Removed from family home by Police & Children Services

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather, Now the court proceedings are over ,do you feel able to tell us the specific things you were alleged to have done? What alleged action of yours led to the charges?

This will enable us to gauge the proportionality to circumstances of the restrictive precautions which are being enforced by the CS.

For example,the other day a case was thrown out of court; the judge said the case didn't relate to cruelty at all! Another case, a man was charged with willful abuse because he went in the shop and left the baby in a hot car for 15 minutes.He didn't do it deliberately and he was cleared.

But can't you see that even if he had been found guilty and punished, even if the child had suffered some harm from heatstroke and even if there was a risk that it might happen again and even if the sw's regarded him as aggressive by nature or unable to understand their concerns' , this would not justify the permanent dissolutiion ( liquidation) of a family.The sw's would have to be deluded to think it.

Or was it something more dangerous than that?

[dvsurvivor]

Dear heartbroken father,
I rely don't know how you have kept going but you have found the strength with the hope of being reunited with your family. I am disgusted with the way you have been treated. Your local authority sounds like the one im living in. The area im in is natorious for splitting families up and putting kids up for adoption. All you can do is name and shame the social workers, go to the newspapers. Im on the verge of doing the same myself with way I and other parents in my area have been treated.
I pray that a corner will be turned and you can be reunited with your family. I cannot belive this has happened but it has, its so unjust! Please keep us posted of your progress and how you are doing.

[heartbrokenfather]

Thank you for your replies and encouragement it is very much needed and appreciated.

This document that my wife was forced to sign was not a pre-written document.
It was hand written on a lined piece of A4 paper, I can only guess by one of the two social workers that was called to the court.
From my understanding is that in the room while my wife was forced to sign this rushed hand written document there was two social workers, the investigating police officer, both the prosecution and defence barrister's.
And when I spoke to my criminal solicitor and my defence barrister's at the court, I was told by them that if my wife refused to sign the document that all of the children would of been taken into care.
I asked both my criminal solicitor and my defence barrister what could be done regarding children's services, and the reply was they could not and would not do anything as it is not a criminal matter but it is now a family matter.

I also asked does the views and wishes of the children not get taken into account, the simple answer was "No", when I asked why I was just told that the children are too young and therefore they do not have a voice.
But the police and children's services are more then happy to listen to the children when they are making any kind of allegations.

Now that the criminal proceedings are over with I am now hoping that my wife will now feel able to join in with the conversation.
I know that my wife is already a user on this and other forums.

I know that I should be pleased that the criminal proceedings are over with, But right now I feel like we are taking steps backwards.

Thanks again for your time.

Best Regards.

Edited by Suzie in accordance with our rules of use

[Suzie, FRG Adviser]

Now that the court case is no longer an issue I am more then willing and able to name the local authority and or the social workers related to my case if Suzie will permit this.

Hi Heartbrokenfather,

To clarify, this is not something that I would permit. Our rules very clearly prevent any information from being posted that might identify the children or indeed any other individuals, including professionals.

Best wishes

Suzie

[heartbrokenfather]

Suzie once again feels the need to edit my post(s) and remove the link to the scanned copy of the "Contact of Expectations" that I censored it to remove all references to the LA and or people in this case, Suzie feels that this is not in accordance with the forum rules of use.

I always edit (censor) any documents I share to make sure that I do not refer to any other person(s) as in concordance with the forum rules of use.

This and other forums are meant to be able helping and support parents and there children, But I do not see how anyone is able to give any help and advice if we are not able to supply details that are needed.

Due to my posts being continuous edited I have now started new topic's on the JFF site.

Once again I would like to thank everyone here for there time and support.

I will continue to post here, But I will not be able to go into details.

Best Regards.

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather,

Your barrister and solicitor will be able to testify,if it comes to it, that the contract was signed under severe duress. That is a criminal matter in my opinion.

Just a couple more questions. Was anything done about the s39 order being broken?
It sounds like someone told the three children not to give video evidence.Why should all three refuse point-blank. I suspect the prosecution knew full well they were in a hopeless position .

1. Because of all the evidence you had gathered meticulously and your witness statements.
2. Because if the children were cross-examined,the truth would come out.

So they manipulated the case so that the Police and CS would come out of it. With reputations intact.

I can guess who told them not to testify,their barrister!

Damage limitation.

[heartbrokenfather]

Regarding the Section 39 Order this was indeed mentioned, and it was the judges view that the way the article was worded was not in breach of the Section 39 Order.

I was not in the room with my wife or even in the same part of the court when she was forced to sign the Contact of Expectations. Only my wife and the people in the room truly know what was said.

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather,

I cannot help but laugh at the rapidly composed contract.
The little tykes! Even the handwriting was childish. One has to have respect for their quick actions but EXPECTATIONS indeed.

Who do they think they are? Charles Dickens!

Well, you have to admit it would be funny if it were not so deadly serious.

Do us all a favour and fight this in court somehow! It was clearly a knee-jerk reaction to the realisation that there were no longer any credible allegations. Their whole case had disintegrated but they didnn't have the professionalism to admit it. An (ad hoc) High court decision on the general validity of these so-called agreements is required.A precedent needs to be set.It is in the Public interest and you might get legal funding on those grounds.

In the meantime, CARRY ON CO-OPERATING!
Stay away from home for just a little bit longer.

[heartbrokenfather]

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

Article 4
Governments must do all they can to make sure every child can enjoy their rights.

Article 5
Governments must respect the rights and responsibilities of parents and carers to direct and guide their children as they grow up, so that they can enjoy their rights properly.

Article 12
Every child has the right to have a say in all matters affecting them, and to have their views taken seriously.

Article 13
Every child must be free to say what they think and to seek and receive all kinds of information, as long as it is within the law.

Article 16
Every child has the right to privacy. The law should protect the child’s private, family and home life.

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather,

As regards Article 12, it could be argued that the children are too young with the littlest ones but not with the 14 year old and the 11 year old surely.

The CS care very little for these international charters and agreements.They walk all over vulnerable families because they know the system is unfair and that we will never be able take them to the U.N.These rules are legal guidelines they ought to abide by but they ignore them with impunity.