of themselves.' Its estimated 93% won't forward this. If you are one of the 7% who will, forward this with the title '7%'. I'm in the 7% Remember that I will always share my spoon with you!

Mentoring Interview

2009-03-24T12:09:00.001Z

This lady interviewed me today. She is the manager of mentoring Scotland and would like to interview other grandparents. Not for publishing, completely anon.

Jimmy

0131 552 8660
heather.mcveigh@mentoruk.org
Mob 7894269854

We thought we'd never see the girls again.

2009-03-22T14:05:00.003Z

A Glasgow couple reveal why they want a change in the law to recognise the rights of grandparents

from the Sunday Times March 22 2009
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article5949849.ece

Jimmy and Margaret Deuchars’ daughter Susan was seven months pregnant when she was diagnosed with terminal breast cancer. From her hospital bed she asked her parents to make a promise that after she died they would look after her two-year-old daughter and baby girl.
“It was such a difficult time but we told her that we would always be there for them,” says Jimmy. “We loved them and they were our last link to our daughter.”
Three years after Susan died, her husband, Joe, and his new girlfriend announced they were moving from Glasgow to Liverpool. Jimmy and Margaret, who had given much of their time to caring for the children, were sad to see them go but agreed to visit and have the girls to stay.
It wasn’t long before the arrangements began to unravel. Visits were cancelled on the flimiest of pretexts. Meetings that did take place were stressful and often cut short. Afterwards Jimmy and Margaret would drive back to Glasgow in tears, fearing that they were being pushed out of their grandchildren’s lives.

“It was like losing Susan all over again,” says Margaret. “It was devastating to think we might lose touch with Nicola and Joanne, too. Our two sons would say, ‘You don’t have to put yourself through this’. But people don’t realise the bond that exists between grandparents and their grandchildren. There was no way we could let them go.”

After six months without seeing the children, the couple grew desperate. “We thought that was it — we were being denied contact altogether,” says Jimmy. Remembering the promise they had made to their daughter they hired a lawyer but were shocked to learn that they had no legal rights to see their grandchildren.

“In the eyes of the law, we are classed as irrelevant persons,” says Jimmy. “There is no need to acknowledge grandparents.”

It’s a predicament that more and more grandparents are facing. As the divorce rate rises, an estimated 7,000 people in the UK are being forcibly kept apart from their grandchildren. According to the Grandparents’ Association, 90% of the callers who contact them are fearful of being cut out of their grandchildren’s lives after a relationship break-up. In many cases the close relationship they enjoyed with the children is destroyed along with the marriage.

For the Deuchars the situation was resolved after a mediation session, arranged by a family court in Liverpool, at which both sides got a chance to air their views. Jimmy says it began badly, with a barrage of accusations, but eventually an agreement was reached. He and Margaret could see Nicola and Joanne once a month and have them to stay during school holidays.

“It was terrifying at the time,” says Margaret. “The night before the court date I never slept a wink. I was so worried about not being allowed to see the girls.”
Since then visits have become much more frequent and relaxed after Jimmy and Margaret’s son-in-law, Joe, split up with his girlfriend. “He was never the problem,” says Jimmy. “It was his former girlfriend who didn’t want anything to do with his first wife’s family.”

Now they are older, Nicola, 15, and Joanne, 17, stay with their grandparents during the school holidays. “We have some special moments. They tell me things that they wouldn’t tell their dad. I like that we have that trust. That’s what grannies are for,” says Margaret.

After enduring such a harrowing experience, Jimmy and Margaret decided to do something to help the growing number of people in a similar situation. “When it happened to us, we didn’t know where to turn for help. Everywhere we turned was another dead end,” says Jimmy. “So we set up a group called Grandparents Apart so that other people would have someone to talk to and ask for advice.

“I remember how bad I felt when we were going through the worst times. I felt that life wasn’t worth living. I only snapped out of my depression when I hired a lawyer and took action to see the girls again.”

The Deuchars’ organisation in Glasow has received thousands of calls and e-mails from distraught grandparents around the UK. “We have had calls late at night but we never turn anyone away because I know what it’s like to go through that,” says Margaret.

Jimmy points out it’s a nightmare scenario that can affect anyone. “Like us, most people don’t give it a thought until it happens to them. We didn’t. You still get grandparents who say, ‘Oh, that would never happen to us because our family would never do that to us’. But you can’t predict what’s going to happen. It really can affect anyone and when it does, it’s very painful. I had one person on the phone who said, ‘Thank God you were there or I might have ended it’.
“I also know of people who have spent up to £50,000 on legal fees trying to gain access to their grandchildren.”

The lack of legal rights afforded to grandparents is something else Jimmy and Margaret are attempting to redress. They are campaigning for a change in the law to recognise the rights of grandparents; this Wednesday, in Dundee, Grandparents Apart UK will be holding a peaceful demonstration against social services’ family policy. “Grandparents play a significant role in many children’s lives and that should be taken into account by the courts when determining a child’s future,” says Jimmy.

The couple have had several meetings with Scottish government officials and were consulted when the Family Law Act was being drawn up in 2005. Their Charter for Grandchildren, which calls on adults to take into account what children want, has been adopted as an advisory document by the government although it does not form part of the Family Law Act.

“We tried to get it made law but it didn’t go through. What we want is for the government to make it mandatory for professionals who deal with children to use the charter when deciding custody and access arrangements,” says Jimmy. “We want the best solution for children and usually that includes the stability of being with grandparents who they’ve known all their lives.”

Now that Nicola and Joanne are older, how do they feel about their grandparents’ struggle that they were too young to understand at the time? “I think they’re really proud. They appreciate the fact that we put up a fight for them,” says Jimmy.

Margaret agrees. “They were definitely worth fighting for and I’d say that to anyone in our position. As long as it’s about love for your grandchildren, you don’t give up.”

http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/

Jimmy and Margaret Deuchars’ story is told in Battle Lines on BBC Radio Scotland on Friday, March 27 at 11.30am.

Child safety sham puts lives at risk

2009-03-22T10:18:00.002Z

http://www.scotsman.com/latestnews/-Child-safety-sham-puts.5096619.jp

Published Date: 22 March 2009
By David Leask

A CRUCIAL part of Scotland's child protection system has been exposed as a sham after it emerged that thousands of youngsters attend clubs and faith groups whose staff have not been vetted.

Politicians and campaigners last night demanded changes to the law after Scotland on Sunday discovered there is no legal way to force many organisations working with children to carry out criminal records checks on their prospective employees.T

he loophole emerged after a children's charity discovered that Imams in four out of five of Scotland's mosques and madrassahs are educating youngsters without being checked by vetting agency Disclosure Scotland. Charities also believe numerous local sports clubs have also failed to vet their volunteers.However, an investigation by this newspaper has established that most organisations are not under any legal obligation to do the checks, there is no sanction for failing to check, and no organisation is regularly monitoring compliance.

The current system only punishes organisations that fail to carry out checks if it subsequently emerges they recruited someone formally barred from working with children, a situation described by one commentator last night as "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted".Last night, the Tories and a child protection adviser to the Scottish Parliament called for urgent reform of the law to make it an offence not to carry out Disclosure Scotland checks on all prospective workers with children. And the SNP deputy convener of the Parliament's education committee said that he wanted to re-examine the whole issue.The current system was introduced after the 2002 murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in Soham,

Cambridgeshire. It was designed to root out individuals who, like the Soham killer Ian Huntley, work with children despite concerns over their past.Schools, nurseries and other organisations which are subject to official inspection are expected by their watchdogs to comply and face disciplinary – but not criminal – action if they fail to do so.Child protection experts are most concerned by organisations outside the mainstream, where there is no system of compliance, enforcement or monitoring.Roshni, a charity which fights child abuse in ethnic minority communities, says around 40 of the nation's 50 mosques and madrassahs north of the border have failed to sign up for Disclosure Scotland checks, despite looking after as many as 3,000 children every day.

The charity's chairman, Ali Khan, has launched a campaign to sign up minority faith groups for the disclosure system. Khan said: "We believe that around 20% of madrassahs and mosques are aware of the need to carry out Disclosure Scotland checks on their staff and are already compliant. Our project is to make sure that, in time, all the rest are too."Martin Henry, of Stop It Now, a charity that raises awareness of child sex abuse, stressed that smaller sports clubs were also slipping through the net.He said: "

There are some organisations, usually small ones, who manage to duck under the radar because they don't belong to larger frameworks that tell them to comply."The current law only allows serious punishment of any organisation that is subsequently found to have recruited a barred person and managers could face five years in jail. No organisation has ever been prosecuted.

Critics have long argued that some organisations have been far more zealous about the way they pursue checks than others. Some schools, for example, insist on vetting casual helpers on children's trips. Established groups, such as churches and the Scout movement, which are committed to the system, sometimes do not make the same demands for the same kind of activities.Anti-abuse campaigner Helen Holland last night called for a major review of the way Scotland's disclosure system is policed. Holland, who suffered horrific sexual abuse while at a church children's home, now counsels fellow survivors and advises the Scottish Parliament on the issue.She said: "It defeats the purpose of having Disclosure Scotland if compliance with its system is not going to be monitored.Holland was backed by Tory MSP Bill Aitken, who said: "Clearly there is a flaw and a loophole in the law that needs to be investigated." Kenny Gibson of the SNP, deputy convener of the Scottish Parliament's education committee, yesterday called for further investigations into the Disclosure system.

He intends to raise the issue with children's minister Adam Ingram and the education committee. Like many, his main concern is simply that so many bodies appear ignorant of the system. Gibson said: "It's really important that we communicate with organisations that they have responsibilities here."

The Scottish Government yesterday said its agencies and partners had carried out significant awareness-raising work with children's organisations, including 1,000 groups from black and ethnic minority communities.

The Disclosure system is set to expand to include vulnerable adults from 2010. A Government spokesman said: "We are committed to protecting vulnerable groups in Scotland and laws are in place to stop unsuitable people gaining access to children through work, either paid or unpaid. "We are engaging Muslim communities in a positive and constructive dialogue and specifically supporting projects to work with Muslim women and youth."

Answer to letter sent to David Camerons Office

2009-03-20T17:14:00.004Z

THE OFFICE OF THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SW1A 0AA

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 ALness Crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ Wednesday. I8th March 2009

Dear Mr Deuchars,

I am writing on behalf of David Cameron to thank you for your letter of 131" March
2009, following my correspondence to Maggie Tuttle of the 24 February.

Your comments and personal experience on losing contact with your own grandchildhas been carefully noted. David Cameron has said it is in the interests of children to be able to have contact with their grandparents, and he has said publicly that grandparents should continue to have access to grandchildren when families break up unless there is a good reason to the contrary. Many children benefit enormously fromthe care, support, and attention of their grandparents. We would like to see these opportunities extended to more children whose parents live apart.

I will certainly make sure that your views are passed on, and I will also forward acopy of your "The Charter for Grandchildren" onto Maria Miller, Shadow Ministerfor Families, so that she is aware of your views.

Thank you again for writing.

Yours sincerely,
C &_\-
lan Pendlmgton ^
Office of the Leader of the Opposition

letter to David Cameron MP

2009-03-13T15:00:00.002Z

OFFICE OF THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SW1A 0AA

Maggie Tuttle

Dear Ms Turtle,

I am writing on behalf of David Cameron to thank you for your letter of 21st February 2009.

We are grateful to you for taking the time and trouble to get in touch, and we certainly do take on board the points you make in your letter regarding grandparents' rights and your suggestions for a grandparents' day.
David is grateful to you for raising this important issue with him, and he understands the sadness and frustration which many children and grandparents feel because of separation.

We believe that the family is the most important institution in Britain, and that we must look into ways of supporting families and encouraging marriage if we are serious about tackling the causes of poverty and social breakdown.
While we would like to see more parents stay together, we do understand that there are times when sadly the separation of parents is the only course of action available. In these circumstances, it is very important for children to enjoy stable relationships with members of their extended family. David very much agrees with you that it is in the interests of children to be able to have contact with their grandparents, and has said publicly that grandparents should continue to have access to grandchildren when families break up unless there is a good reason to the contrary. Many children benefit enormously from the care, support and attention of their grandparents. We would like to see these opportunities exrenaea TO more children whose parents live apart.

Following on from the UNICEF report in 2007 which showed that British children were the unhappiest in the Western world. David Cameron commissioned David Willetts to look into the problems of modem childhood as part of the Childhood Review. The Review
emphasised the importance of the extended family for children's well-being and called for the law to be changed so that Courts must take into consideration the desirability of contact between the child and their extended family.

The Shadow Cabinet is examining closely the recommendation the Childhood Review about
grandparents' access to children from broken families.
Thank you again for writing.

Yours sincerely,

lan Pendlington

Dear Mr Pendlington 13th March 2009

I have just read a copy of your letter to Maggie Tuttle dated 24th February 2009.

This is the most encouraging letter that I have read so far for the best interests of children.

My own case started with the bereavement of my daughter and then loss of contact with my grandchildren, like losing my daughter all over again.

Our relationship with my grandchildren was:- Joanne, we looked after her daily since birth as my daughter and her husband were working Nicola was born a week before my daughter died from breast cancer and we looked after her full time for three years until my son-in-law met another woman who wanted to separate them all from us and his family totally. As you will appreciate a child that comes out of hospital from birth bonds with the woman who cares for her like a mother and at 3 years old and 5 years old it was devastating all round to be separated so abruptly. We went to court in Liverpool and regained contact by Mediation.

We set up Grandparents Apart UK in 2000 because at the time there was no where we could get support or advice with our problem. Since then thousands have used our helpline and we have worked with The Scottish Government in the creation of The Charter for Grandchildren which was made advisory only to accompany the New Family law Bill (Scotland) 2006. With a grant of £10,000.00p from the Big Lottery we toured Scotland promoting The Charter and The Parenting Agreement..

Enclosed is ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ and I would ask if you could bring it to the attention of Mr David Cameron. Our proposal is for it to be made mandatory for social services, courts, lawyers and professionals who work in the welfare of children. This would ensure children will have the best that grandparents can offer without overshadowing the authority of the parents.

We feel that every effort to protect children must be used and there is an army of grandparents only too willing to step in and help if the need arises at a very substantial saving to the public purse.

Yours sincerely

Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

encl:- The Charter for Grandchildren.

CC. to all Conservative MPs.

Grandparents Apart UK is non-profit staffed by volunteers Charity NO. SC 031558. 0141 882 5658

Demo George Square Glasgow 4th March 2009

2009-03-06T11:00:00.007Z

The wee dolly bird with the pad in her hand is Sarah from the Daily mail. She is working for forward olanning.
The big fat guy in the wheelchair is Jimmy Deuchars. Aplogies for him appearing so much.
In the first picture in the middle is Iris Gibson JP Glasgow City Councellor and supports us wholeheartedly. Iris 's son is Kenny Gibson MSP for Cunning North. Former MSPs Rosemary Byrne of Solidarity, John Swinburne Leader of The Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party (SSCUP)
Microphone man, Eamon Kelly, Nan Wilson, Jimmy Crombie and others.

last years demonstration at the Scottish Parliament.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQAYB4cTAmk

Grandparents do have a role to play

2009-03-05T20:02:00.004Z

the Scotsman and Edinburgh Evening News

http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/-Gina-Davidson-Grandparents-do.5041275.jp#3817986

Published Date: 05 March 2009
By GINA DAVIDSON

I HAVE probably never thanked them properly, but the truth is that life would be a lot harder without my children's grandparents. While I might not believe in the policy that chocolate buttons cure all ills – a grandparental prerogative apparently – I wouldn't be able to work if it wasn't for them pitching in to pick up their beloved grandchildren from nursery three days a week.

And whenever the need to pretend that I still have a social life becomes too much to bear, at least one grandparent is happy to sit in on a Saturday night watching Dinosapien and Ben 10 and dishing out milk and animal-shaped biscuitsWhat's more,

the relationship my children have with their three grandparents is a wonderful thing to behold. They just love them for all the fun – and sometimes lack of discipline – they provide in their lives. I really cannot imagine how much more stressful, on so many levels, life would be without them being involved in our family.And yet in these days of the so-called "broken society", having an extended family to help pitch in and take care of the kids is becoming extremely unusual. Which is why, when there are grandparents around to offer physical, emotional or even financial aid to struggling parents, it seems odd that there seems to be some kind of official blacklisting of them as individuals who can help.Yesterday there was a mass protest by grandparents in Glasgow's George Square registering their disgust at the fact that they are not allowed to look after their own flesh and blood should the need arise. Organised by the pressure group Grandparents Apart UK, the rally was protesting against local authority social work department adoption policies which seem to leave grans and grandads out in the cold.

The most recent case in Edinburgh is that of the two children being adopted by a gay couple, despite the grandparents – who had looked after them for years because their mother is a recovering heroin addict – registering their dismay at the need for adoption and at the fact that the children wouldn't be raised in a conventional family. The grandparents claim that they were bullied into agreeing with this option as they were threatened with never seeing the kids again.If true, it's a shocking allegation against the Edinburgh social workers involved in the case, but it would seem that it's just the tip of the iceberg.

One Edinburgh grandfather who is involved with the pressure group, told me this week how he wrote a letter of concern to the city's social work department about the treatment of his grandson by his mother. He was concerned that due to her history of mental health problems, there were times when the child was at threat of physical abuse. He was, he says, prompted to do this because his grandson had called his father to claim his mum was hitting him.Social services duly acted, visiting the mother at home – but during that visit revealed to her they had received a complaint from the grandad and what his allegations were. He was unsurprisingly then contacted by the mother (an allegedly foul-mouthed and abusive conversation) and then by letter from social services saying they had investigated and were happy with what they saw. And yet they never asked him for any information, nor did they get in touch with the child's father (who apparently is constantly in court trying to get access to see his son) to find out what their "evidence" was.This grandfather admits that there is no desire to remove the child from his mother, that she is not "completely hopeless" as a parent, but that they just wish to be more involved in the child's life – but she makes it difficult. Going to social work for help, he says, has only made it more difficult and he hasn't seen his grandson for seven months.

Jimmy Deuchars, organiser of the rally, says such cases are all too common and that in a lot of cases social workers don't even speak to grandparents at all. Quite why this should be so is hard to understand, given that Scots law, the UN Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights all recognise children's rights to benefit from the care of the wider family. A report by the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships – based on the Growing Up in Scotland survey (GUS) – also showed that grandparents are extremely important in what they can provide in terms of support for most parents. All parents need family (or friends) to call on at times.

Grandparents are crucial when parents work, or for single parents who are trying to cope on their own. Those who are not working and have less time pressures often have financial pressures and a different juggling act. Again, grandparents' help can be key. Surely it is time that the rights of grandparents be enshrined in a similar way as that of their grandchildren? Their voices – and those of the extended family – need to be heard if our broken society is ever to move towards being repaired.

The Sunday Express by Nicola Barry.

2009-03-05T16:54:00.002Z

Shut out and forgotten

The Sunday Express, Nicola Barry

More and more grandparents are cut off from their grandchildren by divorce, family rows or, more unusually, when the children are taken into care. As Nicola Barry discovers, many never see them again.

BACK in September 1993, Hugh and Margaret Rennie had their six-year-old (granddaughter to stay. When they discovered she weighed just 3Olbs, they decided toapply for custody. After a long court battle, which ended up costing the Ayrshire couple £20,000 they succeeded. That child is now 21.

Then in 1999. out of the blue. A social worker from Slough. Berkshire, informed the Rennies that their four other grandchildren. three girls and a boy. all under nine. had been horrifically abused and neglected.

The couple was asked if they could provide the children with a home.

While they were informed if they "stayed in the background that everything would be alright”, a year later the youngsters were taken into care - all to foster parents

All these years later, the Rennies say, without hesitation, that the situation has "ruined then" lives".

We ail know that the break-up of any family is messy at the best of times. No matter how hard couples try to resolve their differences, it is rare for access arrangements ever togo smoothly. But hidden behind the legal complexities and dramas played out, grandparents are almost always forgotten.

Many grandparents act as child minders for their children's offspring, in many cases, up to five days a week. Yet grandparents have no automatic legal right to see their grandchildren when couples separate. In fact. they have no rights at all.

Divorce and separation have hit them hard. With more and more going to court in an attempt to maintain a relationship with their grandchildren. This can be an expensive andpainful procedure. In the case of Hugh, 61, and Margaret, 64, it has been both. The Rennies insist lies have been told about them, with the social workers involved told by their daughter that they are unsuitable guardians - nothing could be further from the truth.

SOME parents bring false accusations of abuse, and even where these are discounted by the court, the hostility between family members may remain so great that the court decides it is in the best interests of the child not to grant contact with the grandparents.

"First of all a guardian ad litem, acting for the children, arrived at our house and explained his role in the proceedings," says Margaret. "He stayed for approximately threehours and took no notes. Before leaving he said he had arranged for the children to come the following day and stay.

“The children duly arrived for a week's holiday and returned home to their respective carers, having had great time.
"After that we maintained weekly contact with the children by telephone – arranged through the social worker.

"We had a great relationship with the Slough social worker, right up until July, 2000, when someone else took over."

Between August 30 and September 2, a psychologist came to assess the couple, their son and his then fiancée, now his wile After one more assessment, all contact with thechildren was stopped.

"We did not know at that point that Slough Social Services had already got adoptive parents in place for the two youngest children," says Margaret.

"On September 8, at our request, the new social worker came to the house and outlinedwhat had been happening. She stayed for about two hours but did not take any notes

"Since then we have heard nothing from Slough Social Services about the children. Wehave been told we have to forget them We have that in writing.

"It was only later that we discovered we were entitled to view all reports held by the localauthority on us. To date, all our requests have been ignored."

They also point out that only one person - the psychologist - carried out assessments onthem, yet the guardian ad litem and social worker came, independently, to the sameconclusion. "The judge made his decision on that one assessment," Margaret says. The Rennies asked to see the papers but were only given a copy of one assessment carriedout by the psychologist.

"Taking into account solicitor fees, court and travel costs; we have paid out approximately£20.000.' Hugh says. "But like a lot of grandparents, for us it is not about the money. We only wish to know the children are being well looked after and we want to see them again."
THE Rennies case is not untypical. So many extended family members endure the breakdown of a whole structure. Aunts, uncles. and cousins can be involved - which is where Grandparents Apart UK comes in.

A charity run by grandparents for grandparents, it now has branches through-out the UK and a telephone helpline.

There is a lot of ignorance out there. For example, with an unmarried couple, the only person with legal rights over any children is the parent who has custody of them.
Nine times out of ten it is the mother. The majority of grandparents who are prevented from seeing their grandchildren are from the paternal family.

Jimmy Deuchars 64, who manages The grandparents Apart UK says “it is not unusual for a mother to refuse to allow the father and his family to see the children.

As things stand, grandparents are guilty until proved innocent. There are no automatic rights. If the parents have fallen out with you then you may not get to see your grandchildren.

Jimmy, a former taxi driver, says mediators resolved his own situation. His daughter – who had two children – died of breast cancer. Jimmy and his wife Margaret looked after the baby while their daughter’s husband cared for the older child.
But the husband met someone else who didn’t want us to have access so we called in family mediation says jimmy. Now he sees the children regularly. “if mediation was brought in early enough,” jimmy adds, “you can often prevent molehills turning into mountains.”

‘We have heard nothing from social services about our grandchildren. We have been told we have to forget them – and we have that in writing.'

BBC recording of Grandparents Apart UK

2009-03-05T14:11:00.002Z

The BBC in Glasgow has recorded a ½ hour programme this Monday about the reasons why we set up the Grandparents Apart UK in Glasgow.

I will be broadcast on radio Scotland on Friday 27 th March 11.30am A programme caled Battlelines By Shareen Nanjiani.

Jimmy Deuchars

Protester demand grey rights. Daily Mail.

2009-03-05T13:34:00.000Z

Page 29

The Daily Mail 5th March 2009.

Protesters demand grey rights

GRANDPARENTS from across Scotland yesterday gathered to demand better access rights to their grand- children when families break down. Dozens attended a protest in Glasgow's George Square to high- light the issue.

Organisers claim that grandparents frequently lose out when a marriage or relationship involving youngsters fails. And campaigners say that social workers often put children into care when they would be better off living with their grandparents.

Jimmy Deuchars, of pressure group Grandparents Apart UK, said: 'Grandparents are at the very bottom of the list when itcomes to rights. 'We're regarded as trouble- makers if we say a word against anything that is happening.'

The Executive insists that the decision to remove a child from their natural family is never taken lightly and officials always con-sider carers in the wider family.

But John Swinburne, former MSP for the Scottish Senior Citi-zens Unity Party, said: 'In the past, if children were taken away from their parents, the first thing that would happen was that they'd be given to the grandparents. 'There was always an unofficial network of kinship carers. It's deplorable that any child should be deprived of the chance to seetheir own grandparents.'

Sarah, The reporter for The Daily Mail send this was being used for further planning. That is a future programme.

Childcare failure put thousands more at risk.

2009-03-05T12:45:00.001Z

The Times

March 5, 2009

Childcare failures put thousands more at risk, Audit Commission reveals

Children's services was the only area where more councils declined than improved
Tens of thousands of children are at risk of abuse and neglect, with a quarter of councils providing inadequate or minimal services for young people, the Audit Commission reveals today.
Even wealthy authorities are not immune to the widespread deterioration in children’s services. The rating of Surrey, one of the country’s most affluent councils, fell to the bottom of the local government watchdog’s league table after failing its children.

The performance league tables show that the standard of children’s services fell across England last year. Only 13 councils showed improvement; the ratings of 22 fell. Surrey was joined at the bottom of the table by Haringey, which was embroiled in the Baby P scandal last year; Doncaster, where seven children have died in three years through abuse or neglect; and Milton Keynes, which was criticised for its poor education and complacent management.
Forty of the 149 councils assessed by the children’s watchdog Ofsted provided either inadequate or the bare minimum of children’s services, which covers education, social care and child protection. The number achieving the full four stars fell from twelve in 2007 to nine in 2008. Children’s services was the only area where more councils declined than improved.
A common weakness was failing to implement legislation requiring all staff working with children to have criminal record checks. Several councils were also slow to put children on the at-risk register, to assign a social worker or to place a young person with an adopted or foster parent, said a spokesman for Ofsted.

In other areas, education results were poor, too few children went on to further education or there were high levels of teenage pregnancy.
Christine Gilbert, the Ofsted Chief Inspector, said that the worst-performing councils were improving services but that she could not guarantee children’s safety until they were reassessed.
Doncaster, where a government review has been ordered, said that the picture had changed significantly since Ofsted finished its review last March. “We’re in a very different place,” said Paul Gray, the director of children’s services, who was recruited last year. “There’s been a substantial increase in the number of social workers and we’ve cleared the backlog of cases.”

Claire Kober, the leader of Haringey, said: “We accept that things went badly wrong with child protection. We are committed to making things right.”
Surrey County Council has taken Ofsted to a judicial review over its rating. It pointed out that many of its other scores were high. “Children are better protected than 12 months ago,” said a spokesman.

Isobel McCall, the leader of Milton Keynes Council, attacked the Audit Commission’s “bizarre” methodology. “If you look at our other scores we have had our other services rated two or three stars,” she said. “Our rank overall is harsh and does not reflect where we are overall.” She was annoyed that the rating blurred the distinction between education and child protection, which was rated adequate.

The comprehensive performance assessment was introduced in 2002 to measure the effectiveness and value for money of local authorities. The areas assessed include housing, culture, the environment, benefits, adult social care, use of resources and corporate management. Use of resources and children’s services are weighted more heavily than the other categories.

2009-03-05T11:54:00.010Z

Congratulations

2009-03-04T18:04:00.001Z

Congratulations and well done on the demo today, I would like to thank everyone who took part,one day I might be able to tell my beautiful granddaughter all about it.

to be a grandparent

2009-03-02T21:29:00.001Z

To be a grandparent is not an easy job. Your grandchildren are counting on you to love them unconditionally to a degree that their parents may not be able to.. They're counting on you to listen, really listen, without judging right or wrong. It is often assumed that you have no life of your own, and that you only exist to be called on when you are needed. This of course is not true. At the same time do not miss this opportunity that you have been given, a chance for a relationship with the next generation.
© Family Friend Poems

praise from Australia

2009-03-01T17:50:00.000Z

Hi James,

On behalf of the parents and grandparents of Australia, we wish you well with the protest and salute your determination and resolve to bring to a halt, the stealing of our children and grandchildren, by State sponsored agencies and bureaucracies.

OUR CHILDREN ARE REMOVED FROM LOVING PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS, BY AGENDA DRIVEN ZEALOTS, WHO BULLY AND MANIPULATE THE CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES IN ORDER TO ENFORCE THEIR OWN TWISTED VIEW OF WHAT THEY CONSIDER TO BE BEST FOR OTHER PEOPLES CHILDREN.

BABY P IN THE U.K http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/ DID’NT FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS, HE DISAPPEARED INTO THE FRIGHTENING BLACK HOLE OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE SYSTEM.

UNFORTUNATELY HE IS ONE OF MILLIONS OF CHILDREN AROUND THE GLOBE, WHO HAVE BEEN FORCIBLY REMOVED FROM THE PROTECTIVE LOVE AND CARE OF HALF OF THEIR BIOLOGICAL FAMILIES.

THEIR PARENTS WERE SUCKED INTO THE FINANCIAL AND EMOTIONAL BLACK HOLE, AND THEIR CHILDREN FORCIBLY REMOVED AND LEFT IN THE CARE OF ONE PARENT WHO IS GIVEN TOTAL POWER AND CONTROL OVER EVERY PARENTING ASPECT OF THE COUPLE’S CHILDREN.

THESE CHILDREN DISAPPEAR INTO THE UNPROTECTED BLACK HOLE OF PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL TORTURE, AT THE VERY HANDS OF THOSE WHO ARE ENTRUSTED TO CARE FOR THEIR HEALTH AND WELL BEING.

EVIDENCE OF THE CUSTODIAL CHILD PROTECTOR’S DYSFUNCTIONAL UNSUITABILITY AS A PROTECTIVE PARENT IS IGNORED, WHILE THE OTHER BIOLOGICAL PARENT IS EXCLUDED FROM TAKING ANY PART IN THE PROTECTION AND PARENTING PROCESS.

UNFORTUNATELY OUR LEGISLATORS ARE DRAWN FROM AN IGNORANT COMMUNITY, WHICH STILL BELIEVES “THE BEST INTEREST OF CHILDREN” IS BEST SERVED BY THIS DRACONIAN INTERNATIONAL FAMILY JUSTICE INDUSTRY, WHICH IS WREAKING SUCH HAVOC UPON OUR UNSUSPECTING COMMUNITIES.

FUTURE GENERATIONS WILL CRINGE WHEN THEY READ HOW FOR DECADES, MILLIONS OF CHILDREN WERE REMOVED FROM PERFECTLY NORMAL, RESPONSIBLE AND LOVING PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS, BECAUSE THE INTERNATIONAL FAMILY JUSTICE INDUSTRY AND THEIR MERCENARIES, CONSIDERED THAT NOT TO DO SO, WOULD UPSET DYSFUNCTIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY DISTURBED CUSTODIAL PARENTS AND THIS WOULD THEREFORE NEGATIVELY IMPACT ON THE CHILDREN.

THE SHEER ENORMITY OF THIS WORLD WIDE PROBLEM IS ALARMING, AND THE LEVEL OF CORRUPTION, IGNORANCE AND INCOMPETENCE OF MANY OF THOSE INVOLVED WITH THE OPERATIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL FAMILY JUSTICE INDUSTRY, BEGGARS BELIEF.

HAVING SPOKEN TO REPRESENTATIVES OF MANY OF THE WORLD’S LEADING VICTIM GROUPS AND TO THOSE THAT SUPPORT THEIR CALL FOR CHANGE, I AM HUMBLED BY THEIR RESTRAINED DEMEANOUR IN THE FACE OF SUCH CONCERTED ATTACKS UPON THEIR FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND THOSE OF THEIR CHILDREN.

NO CIVILISED SOCIETY SHOULD TOLERATE SUCH ASSAULT ON THE BASIC CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF ITS POPULATION, BY STATE SPONSORED AGENCIES AND BUREAUCRACIES.

THE PROBLEM WILL ONLY BE RESOLVED, WHEN BOTH RESPONSIBLE BIOLOGICAL PARENTS ARE GIVEN THE LEGAL PARENTING RIGHT, PRIORITY AND OPPORTUNITY, TO REMAIN INVOLVED IN THEIR CHILDREN’S LIFE, DURING THEIR FORMATIVE YEARS OF CHILDHOOD.

IF WE CONSIDER OURSELVES TO BE A CIVILISED SOCIETY, YET CONTINUE TO ALLOW OUR GOVERNMENTS TO IGNORE THIS URGENT ISSUE, THEN WE ARE ALL COMPLICIT IN THE CULTURAL GENOCIDE OF OUR CULTURE.

Peter van de Voorde
Presenter, Researcher and co-Producer
DADS ON THE AIR, AUSTRALIA
www.dadsontheair.net
dotafeedback@gmail.com
+61 04286 48691
Singer,Songwriter
http://www.justisrecords.com.au/stolen.asp

2009-03-01T14:07:00.003Z

2009-03-01T14:07:00.000Z

Grey protesters hold rally to stop ‘forced adoption’ of grandchildren

By Jasper Hamill, http://www.sundayherald.com/misc/print.php?artid=2492531

ELDERLY ACTIVISTS will stage a protest in Glasgow this week to demand that no child should be put into care if they can live with their grandparents.
Grandparents Apart UK believe that social workers are too willing to place children with strangers. The group's "war cry" is the recent case of an Edinburgh child sent to live with a gay couple - but they insist their grievance is not homophobic.

They have previously campaigned for automatic access rights for grandparents after custody battles and were involved in writing the Grandparents' Charter, which sets out the rights of grandparents but is not legally binding.

Grandparents Apart urged the SNP to listen to their demands and warned failure to do so could cost them the "grey vote" at the next election.
Jimmy Deuchars, manager of Grandparents Apart UK, said: "We're challenging the social services's and the government's policies regarding children and adoption, particularly when grandchildren are adopted to strangers. Social services used to be an organisation that cared and protected, but now they snatch the children and adopt them forcibly, alienating them from their family. Evidence from our members indicates that if grandparents then put up a fuss, they are threatened with the removal of all contact rights. What sort of a democracy is this?"
In response to a questionnaire, 33.6% of Grandparents Apart's 500 members said they had experienced "falsified" reports from the social services, 43.5% said they had been bypassed by social services on child welfare issues, 79.4% said their grandchildren had been used as "weapons" against them in arguments, and 78.6% felt their grandchild had been "brainwashed" against them.

The daughter of one member of Deuchars's organisation, who would not give his name, died of a drug overdose, leaving three children. Two were taken in by family members but one was taken into care aged 10 and his grandfather did not see him for another seven years.
When the grandfather finally managed to get a meeting, the boy said social workers had told him his grandfather did not want to see him. His hair was matted, he was dirty and he was dressed badly.

In care, the boy attended five separate schools, lived in eight foster homes and said he had had soapy water poured into his mouth for swearing. By the time of his standard grade exams, his self-esteem was so battered he didn't feel "good enough" to take them.
The grandfather said: "You've heard that children in care are low achievers, that they end up running with gangs to take the place of their families. It's all true. That happened to my boy."
Since the two got together, the young man has become an apprentice mechanic and is more optimistic about the future.
Kathleen Marshall, Scotland's Commissioner for Children and Young People, favours children staying with their families. She said Scottish law, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and European Court of Human Rights case law, all recognise children's rights to benefit from the care of their wider family where it is in their interests.
She said: "Courts should look to the child's extended family before considering placing a child with strangers. Grandparents can also apply to the courts for contact with their grandchildren and the court will decide what is in the child's best interests, taking account of the child's views, where the child is able to form them and wants to give them."

The Scottish government and children's minister Adam Ingram said in a letter to Deuchars he was "very aware of the important role that grandparents can play in development of young people". He denied social services had a policy of forced adoption.
A spokesman said: "The removal of any child from their natural parents is always a difficult decision and one that is never taken lightly. We firmly believe that, if a child cannot live with their birth parents, the first option should be to consider the ability and capacity of kinship carers in the wider family."
Related Links
www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

2009-02-28T16:07:00.001Z

“The Best Interests of the Children”

in the best interests of the child In social work terms is like “Abracadabra” to a magician. This phrase, cause sheriffs, judges, lawyers or professionals that deal with children to cringe and agree unreservedly with every word that social services say like they have no will or mind of their own. They should be ashamed to call themselves servants of the people.

That must mean the social services think they are perfect and a law onto themselves.

Has nothing penetrated through to our members of parliaments that they allowed this law to be passed?

How many times have social services found to be not working to their own policies.

How many children have been adopted and been lost to their parents and the social services were to blame with inaccurate statements.

How many children have been removed wrongly by social services?

How many children have been proven to be abused in care?

Now see for yourself it is disgusting.

(Quote) Independent Media. But as of April, because of a change in legislation being introduced by Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, the media will no longer be able to identify those involved in cases such as the W--------. It will also be illegal for any children currently in care to speak out, even if they feel they are being maltreated. (unquote)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/justice-ministry-to-bar-parents-from-telling-their-own-stories-1622154.html

The Websters: a crisis of complexity
The story of children removed from their parents is tragic, but when the evidence tells a different story, who are we to believe?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/13/websters-child-protection

Why we should avoid social services and NSCCP

2009-02-26T17:03:00.002Z

The government is under continued pressure about the blundering incompetent Social Services and the First Minister is not a happy bunny. A little bird told me he did not want any scandals from social services during his reign.

So far the government appear to be no closer to coming up with any answers. Now social services, it appears, are making contacting with them as awkward and harassing experience as possible and putting people in fear of asking for assistance. Families are so terrified to approach them for fear of their children being taken away. Evidence has shown that the majority of families are reluctant to contact social services for their child policies of snatching, alienating then adopting children to strangers and bypassing the grandparents if the parents are not available.

The draconian measures they are producing is frightening people away from a service which used to be a caring and once gave support to families in times of trouble. Now they are coming up with gagging laws to shut anyone up that has come into contact with them.

It is a rigorous process vetting foster cares or adopters but it must be cheaper in the long run to adopt children.. Spending money on fostering children back and forth is just about out of the question and they don’t mess about now .Cost is their main concern.

If they consider the children are not in a safe place and not properly cared for, make no bones about it, the children will be removed and they will be groomed for adoption, with or without your consent, nearly always to strangers. But the problem is, all too often their judgement is wrong.

The social service’s concern is for the physical care of children (what the public sees) and the emotional, mental or spiritual side is not catered for, hence the reason it is said that children in care are low achievers lose their identity and self esteem and find comfort in gangs as a family substitute. With a start like that in young adulthood they find it extremely difficult if not impossible to rise above their situation..

This is the pattern the social services are following and it is not in the best interests of your children.

Are you getting the message? They don’t want you to contact them.

How to avoid Social Services.
Points to note.

1……If any parent/s or other caring for children are having problems with drink or
drugs

2…….If children are suspected of being neglected or abused.

3…….If there is disagreement in the family about the safety of children.

4…….If social services consider the children are in a place where they could be in
danger.

Try and resolve your differences between yourselves. Contact Family Mediation Services or groups like ours Grandparents Apart UK 0141 882 5658 If we don’t know, we will know a man or women that does.

The social services are not compelled to consider grandparents or extended family, because they are human.

1…….They have no legal rights to the children.

2…….They will often allow the children contact with the person/s that the social
service forbids costing them once again.

3…….Often grandparents speak up to social services, and then they are branded as
being uncooperative and then ignored.

4…….Grandparents are acknowledged as first class at early detection of child abuse
that is why they are alienated so much..

Getting help.

it is amazing what a family group conference can achieve. A mountain can be a molehill out of control. You must try to reach an agreement within the family. Try not to be in a position where social services need to be involved… Contact Family Mediation 0845 119 2020 Services or groups like ours Grandparents Apart UK 0141 882 5658

Please note. We really need social services unfortunately, if it is not within your own power to stop abuse when children are in real danger, please do not hesitate to call them or the police when you suspect abuse is happening.

If anyone in charge of children has an alcohol problem and cannot cope contact other members of the family and temporarily sign the parental rights and responsibilities over to the grandparents or a member of the family who is not having problems then seek help from alcohol or drug counsellors from your local advice centre.. This way if the person with a problem is in recovery then they can see the kids regularly for encouragement and when they resolve their problems they can have the kids back. If social services end up adopting them you will have no chance of getting them back.

Grandparents Help Single Parents With Teens

2009-02-26T17:00:00.001Z

Tuesday, Feb 24 (Psych Central)

Spending time with a grandparent is linked with better social skills and fewer behavior problems among adolescents, especially those living in single-parent or stepfamily households.

This study in the February Journal of Family Psychology found that children and adolescents whose parents have separated or divorced see their grandparents as confidants and sources of comfort. “Grandparents are a positive force for all families but play a significant role in families undergoing difficulties,” said lead author Shalhevet Attar-Schwartz, Ph.D, of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. “They can reduce the negative influence of parents separating and be a resource for children who are going through these family changes.”

The article continues via: http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/02/24/grandparents-help-single-parents-with-teens/4306.html

Grandparents Help Single Parents With Teens

2009-02-26T17:00:00.000Z

Join us

2009-02-22T10:38:00.001Z

It would be great to have more members on the Chatterblog, I miss you all.
Jane.

Grandparents Apart Uk Revised Proposal

2009-02-21T15:03:00.001Z

Grandparents Apart Uk Revised proposal for the ‘best interests of children’

Our revised proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child neglect and abuse cases is devastating to them and not at all in their best interests. In this revised proposal we have listened to the government and strive to work towards their wishes as much as possible.

The governments of the UK have refused point blank to give grandparents legal rights of contact with their grandchildren. Their wishes are that grandparents should not have individual legal rights because the say it would cause more problems than it resolves solves and it is not the answer for every child. (Neither are their proposals) Further wishes of the government are that families get together without legislation and The Charter for Grandchildren was produced for that purpose but there has been no encouragement from the government and the situation is not improving and grandparents are being by-passed for strangers or like the wee girl given to two men when the she was afraid of men... This is not in the best interests of children.

We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ in Scotland should be adopted UK wide and ‘and be 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 (not important) 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 inspire mediation focusing on the best interests of the children when there is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and amid the fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse. What more does the government want? Is this the best interests of children or is it polotics?

It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are very 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, this is not always the case. 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 they know cares for them.

In any event, the following statements are proof enough that there is common ground to build on for the benefit of our children and the governments should act without delay.

Responses from concerned parties.

Children 1st. Response to PE 1156
Grandparents should be given the right of information about their grandchildren’s welfare.
Grandchildren’s Charter which is not about grandparents’ right to contact with their grandchildren, but about their grandchildren’s interests – these documents are available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/Civil/17867/10388
CHILDREN 1ST is a strong supporter of this approach. The Committee may want to ask the Government about how widely these documents are used, and whether any further non-legislative measures are needed to help embed their use. Children 1st. Response to PE 1120

I 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.
H. C. Woman’s Aids recent communication. Not necessarily the final word of W. A.

You are totally right: grandparents are among the most skilled professionals when it comes to looking after children. Grandparents can play an essential role in not only boosting their grandchildren's well- being. But also - as you rightly say - in detecting child abuse. MS Miller has kindly agreed to this quote in firm belief that grandparents have a crucial role to play in a child’s life in the over whelming majority of circumstances.
Maria Miller MP

Thank you for your email. I have much sympathy with your case and have
noted that my fellow Hampshire MP and frontbench colleague, Maria
Miller, has made a point which I fully endorse.
Gerald Howarth MP
Member of Parliament for Aldershot & Shadow Defence Minister

Making the Grandparents' Charter mandatory for professionals effectively means that you create legal duties - in other words individuals cannot enforce rights directly but can expect state institutions to follow the principles of the Charter. It might be worth you exploring the implications of this with the government.
Robert Brown Euro MSP

Former Justice Minister Cathy Jamieson MSP, also a former social worker, said
“Grandparents play a hugely significant role in children's lives. They are often the people who step in to care for children when parents can't cope due to drug or alcohol misuse and many find themselves struggling financially as a result. I would expect every social work department to look at what they can do to help in these situations, to ensure that the best interests of the child are promoted at all times. Supporting grandparents is often the best way to support the children."
Cathy Jamieson MSP Shadow Justice Minister

During my four year term as an MSP (2003-2007) I encountered many problems relative to grandparents and their grandchildren. I regularly raised the issue of 'Kinship Carers' in Parliament and complained about the lack of funding for grandparents who had their grandchildren given into their care by social workers.

The new proposals by the 'Grandparents Apart UK organisation' would act as yet another safeguard in the welfare and wellbeing of vulnerable youngsters. It is imperative that the Government acts now to help to reduce the chance of any more children becoming the focus of media attention due to abuse which has gone unnoticed by social workers and allow the Charter for Grandchildren to be mandatory by professionals.
This is a cost free simple way to help to bring to an end this new trend in society whereby vulnerable children become helpless victims. All too often there is drugs at the root of the problem. Social workers need all the help they can get therefore should welcome this new proposal NOW!
John Swinburne. Leader of the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party.

Jimmy Deuchars, June Loudoun.
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

Update of my situation

2009-02-20T09:05:00.002Z

My oldest son has phoned me. ( the mother stopped me seeing them since mid dec )
He has asked why I have not phoned him on a Sunday as his mother instructed me to.
I told him that I was not being told by her when I could phone.
He asked for his Xmas presents and his warhammer models.
His x-box is broken and he is bored.
I wonder if the mother has allowed him to contact me so as he can get stuff?
Anyway, I asked if he wanted to come through for a weekend and he went and asked his mother.
She said yes ( how nice of her )
I am supposed to see them in a fortnights time and have mixed feelings about it.
I do not want to go back to being abused by their mother and am in 2 minds about the whole thing.
She will not change and it is so much hassle because she is a monster.
He told me that he did not like me falling out with him ( I lost the plot after my works xmas lunch ) in mid december and that he did not like me calling his mother an A*hole and a bi*ch ( the drink was in and the wit was out ). I am a very bad boy!
The reason I went off the deep end was the culmination of the sh*te that was happening, things such as me going all the way up to Inverness to collect them ....only to find out that they wouldn't turn up and I had to go all the way back without them, this is after me booking time off work, buying train tickets etc. ( not the first time ) Stopping my girlfriend cutting their hair, totally ruining all the plans for Xmas ( it was my turn ),.
The list of sh*te goes on and on and it has steadily got worse over the last 6 years.
I know that it was so wrong to do that, he just pushed the buttons once too much!
How do I get it through to him that his mother is being so bad to me and is making life so difficult.
It won't be too long before I can stop the 6 hour round trip to inverness as they can be put on the train by their mother and I ( I would have to pay of course )
The alienation is definately setting in ( I can see it in my oldest boy ) he seems to think his mother is great!
It has been okay for the last 8 weeks and my life has had some calm in it.
I can see why some dads have given up fighting with the mother.
The fight with the system by me will never end and no matter what I will chase the politicians to the ends of the earth.
It is them that can affect the changes needed.
Any words of advice from you would be appreciated.
Regards
Richard

2009-02-20T08:39:00.004Z

Hi all - I fully support what Grandparents Apart are doing and hope to see a day when the Law will change and they will have a legal right to have contact with their grandchildren.
It is ludicrous that Social Services have such power when the children in question haven't been abused - and ludicrous that they can then have the children adopted and virtually stop all contact - what sort of people do that? That is denying the children stability and the right to their extended family and their own flesh and blood. I am sure their mother and grandparents would feel happier about the adoption if they could still have some involvement.
If they were my grandchildren I would move Heaven and Earth to stop this!
Why should they not be allowed to see them - they are their flesh and blood and would not be here if it was not for them?! And how can it NOT be in the best interests of the children - what rubbish and who are they to decide what is in the best interests of the children - perhaps they should listen to those said children for once!

Also it is disgusting that a child can be taken and adopted wrongfully and that this decision cannot be reversed!
I wonder what kind of outcry there would be if this happened to a Social Worker or Politician - or anyone else in a position of power?
This is another Law that needs to be altered - so in the case like the one on this blog where it has come to light that there has been no abuse the children can be returned to their rightful parents.
These are my thoughts.

Victoria

Where is everyone?

2009-02-16T18:14:00.001Z

Hi everyone,
Is there anyone actually using the blog?
Jane.xx