SARA SHARIF ?

[12gauge82]

I'd have some sympathy for over stretched social services, except looking at the stats, it seems to me children are removed based off of how easy it is to rehome them rather than how much risk there might be. Children (I would guess particularly white) under the age of 2 seem to be removed at a very high rate compared to say 13 year olds. There's something very fishy about that as far as I can see 🤔. 

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

I'd have some sympathy for over stretched social services, except looking at the stats, it seems to me children are removed based off of how easy it is to rehome them rather than how much risk there might be. Children (I would guess particularly white) under the age of 2 seem to be removed at a very high rate compared to say 13 year olds. There's something very fishy about that as far as I can see 🤔. 

 

It’s not rocket science, children under 2 are significantly more vulnerable than children 13+ to things like neglect? 

Much younger children can’t ask for help, can’t make their own food like many children have to, etc etc. 
 

Also in the family courts the older children have a voice… younger children often can’t say what they want. 
 

In the past working in a number of children’s homes every child I met no matter what abuse or experience they had suffered all wanted to be at home, they all wanted to have a family who cared for them, they just wanted the abuse etc to stop, none of them wanted to be in a care home.

[Scully]

Holding social services responsible is self defeating ( who would apply to join if they were made responsible for deaths? ) and cruelly misplaced; they already have to live with the fact they may have been able to save this child and there will be many sleepless nights as a result, no doubt. 
It’s time those responsible for the deaths of children in cases such as this, were made to suffer the consequences.
As loathe as I am to allow the state such power, its way past the time these low life’s were euthanised instead of having their every basic need ( even protection ) catered to for the rest of their lives. 
I could sleep soundly quite happily ignoring the wagging fingers of those who would claim this is an act of revenge rather than justice, but taking away someone’s liberty and then catering to their every need isn’t my idea of justice. 

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

It’s not rocket science, children under 2 are significantly more vulnerable than children 13+ to things like neglect? 

Much younger children can’t ask for help, can’t make their own food like many children have to, etc etc. 
 

Also in the family courts the older children have a voice… younger children often can’t say what they want. 
 

In the past working in a number of children’s homes every child I met no matter what abuse or experience they had suffered all wanted to be at home, they all wanted to have a family who cared for them, they just wanted the abuse etc to stop, none of them wanted to be in a care home.

That argument doesn't fully hold water to me. A parent who would neglect/abuse a child should not have one, regardless of the child's age. While a younger child is obviously more vulnerable, an abusive parent doesn't become a good one just because a child is older. It seems very clear from the statistics, that children are rescued from abuse based more on how easy it is to find them a new home/family rather than an absolute need to get them out of harms way. 

[bruno22rf]

4 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

Would you blame an individual Police Officer if they were prioritising 5 emergency calls, and someone died on the call they didn’t make it to? 
 

Send that Police officer to prison for manslaughter? 
 

Would you hold doctors and nurses to the same ‘account’ for not seeing patients in time?

 

People die everyday because they’re sat on waiting lists and not seen fast enough… paramedics prioritising calls and some don’t get made to fast enough … 

 

Blame the individual workers in a number of under resourced fields that are already struggling to recruit … 

 

The threat of being “accountable” (blamed or scapegoat) when something goes wrong doesn’t suddenly make those professionals able to do 4-5x as much work as they could previously. 
 

It just makes them leave the profession. 

Blow the whistle on what?

People hitting their kids? 

There’s thousands of incidents a day. There are indeed many more in her situation. 
 

Social workers get criticised if they go to court and remove the children, then get criticised on cases where they don’t. 

Police officers do not make such decisions on which calls they attend, that's an officer in the control room, usually Oscsar 1 or 2 and they are checked on their responses and decisions by a separate team that have access to their comms on a daily basis.

Edited Friday at 17:22 by bruno22rf

[clangerman]

this is the reality of social services out of four kids they were stupid enough to let my step brother foster first one became pregnant the boys committed serious crimes including cutting family dogs throat so how big a flag did they want he’s not fit to foster a hamster as for vetting family’s social services made no attempt to contact me whatsoever if that’s not a gross failure what is! 

[12gauge82]

5 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

 

 

Social workers get criticised if they go to court and remove the children, then get criticised on cases where they don’t. 

It's hardly surprising being criticised if they get it wrong. You can't afford to get a decision like that wrong, take a child who's not at risk of harm and you are basically kidnapping a child from its parents, or fail to remove one at risk and they might end up dead. 

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

That argument doesn't fully hold water to me. A parent who would neglect/abuse a child should not have one, regardless of the child's age. While a younger child is obviously more vulnerable, an abusive parent doesn't become a good one just because a child is older. It seems very clear from the statistics, that children are rescued from abuse based more on how easy it is to find them a new home/family rather than an absolute need to get them out of harms way. 

Tell it to the courts/judges… 

They are the ones who make the decisions. 

LOADS of kids experience abuse at home and are left as it’s not “bad enough” for removal. 

I think you’d be surprised at the scale of it… similar to domestic violence … it’s happening everywhere. 

 

 

1 hour ago, bruno22rf said:

Police officers do not make such decisions on which calls they attend, that's an officer in the control room, usually Oscsar 1 or 2 and they are checked on their responses and decisions by a separate team that have access to their comms on a daily basis.

The Police are the only people who have the power to remove children immediately without a court order. 
 

I have been there to pick up the pieces where they’ve said no risk and refused to remove kids and they have come to harm (very significant). 
 

There’s not much point blaming the front line staff … no one has a crystal ball and can predict which cases will be fine if left and which can go horribly wrong. 

[mr smith]

58 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

I think you’d be surprised at the scale of it… similar to domestic violence … it’s happening everywhere. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07gzr5r9eko

Sadly so.

[Lloyd90]

15 minutes ago, mr smith said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07gzr5r9eko

Sadly so.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-64647958.amp

 

Bridgend Social Services still over burdened and struggling despite having a terrible child death not that long ago. 
 

Perhaps they should threaten to imprison the frontline workers … that will surely solve their problems? 

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

 

 

The Police are the only people who have the power to remove children immediately without a court order. 
 

 

 

I'm no expert in any of this but in reality, I don't believe thats correct, Social services or the local authority could be the ones to apply to the courts for an interim care order and if granted, would very quickly and immediately allow them to remove a child. While technically, like you've said, a judge/court has decided, it's really only ever going to based, on what social services, or the local authority tell them. 

[Minky]

 I've been reading through the posts in this thread and although everyone is shocked, appaled, angry and  abusive towards the parents one thing appears to be absent in all of this and that no one seems to look for a systematic reason as to WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS. I've had four children and I've never abused them in any way.  They've all grown up to be happy and successful people in education and employment. So what's the difference between me, the Mrs and these people.  If someone could find the answer something could be done about it.   But there's no money available for anything. The puzzle has more layers than can be handled.  There are too many humans on this planet.  We don't have any predators apart from ourselves and  general  stupidity.   Another pandemic might trim a few but our science takled and pretty well tamed the last one. Who am I to suggest something like this.  This is down to God.

[Scully]

1 minute ago, Minky said:

 I've been reading through the posts in this thread and although everyone is shocked, appaled, angry and  abusive towards the parents one thing appears to be absent in all of this and that no one seems to look for a systematic reason as to WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS. I've had four children and I've never abused them in any way.  They've all grown up to be happy and successful people in education and employment. So what's the difference between me, the Mrs and these people.  If someone could find the answer something could be done about it.   But there's no money available for anything. The puzzle has more layers than can be handled.  There are too many humans on this planet.  We don't have any predators apart from ourselves and  general  stupidity.   Another pandemic might trim a few but our science takled and pretty well tamed the last one. Who am I to suggest something like this.  This is down to God.

🤔 Had a good night have we? 

[Lloyd90]

55 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

I'm no expert in any of this but in reality, I don't believe thats correct, Social services or the local authority could be the ones to apply to the courts for an interim care order and if granted, would very quickly and immediately allow them to remove a child. While technically, like you've said, a judge/court has decided, it's really only ever going to based, on what social services, or the local authority tell them. 

You don’t believe it’s correct but your example is what I said happens so that doesn’t make sense. 
 

An interim care order is an order of the court … so social services can’t remove without a court order … 

There’s also an emergency protection order… from a judge … in a court. 
 

The police however can remove children immediately without a court order for up to 72 hours under Police Powers of protection… no court order needed. This is normally used to give social services time to go to court as needed for the above. 
 

 

[oowee]

Total respect to you @Lloyd90 doing what you do. 

[12gauge82]

57 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

You don’t believe it’s correct but your example is what I said happens so that doesn’t make sense. 
 

An interim care order is an order of the court … so social services can’t remove without a court order … 

There’s also an emergency protection order… from a judge … in a court. 
 

The police however can remove children immediately without a court order for up to 72 hours under Police Powers of protection… no court order needed. This is normally used to give social services time to go to court as needed for the above. 
 

 

I explained what I meat in my post. 9 times out of 10 what a judge hears or a police officer acts on will be the information provided by a social worker, so although the power is enacted by a court/police. To imply a social worker can't remove a child is a stretch, it's simply symbolic. 

[old man]

12 hours ago, Minky said:

 I've been reading through the posts in this thread and although everyone is shocked, appaled, angry and  abusive towards the parents one thing appears to be absent in all of this and that no one seems to look for a systematic reason as to WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS. I've had four children and I've never abused them in any way.  They've all grown up to be happy and successful people in education and employment. So what's the difference between me, the Mrs and these people.  If someone could find the answer something could be done about it.   But there's no money available for anything. The puzzle has more layers than can be handled.  There are too many humans on this planet.  We don't have any predators apart from ourselves and  general  stupidity.   Another pandemic might trim a few but our science takled and pretty well tamed the last one. Who am I to suggest something like this.  This is down to God.

The answer maybe lies in dormant genes?

[amateur]

26 minutes ago, old man said:

The answer maybe lies in dormant genes?

The other element may be that, whereas a mother might be protective of her kids, a step-mother may well be less so, as it seems to be in this case

[mel b3]

13 hours ago, Minky said:

 I've been reading through the posts in this thread and although everyone is shocked, appaled, angry and  abusive towards the parents one thing appears to be absent in all of this and that no one seems to look for a systematic reason as to WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS. I've had four children and I've never abused them in any way.  They've all grown up to be happy and successful people in education and employment. So what's the difference between me, the Mrs and these people.  If someone could find the answer something could be done about it.   But there's no money available for anything. The puzzle has more layers than can be handled.  There are too many humans on this planet.  We don't have any predators apart from ourselves and  general  stupidity.   Another pandemic might trim a few but our science takled and pretty well tamed the last one. Who am I to suggest something like this.  This is down to God.

Quite a few years ago , I watched a tv programme ( it might have been open university). 

Scientists did an experiment,  involving rats in a huge tank . The rats were just left to breed and breed . When the population reached an unsustainable level , the male rats started to turn gay , and the female rats started to kill their own young .

I can't help but draw parallels with the planet earth , and the human population .

[shaun4860]

And it’s back on track!

[marsh man]

Just a matter of days ago there was another case that was just as bad if not worse than the one above that was fairly local , the boyfriend of the girl who murdered this little girl put sun glasses on her face and covered her head up with a hood so people couldn't see the bruises , the mother let her boyfriend carry on beating this little child up as she didn't want to lose her boyfriend , they walked about with the dead child in the trolly as if nothing had happened while laughing and joking with each other , both are now inside and the key should be thrown away forever , certainly some sick people about .   MM

[mr smith]

2 hours ago, marsh man said:

Just a matter of days ago there was another case that was just as bad if not worse than the one above that was fairly local , the boyfriend of the girl who murdered this little girl put sun glasses on her face and covered her head up with a hood so people couldn't see the bruises , the mother let her boyfriend carry on beating this little child up as she didn't want to lose her boyfriend , they walked about with the dead child in the trolly as if nothing had happened while laughing and joking with each other , both are now inside and the key should be thrown away forever , certainly some sick people about .   MM

This was the story I linked to further up,there is even cctv footage of them pushing to poor wee thing around dead doing just as you have described. Absolute B's.

[marsh man]

3 hours ago, mr smith said:

This was the story I linked to further up,there is even cctv footage of them pushing to poor wee thing around dead doing just as you have described. Absolute B's.

Sorry I didn't see your link mr smith and very glad you highlighted this shocking episode , truly , truly awful 

[mr smith]

2 hours ago, marsh man said:

Sorry I didn't see your link mr smith and very glad you highlighted this shocking episode , truly , truly awful 

When you think you've heard it all, sadly some piece of **** comes along with a new level of,god knows,no words.

 

[Westley]

Compulsory sterilisation springs to mind   ??