yet another disgusting example of senseless intervention based on hearsay ....my total sympathys are with the couple at this time.


Solicitor jailed for snatching own baby daughter from social workers By ANDREW LEVY - More by this author » Last updated at 22:40pm on 8th November 2007 Comments (53) A solicitor who snatched his baby from two care workers before going on the run has been jailed for 20 months. Jonathan Phillips, 40, punched the two women, one of whom was heavily pregnant, before grabbing his daughter and speeding away in his car. The child had been taken into care because of concerns over his wife's mental health - although the couple insist she does not present a risk. Scroll down for more... They were allowed to visit their daughter for two hours every day at a family contact centre in King's Lynn, Norfolk. But Phillips lashed out because he felt staff were treating her too roughly. He shouted, "Take your hands off my baby" before overturning a table, attacking the women and seizing his child, who was four months old at the time. Phillips, a soldier in the Territorial Army, fled with his wife Erica and the child, who cannot be named for legal reasons. They were stopped on the M6 near Birmingham later the same day. Phillips, of Downham Market, Norfolk, was sent to prison after admitting kidnap and two charges of assault causing actual bodily harm. Before he was sentenced he said: "I was acting under extreme provocation. Social services had taken our baby into care under dubious circumstances and whenever we visited her, the staff handled her roughly, overfed her and generally ill-treated her. "I lashed out in the heat of the moment. I could see my family crumbling before me. "Now the tragedy is that she looks set to be adopted and we will not be able to see her again until she is 18." Scroll down for more... Norwich Crown Court heard that Norfolk County Council gained an interim care order in May to place the child in foster care because of Mrs Phillips's mental health. The couple say they have independent evidence showing she was capable of looking after her baby. Mark Shelley, defending, said Phillips was "a well respected and popular solicitor". "It was not a planned snatch," he said. "It was a culmination of emotions as he could see his daughter slipping away from him." The court heard the two care workers suffered cuts and bruises during the attack in August. Phillips was jailed on Tuesday for 12 months for kidnap and eight months to run consecutively for the assaults. "These are extremely serious charges and I cannot see them in any other light," Judge Paul Downes told him. Mrs Phillips, a qualified cardiology nurse, said afterwards that staff at the contact centre were rude and would go out of their way to upset them. She added: 'My husband is a decent man and a kind and loving father and had no criminal convictions before this.' Norfolk County Council said the sentence sent out a strong message that violence against its staff was unacceptable.

Add your comment Comments (53)

53 people have commented on this story so far. Tell us what you think below. "Norfolk County Council said the court ruling sent out a strong message that violence against staff is unacceptable."

Wheareas ill-treating a child in your care and abusing the parents is acceptable, right? Social Services are a joke.

- Rob, Northampton, England What a miscarriage of justice! A terrible commentary on the way this poor sad country is now run. The 1970's lunatics have very definitely taken over our asylum.

- Ian Millard, Exeter UK Sounds to me like they are being used as a scapegoat and to "teach a lesson to others" I would feel the same if my child was taken from me, I would feel frustrated and I think a moment of "anger" can happen to anyone.

- Anna, East Sussex And cruelty to loving parents is unacceptable. How come they can find a jail cell for this father, but not for drug dealers?

- Lorraine, Worthing UK Any parent would have reacted in a similar fashion. I hope this family is put together again and I hope the powers that be can see that their actions haver led to this.

Now they may not see their daughter again until 18.

Is that justice? More like a disgrace.

- Ibbo, Leeds How can Social Services 'deem' somebody to be mentally ill and then remove the child? Social Services do not always get it right and I can sympathise with this family.

- Shirley Eley, Milton Keynes I read this story with disbelief. Sent to jail for 2 years for kidnapping his own daughter - with the mother's consent. What is happening in this country? I do hope the family can fight on and regain their daughter. My sympathies are with them. Surely this is another example of where our secretive Family Courts need to be investigated thoroughly?

- Ruth, Poole, UK Seems to me the man had every right to act in the way he did. Even if his wife was unstable that is no excuse for removing the child from him.

The removal of a child from it's parents when only one of those parents is deemed to pose a risk seems unnecessary and extremely heavy-handed. Better the mentally ill parent removed than the child placed in care.

- Marting, Reading England Please can some authority step in and sort this out? If anyone took my four month old away from me, I'm sure I would do the same. Where is reason?

- Amanda, Switzerland I don't know why we have social workers. They seem only to target the vulnerable instead of helping them.

- Julie, Cambridge, England What a shocking story. I can't imagine how desperate Mr Phillips must have felt to have to kidnap his own daughter, which no doubt the social services will now use against him to get this child adopted. Fair enough he shouldn't have lashed out, but there are far worse motiveless crimes occuring in this country which receive more lenient sentences.

- El, Kent Show this man some compassion. He loves his family, needs his wife and daughter, and if the report is accurate, he should be with them, not in prison.

- Mary, London But it is OK for the state to steal your child?

- Jane, Bournemouth I have every sympathy for this man, Social Services should be ashamed, they've destroyed another family.

- Marie Penney, Manchester, UK How about the father's ability to look after his own daughter? Has he not been forgotten in this whole very sad story? How about the independent proof that she can look after the little girl? Could that help the so called judge to see things in an other light?

- Elodie, Madrid, Spain I feel so sorry for Mr annd Mrs Phillips! How cruel to take their daughter away from them just like that. We see murderers and rapists goingt to prison just for few months while this loving caring parent is imprisoned for over a year! Disgusting!

- Fern, Newcastle > Norfolk County Council said the sentence sent out a strong message that violence against its staff was unacceptable.

But violence against families is just fine.

More busybodies who think they know best.

- Dino Fancellu, Epsom Let this couple have their child back - this is another case of social services getting it completely wrong. Why take a child from a loving stable family with two parents?

I can see why the parents are so frustrated - they felt they had no option. When social services get their claws into you, they just don't listen and you get nowhere.

Being cynical, this could of course just be a way of making more children available for adoption so that the council fills its 'quota'.

- Sal, Oxford This country and its misguided principles makes me sick. The British Social Services Department is a disaster area run by a bunch of incompetent idiots.
Where children really are at risk, they fail to act and where there is no real problem they break up families. My sympathy lies with Mr Phillips and his wife.

- Rc, Scotland A tragic story, with the parents seemingly as victims. Social services have a job to do, but some personalities can be a little heavy handed with little regard for human feelings, or emotions.

- Angelina, Vancouver, Canada Whilst I do believe in children being protected, I do have to wonder why they take a child away from parents that have done nothing wrong.

- Helen, UK If it's proven that the staff were mistreating his daughter, then surely he was only trying to protect her? The violence I don't condone, but people will do desperate things when they feel their family is being threatened.

- Michelle, Leicester What a tragedy. We all now know how dubious "expert" opinions can be. This is truly shameful that it should have come to this.

- Sally-Anne, Essex He'll be able to have more children but, as long as the mother is deemed mentally ill, she will have her children taken at birth now, this is how the public family law and social work system operates.

- Liz, London, UK This is a travesty of justice.

- Pete, Lincoln This poor man. He just wanted to protect his family. Violence is NEVER right but his natural instincts came into play.

- Clare, Sheffield When a child is really in danger these so called social workers seem to do nothing at all. Get a decent respectable family though and it's a different cup of tea. What do they expect a father to do when his child has been snatched away?

- P Marshall, Loughton Essex England Welcome to Orwell's "Big Brother" Britain. The injustice of this case sickens me. Can you kidnap your own child? Sure, because once in the State's hands she is not yours. Look at the sentences, rapists, murderers, crooks get concurrent terms no matter how many offences they commit, this poor dad gets a consecutive one. Worst of all he and his wife lose their child until she is 18. Meanwhile Norfolk County Council's smug spokesman bleats about zero tolerance for assaults on its staff. What sort of staff are they? If the parents are to be believed the staff are unhelpful and arrogant.

- James, Spain Seems very harsh. I'm sure I would have acted the same under the cirmstances. It's an unbelievable sentence when compared to those getting not much more for murder. A heartless decision by the judge.

- Alan, Bath, England I think someone should review this case. It doesn't seem right that this family have to suffer this and have their daughter taken away.

- Nibs, Glamorgan This is a very harsh judgement. The parents are more likely to be the ones with the best interests of their baby at heart than the social workers. It's very scary that this could happen. Couldn't a relative have been appointed as guardian until social services were satisfied about the welfare of the baby?

- Max Davies, Bideford, Devon I would have done the same. Release him. The family needs help, not this. Time and time again you see drug adddicts being given second, third, fourth chances. You see thieves being let off with a reprimand. Recently a man attacked a 90 year old man on the tube and was let off. Justice is supposed to be seen to be done. It is not.

- Paul, Gloucester The power given to social services is terrifying. My heart goes out to this poor couple. In the UK today it seems that the criminals go free and decent people are jailed.

- C.Tallin, London, UK A loving father jailed for protecting his own daughter? How can any parent tolerate this madness?

- Robert, Sydney, Australia 20 months is too long for this. He's lost his career, his children and his liberty for a year for acting on instinct when he thought he saw his children being mistreated. No wonder the prisons are full to overflowing.

- Pete, London Poor man, he and his wife should've been offered help and assistance from social services to keep the baby in the family home, not had their baby removed from them.

- Tracey, Wilts, UK What in God's name is going on in Britain? The jailing of this man is an absolute disgrace.

- Nigel Hamley, Australia What a ghastly tale! I feel so sorry for this family. Social workers seem to bend over backwards to keep children in so-called working class families which have physically and mentally abused them,families where parents are alcoholics, families where the child lives in abject squallor. Why could the social workers involved not put a 'package of care' in place for this family? This is a disgrace.

- Hazel Anne Larmour, Ballygowan, N. Ireland How can families like this be separated, yet other children left to die without care workers lifiting a finger to help? Surely another care arrangement other than forcible adoption can be worked out?

- Christine, Melbourne Australia Surely the question should be raised, were social services justified in taking the baby into care and was Mr Phillips reacting to extreem provocation? This is his daughter we are talking about and the future of his family is being taken from him, of course he will be distraught!

- Sid, Cornwall I have sympathy for the man. Local authority snooping and interference in our lives has reached an intolerable level and this business is symptomatic of the slide into authoritarian socialism of our once great country.

- Rokola, Chiang Mai, Thailand Would any mental health charities like to get involved in this case? And if not, why not? It cannot be right that a family is penalised for an illness by having their child removed. Surely it is the case that the Phillipses were provoked into acting the way they did so that their child could be adopted?

- Sarah N., London How terrible that yet again a family is destroyed by the arbitrary decisions of social workers.

We really do need to implement some form of psychological testing to wean out those who are unsuitable and incapable of staying objective when dealing with the understandable emotions their investigations will generate.

The government is supposed to be going to prevent homeowners from facing prosecution for protecting themselves and their property from intruders. Surely it is far more understandable that a man will try to protect his baby from rough treatment?

This man should be applauded, not imprisoned.

- Nick, Birmingham UK This man's human rights have been infringed, and his wife's alleged mental health problems mean that, like the elderly and vulnerable, they are bullied and discriminated against.

He had a right to use reasonable force to defend his baby against being roughly handled, and all parents have a right to defend their children against 'abusers'.

- Solarsentinel, England So he gets two years for this and a thug who attacks someone on the street would walk free. Something wrong here surely.

Yes he shouldn't have done this but there were clearly mitigating circumstances and he was previously of good character.

- Pat, Reading, England Yet another family destroyed by Norfolk Social Services? Another baby taken to meet adoption targets?

Mother 'deemed' to be mentally ill? Assessment of the mother by appropriate professional?

It's impossible to watch 'carers' ill treat your child before you and not react.

Our children were taken into care when I suffered postnatal depression. A health visitor who had not met me thought I 'might' pose a risk. No assessment was undertaken or contact made with the Consultant Psychiatrist treating me before the children were 'snatched' from our home.

My children were ill-treated by their foster parents and Social Services admitted they suffered both physically and emotionally whilst in their care. After reassessment of the foster placement, they will not foster again.

A letter from the Senior Social worker apologizing, stating the only harm our children suffered was caused by their department didn't stop the nightmares the children suffered afterwards.

Deepest sympathies to both parents.

- Brown, Newtown - UK A decent man does not punch a pregnant woman, no matter what his emotions are. He deserves to be in prison, he endangered an unborn baby.

- Rose, Co Cork, Ireland For Social Workers they sure know how to rip a family apart.

- Pu Li, Guangxi, China Another case of this nanny state robbing good parents of their children. The most cruel thing you can do to any child is take it away from loving parents.

- E.Horwood, Basingstoke I can understand why this father lost his rag, would you trust your baby daughter with two social workers, I most certainly would not. Good luck Mr Phillips.

- Mary, Kuwait No he shouldn't have done it, but I don't doubt the social services people deserved it. They seem to act like little gods and are hostile and goading. They don't appear to think like normal people or know the difference between the decent who ought be trusted with their own children and scum whose children actually need rescuing.

- Cate G, E Anglia Whilst I can understand that courts must take a hard line against assaults of this nature, the sentence does seem harsh given the circumstances. It seems that Social Services are a law unto themselves.

I wonder who many other parents are in a similar position?

- Lorna Collins, Bournemouth , UK











sarah white an extremely brave lady ....





linda mcdermott another very brave lady...




a very brave couple vanessa and martin, fighting to keep their unborn child.....may calderdale social services hang their heads in shame....











Behind closed doors... the decisions that can tear a child from her family

Inquiry into care tragic Salma received

A mother pleads in court for girl’s return

THE tragic death of 12-year-old runaway Salma ElSharkawy – killed in a car crash after being taken from her parents by social services – has exposed a care system where decisions are taken behind closed doors, with relatives feeling shut out.
Parents and social workers have contacted the New Journal after reading Salma’s story last week, lifting the lid on a process which is rarely openly discussed.


Many have warned that resources are spentoncourt proceedings and foster carers instead of helping parents struggling to cope.
The issues will be highlighted today (Thursday) when a mother from West Hampstead goes to the High Court in a battle to win her daughter back from Camden Council’s care.
She cannot be named for legal reasons but the woman claims her daughter jumped out of a window after being taken away.
It will be argued in court that her child’s pleas to remain with her mother were ignored.
She said this week: “I’m appealing to the Royal Courts because there’s no reason for them to take her.
“I don’t have any contact with her whatsoever. They took her completely and she disappeared from my life.
“When they took her they knew she had attempted to kill herself before. She had told psychiatrists she would kill herself. She threw herself out of a window the same night she was taken away but survived.”
The case comes in the wake of the death of Salma ElSharkawy in a car crash after being taken into care. She had written letters to a family court judge asking to return to her parents, but was sent to live with a family in Derbyshire, where she died in the crash.
Initially, her mother had asked for help after Salma began developing behavioural problems.
Camden’s children’s director Heather Sch­roed­er is due to pick an independent investigator with experience of the social care system to lead an external inquiry into the care Salma received. Everyone who came into contact with Salma is expected to be questioned.
Lib Dem councillor John Bryant, who holds the portfolio for children, said: “If there are lessons to be learned we need to think those through. The coroner has to decide the cause of death but that doesn’t help us out with risk assessments.”
Following last week’s article, parents contacted the New Journal with their concerns.
One woman, who used to live in Belsize Park, wrote in an email: “I’m in Australia now with my children safe but I have all my documents with a list of dodgy social workers and medical staff from two hospitals.”
Former foster carer Christine Brody, of Steeles Road, Belsize Park, said a young relative was also failed by the system.
She added: “Camden has the most terrible reputation for frightening parents.
“Anybody can go to social services and report you and this immediately goes into a ‘strategy process’. You don’t have the right to know this is even going on.
“Then a strategy meeting is called where the people concerned with the child are invited but the parents don’t always have the right to attend. They all get together with social services, have their meetings and say they want an independent assessment. You believe them but they crucify you. You’re not given any chance to question the allegations.”
She said social workers were concerned about damage to careers. “If they don’t toe the line and fill the quotas and targets their careers suffer. All the time they are throwing money at new schemes instead of supporting parents with their children.”
In an email to the New Journal, Staffordshire social worker Rachel Mulcahy said: “This sad case of Salma could happen anywhere in the country. If she had been on my books there’s no way she would have been in the care system. The whole system is unbalanced. They spend so much money on care proceedings and looked-after children. When I was an area social worker, parents had been asking for help, in most cases for two years. By the time they came to me the family were in crisis and often the children were in the care system.”
Trevor Jones, a spokesman for Parents Against Injustice (PAIN), which assists families caught up in care proceedings, said: “The system of taking children into care operates behind closed doors where social workers are not accountable for their actions.
“Without scrutiny, it is not surprising injustices occur and children are removed permanently from innocent parents.”
Salma’s parents have questioned Camden Council about their daughter being passed between so many social workers. They say they were told there was a shortage of social workers and that the council struggled to hold on to the ones they had.
A council press official said Camden employs 160 children’s social workers, a small proportion of whom are agency staff.
She added: “Camden Council is a high performing, four-star local authority with a strong record of effectively protecting and supporting children, young people and families. Our social workers do the valuable and challenging job of supporting the needs of children, young people and families, often in very difficult circumstances.
“We have at times faced similar problems to other local authorities in recruiting good-quality social workers.
“We always try to ensure continuity of care and at the end of May, of children known to Safeguarding and Social Care, more than three quarters had one social worker allocated to them during the previous 12 months, 21 per cent had two social workers and just one per cent had more than two social workers over the same period.”
Inquests into the deaths of Salma and support worker Elizabeth Fitton, from Buxton, Derbyshire, who also died in the crash, have been opened and adjourned.



Salma’s father Walid ElSharkawy is to hold a daily demonstration outside Parliament and Downing Street for the next three weeks.
He said: “To me, Salma died on February 25 when she was taken away. Our voice has always been repressed. Once a social worker gives evidence, they go and you can’t question them. The system for contact visits is just another chance for them to cement their case.”
Mr ElSharkawy has been documenting Salma’s story on his internet blog, and has received messages of support on the website www.fassit.co.uk from parents who say they have suffered similarly.


I COMMEND THE PARENTS BRAVERY AND COMMITMENT IN INVESTIGATING THEIR DAUGHTER S TRADGIC DEATH....
JUSTICE MUST BE SEEN TO BE DONE, I SINCERELY HOPE THEY SOON FIND PEACE ONCE AGAIN IN THEIR LIVES....




so ashamed to be british.....
transcript of radio 4

FACE THE FACTS Forced Adoptions Presenter: John Waite TRANSMISSION: Friday 24th August 2007 1230-1300 BBC RADIO 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Waite This week we investigate so called "forced adoptions" - part of the child protection system that exists for all the right reasons. But one that's having all the wrong results according to parents who say their children have been taken from them unjustly. Joy It's knocked me for six. I don't know what to do anymore. I know I've got to fight for her but it's scaring me because I know if she gets adopted that's it, that's the end, until she comes to find us. Chris I spend all my life thinking about what they're doing where they are, what they're up to, what their favourite colour is, favourite TV programme, what they're into, what they like, everyday and I wonder what's going through their mind - what they're thinking about. And I hope that one day they will come and find me but I have no guarantees on that. Waite Joy and Chris - two parents - one of whom is likely to lose her child, the other whose children have already been forcibly adopted. When the state intervenes in family life and removes children thought to be at risk of harm. Changes to adoption policies were first introduced in 2000. There were concerns that children were languishing in care for too long, and with a shortage of babies, older children, who are less appealing to adopters, were remaining stuck in the system. Tony Blair himself chaired the review. He had a personal interest as his father, Leo, was an adopted child. And Alan Milburn, the then health secretary, announced the changes to the Commons in December that year. Milburn speaking in Parliament The White Paper - this forth sets a new national target to deliver a minimum 40% increase in lasting adoptions by the year 2005. Although I hope that the measures I've outlined today will help us achieve a 50% increase over that period. Waite And speeding up adoptions and achieving adoption targets came coupled with financial incentives. Currently an English local authority that chooses to sign up could benefit from payments of more than £2 million. But, right from the start, the idea of adoption "targets" - though undoubtedly well intentioned - caused some unease. With the Local Government Association, for example, warning: Local Government Association warning There are real concerns about targets which may rush agencies into placing children for adoption when the best plan, in accordance with the wishes of the child, may be to work with the birth family to enable them to care for their child. Waite A warning that's turned out to be true, according to parents, even some social workers and campaigners like Jean Robinson from the Association for Improvements in Maternity Services, AIMS. Robinson The government set a dangerously simplistic target. This resulted in social workers targeting not the children who were already in care but babies which are the easiest most desirable fodder for adoption. Waite So how does the adoption process work? Adoptions where parents decide that they cannot look after their child are straightforward, but it's when parents contest an adoption recommended by the authorities that problems can arise. If social workers suspect a child is being abused, or is at some risk of harm from its parents, either now or in the future, they begin an assessment process to scrutinise the family. If there's thought to be an imminent risk, an emergency or interim care order is sought, and a child can be removed from the family home while an investigation takes place. Once it gets to this stage, the family courts are involved, as well as the Child and Family Court Advisory and Support Service which appoints a guardian for the child. Social workers dealing with a case have to assess the family, the possible problems and whether it is suitable for a child to remain with its parents. And once an investigation has passed the four months stage, so-called "twin tracking" takes place. Where a plan is put together for a child to return home - while a second plan is drawn up for if the child stays in care. John and Joy, not their real names, are parents who are experiencing the reality of twin tracking. Two years ago their newborn baby was taken into care by social services, and even though they are still trying to prove that they are fit parents, the twin track of the adoption process to find their child new parents is also well under way. Joy told me what happened the day her baby was taken. Joy There was a knock on the door and it was two policemen and two social workers. They came in, held me back, took my daughter away in her baby cot and that was it. Waite By law, Joy cannot see her child now, and last had contact last November. But she sees photographs of her daughter, with her Christian name clearly displayed, all the time - in publications advertising her for adoptive parents. Joy Seeing a child on the internet or in an adoption magazine is very distressing because you know that's your child and that child is going to be parented by somebody else. Total strangers. And you never get to see the child because they stop contact altogether. Waite Everyone is agreed that Joy, as a parent, has done nothing wrong. But her baby was taken away from her because of something that John, the man she married, may have done in the past when he came to the attention of child protection officials in his previous marriage. John Ten years ago I had a baby daughter, she was fine, two years later we had a son, eight weeks old he started fitting and at the time I had to go to work but by the time I got to work somebody had already phoned work and said that my son's in hospital and put him on a life support machine. They got him stabilise after a few weeks and then a doctor comes into the room and says it's shaken baby syndrome. Waite And had you shaken your son? John No I hadn't. Waite Had your wife shaken your son? John No, no. None of us have ever been charged for we've never done anything. Waite John and his first wife were investigated by social services, and court proceedings took place to decide whether they were indeed guilty of harming their son. John In the final hearing they said that me or my ex-wife were guilty of shaking our son so violently to cause him brain damage. Waite And that you have always denied? John Well I've never done it but the social services want me to - they say it would look better if I admit to it but how can you admit to something you've never done? Waite Did they take that baby of yours away? John No, he was returned home - unsupervised, no interference - with the full knowledge of social services. Waite So now we have a situation where an incident occurred, still not completely explained, but in the past and no direct action was taken - no child of yours was removed from your care - but you have another child with a new wife and that's the child that is removed even though there's no evidence whatsoever that there was any harm done to it? John Absolutely. Waite Cases where the system is removing children rather than supporting parents worry Jean Robinson from AIMS. She recalls one case involving a mother with severe postnatal depression. She'd brought up her other children with absolutely no problems, but, because of her depression, her new baby had been placed with foster parents - and she was warned that she may well lose her. Robinson I was actually with her when the social worker said your baby is doing very well with the foster carers, they want to adopt it, unless you are better in two months we shall seriously be putting it up for adoption. We got the mother into a mother and baby unit where she could be with her baby while she got better. The social worker fought right up to the steps of the court against her going. That baby was booked for adoption. Waite And it does seem to be that more babies are being brought into the adoption system, when in fact adoption targets were aimed at older children or those already in the care system. Figures show that, for the over sevens, adoption has decreased or remained static, while the number of babies and younger children being taken into care has been rising. In the mid 1990's around 500 babies under one month old were being taken into care and then adopted every year. Latest figures show this has increased to 1300. While the number of children under the age of one year, taken from their families on the grounds of alleged abuse or neglect, has also more than doubled - from 1,300 10 years ago to 2,800 last year. So are more children being abused by their parents; are we simply more vigilant, or could it be - as Jean Robinson believes - that all too many babies are being wrongly removed? Robinson We have had well over a hundred cases. We are getting women coming to us who are pregnant and already fear that their babies will be taken for adoption. Women who are threatened with having their babies taken. Women whose babies have been taken into care and are put on a fast adoption track. Waite So fast, at times, that a baby has barely been born before it's removed by the authorities. That's what happened to Amanda, again not her real name, who was of interest to social services because she has older children who've been in the care system. But, she says, nothing prepared her for the trauma of what happened when she was in hospital in Scotland about to deliver her latest child. Amanda Just as I was about to give birth to my child and her head was just about to come out when the sheriff officers and the social worker walked into the birthing suite, the doctor took the baby. I tried to get up but I was bleeding. I remember him putting his hand on me and trying to push me back down because he said that the placenta hadn't been delivered yet. And they just took the baby and it was very, very, very quick. I just felt like I wanted to die really. Waite Amanda, eventually, had her baby returned to her and received apologies from the authorities. But it took more than six months. Her story yet another example, according to its critics, of the errors that can occur with an adoption system that now places so much emphasis on speed and targets. Critics like "James", a former social work manager, whose career has been in child protection for the last 25 years. But who resigned last year. In his words - voiced by an actor - not only because the system is wrong, but so - all too often - is the lack of proper training in assessing family behaviour among some of the social workers who have to implement that system. James What you are going to get inevitably are situations where the social worker goes out, sees what's happening misinterprets it, writes the report accordingly, carry out assessments accordingly and you have a family that's presented in a skewed manner. And if the child is removed it becomes far more likely that the child could be freed for adoption than if the child had been allowed to remain in the family home. Waite Jean Robinson agrees. She's seen at first hand many social work assessments, she says, that were far from accurate. Robinson The most shocking thing to me is to see the reports of meetings in a mother's home, at which I was present, or review meetings in a local authority at which I was present and then wonder were we in the same place at the same time? And then I realised how inaccurate and in some cases dishonest is the information that the family court is seeing and which forms the basis of these absolutely draconian decisions. Waite "Draconian" because, once adoption proceedings have started, it can prove extremely difficult for the small number of parents who are falsely accused to stop the process. Parents like "Sue". Her baby had been vomiting and losing weight. So, of course, she took her to hospital for tests. Where, unbeknownst to her, a doctor became suspicious. So, instead of receiving the test results, Sue received a call from the authorities. Sue This doctor had been in contact with them and told them that there was no medical reason for my daughter's weight loss and he was very concerned and he wanted them to look into it. They sought an interim care order, we had to go to court and they said they were concerned for her health, they didn't want her discharged back to my care until they'd investigated her weight loss. Obviously they believed the doctor, they didn't believe me. She was taken into care a week before Christmas. I couldn't understand why she'd been taken off us because actually with the foster carer she continued to vomit and continued to be ill. There was nothing I could do, it was out of my hands. They have a protocol that they follow, procedure, and once you're in that procedure it's very difficult to get out of it. Waite Sue was determined to get out of it , however. And she didn't rest until she'd got her daughter back. It took seven months. Months in which she and her husband combed each and every court paper until they discovered the evidence that proved their baby had a medical condition that explained her symptoms. Sue was lucky. According to social work manager, James, parents that protest, particularly if they get angry at what's happening to them during a home assessment, can find themselves "labelled" by the visiting social workers. James They'll return to their office and write up the interaction as being an aggressive one. The parent will then have a label attached to them and very often with a red flag on the file. If you've developed in the first encounter a reputation for being dangerous or aggressive the expectation of every individual who's read the file following is going to be that you are going to be aggressive. Waite Chris says he was labelled by his social workers whilst fighting to prevent his children from being adopted without his consent. He'd split up from his partner, who was suffering a mental illness. As they weren't married, however, Chris had few parental rights. And despite insisting that he wanted to look after the children, they were taken into care by social services with Chris being branded as "difficult" and "untruthful". He made an official complaint, and asked to see all the files, and eventually received a letter of apology from the local authority concerned. But, even though investigations ruled that Chris had been truthful, and that official assessments of him had not been accurate, it remained a Pyrrhic victory. The speed of the adoption system had overtaken him, and he will never get his children back. Chris You either get a very, very, very small window of appeal when children are being put forward for a full care order to be adopted and it's only normally about six weeks. So here we are 18 months later and we've only just get the evidence that could prove that the case was completely flawed. But it's too late - the children have moved on, they've been adopted, they're in a new home, everything's hunky-dory, except for the fact that the children aren't being brought up by one of their natural birth parents. Waite According to social work manager, James, a momentum is built up in forced adoption cases which can be very hard to halt. Once adoption has been recommended by child protection professionals, and the case comes to the family court. James The chances of parents having a hearing which overthrows that decision or that recommendation are slim. People will find that their children have been removed and freed for adoption without them having had a proper chance to defend themselves and their families and their children. There are some adoptions that go through which should not have. Waite And, it seems, the secretiveness of the family courts themselves is yet another part of the problem. So as to avoid this programme being in contempt of court, we've had to change names and leave out details. Proceedings involving contested adoptions in the family court are virtually always closed with no juries, no public gallery, no journalists allowed. A shroud of secrecy that must be lifted - according to Sarah Harman, a solicitor with 25 years experience of family law and who's represented parents, sat as a judge and campaigned for fair and open justice in the family courts. Harman Once you have secrecy, secrecy breeds bad practice, it breeds suspicion, it feeds parents' sense of injustice when they have their children removed that they're not able to talk about it, they not able to air their grievances. Waite A concern that seems to be spreading even to the courts themselves, where, in the view of one prominent family court judge, Mr Justice Munby: Mr Justice Mumby quote We cannot afford to proceed on the blinkered assumption that there have been no miscarriages of justice in the family justice system. Open and public debate in the media is essential. Harman Children have been removed from their families unjustly, there's no two ways about that. Waite Solicitor Sarah Harman again: Harman The recent figures on adoptions show the increasing number of adoptions of very young children. I think we ought to know the reasons why. I think we ought to know why the court is intervening in families' lives and I think that's a matter of real concern, I think we need more information so that we can judge how well the courts are dealing with adoption. Waite Equally adamant that the current forced adoption process is resulting in miscarriages of justice is the MP for Birmingham Yardley, John Hemming. Hemming There are clearly a large number of cases where the system is going wrong and they can range from ones where children should not be taken into care, also through to ones in which kinship caring - that is the uncles and aunts should be caring for the children or the grandparents should be caring for the children - but instead they're adopted. We're seeing perhaps three or four new cases referred to us every day. We've looked at over a hundred where there seem to be clearly problems. So it's a substantial minority of cases where things are going wrong. Waite MPs have called for a public inquiry into the present system. A matter which Mr Hemming and other members are planning to take up with Jack Straw, the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor, in the autumn. But is it true that there's cause for concern in perhaps as many as a hundred cases of forced adoptions? A point I put to the joint President of the Association of Directors of Children's services for England, John Coughlan. Coughlan Well I simply don't accept that broad language I have to say, I simply don't accept it. Waite We've heard too from solicitor Sarah Harman who says children have been removed from their families unjustly, there is no two ways about it. Coughlan We have something in the region of 60,000 children in the care system at any one time and the majority of those are there through care orders where there has been very careful consideration of the facts. Inevitably those decisions involve ultimately through the courts a judgement of the findings, sometimes based upon a degree of subjective evidence but always evidence which is very, very thoroughly tested through the courts. Waite It doesn't mean though that those unjust decisions aren't being taken. I mean a social worker we've spoken to with 25 years experience says there are adoptions that go through which should not. Coughlan We are talking about the gravest form of decision and we all understand and recognise that and we do have a thorough process which tests those decisions. These are human decisions and inevitably there is the potential for human error which is why we have a process which is so thorough and so prolonged. Waite What about the point that's been made to us in the programme though that in reaching these targets social services, child protection agencies, whatever, have become over zealous, over likely to take children away from their parents unjustifiably? Coughlan The single issue has not been about government targets to do with adoption, it has been about the national reaction to the Lord Laming report into the death of Victoria Climbie which led to a slight increase in the numbers of children who were subject to care proceedings and certainly contributed to authorities acting earlier than they might have done before. Waite Well we've heard from another mother who was actually giving birth when officials arrived - now isn't that a perfect example of this over protectiveness? Coughlan Those are rare circumstances but frankly yes they do happen. We know through all of the research and all of the evidence that in most circumstances the welfare of the child can best be guaranteed by staying within a family and ideally within their own family. And a huge amount of work does go on to try to ensure that. But ultimately you have to take a decision about where the safeguards need to lean towards and yes those safeguards lean towards the protection of the child. Waite We've also heard there's great concern over the high secrecy of the family courts - no public, no media - we've heard from Sarah Harman that cannot be good for justice, it breeds bad practice, it can hide errors and causes suspicion. Coughlan As directors of children services we've been carefully supporting the government in considering ways in which we can make the family courts more open. There's an issue of public confidence and public awareness and that's one of the reasons why we would support a very cautious approach to opening these proceedings more carefully. One of the things that's influenced government decision making and has pulled them back a little bit from the approach to further openness has been the views of children and young people within the system. And in the consultation that they've just gone through children and young people themselves are saying we do not trust the way this process can be made more open, our right to privacy - not secrecy - is more important than that openness. Waite Well as you know, as well as I do, there are a number of parents very concerned about this issue, a number of campaigners, who say they've got scores of examples of where the system isn't working. An MP we've heard from says he has a hundred cases where he thinks things are going wrong. Are you saying, Mr Coughlan, they're all wrong? Coughlan No. What I'm saying is we are working with circumstances which are highly emotive and go to the core of human rights and juxtapose the rights of children to be safe and to be well cared for versus the rights of adults to have a family life and to parent. I am not saying the system we have is perfect, I'm not saying it's not open for improvement, I certainly think it is open for improvement. But I also do know that we have a system which works well and is thoroughly checked and involves a range of processes to scrutinise and objectively assess the decisions that are taken to ensure that we achieve what's most important - namely that children's welfare is protected and safeguarded. Waite John Coughlan. There is, we discovered, one area, however, where the system may be changing, over the strict secrecy of the family courts. In a statement from the Ministry of Justice we were told: Ministry of Justice statement We have developed a new approach based not on who will be allowed into family courts, but on the information coming out of them. As part of this new approach we will be piloting providing more information in particular cases where there is a significant public interest . At the conclusion of such cases, the court will decide whether to produce either a transcript of the judgement or a decision summary. This will be given to the people involved in proceedings and retained for children who were subject to proceedings as children. It will also be anonymised and the reasons for the decision will be made available online for public scrutiny. Waite As for the government's Department for Children, Schools and Families, however, things don't look likely to change. Department for Children, Schools and Families statement There is not, and never has been, a target to take children from their birth parents to meet adoption targets. It may still be appropriate for local authorities to set themselves targets to place children for adoption more quickly, once a decision has been made that adoption is in the child's best interests. Waite But how can it be in the child's best interests to be adopted - an irreversible decision - if its parents have done nothing wrong? Parents, as we've heard, like Joy - a woman who everyone agrees has never done anything to harm her baby daughter. Even so, that child is well advanced now in the process of being adopted - while Joy can only fight frantically to win her back before she loses her forever. Joy I'm getting more panicky. I mean every day is really hard. I've lost my only child, she's my only child I'm ever going to have because my husband's got MS and he can't have anymore children. She hasn't been adopted yet but there's still that chance. Waite Can I be blunt Joy? It would seem surely you're not going to get your daughter back? Joy There's a possibility of that yeah. Waite If that happens what will the effect be on you? Joy It'll probably kill me.

Audio Help Face the Facts Home Contact us Programme Archive Listen again Listen tothe most recent edition Message boards Join the discussion Questions, Questions Woman's Hour Word of Mouth Have yoursayabout Radio 4: The Choice is Yours on bbc.co.uk Asian Network Documentaries BBC Watchdog BBC Education News BBC Food Category BBC Gardening Category BBC Homes Category BBC Learning Category Don't miss We want to hear your experiences

E-mail this to a friend Printable version 'Cheap' care offer angers mother Mandy Thurland and her son Curtis, who has a form of autismThe mother of a boy with special needs says social services tried to take away her son after they refused to offer him a place at a special school. Curtis Thurland, who has a form of autism, has been refused the special education experts feel he needs. His mother, Mandy Thurland, who has the support of her MP in Luton, fears councils are choosing care provision over education because it is cheaper. On Tuesday Luton Borough Council said Curtis's needs were being reassessed. The boy's eccentric and unpredictable behaviour has put him and others in danger. It seems that because of money they are putting a vulnerable child with a disability out of his home Mandy Thurland He was in hospital for two days after being attacked by another boy and he has physically taken out his frustration on his mother. For years Mrs Thurland fought to have her son's condition diagnosed and when it was confirmed he had Asperger's Syndrome she thought the right support would come through. But there was to be no specialist education and she said a social worker then asked her to sign a form for Curtis to go into care. "I said how it this going to solve his educational needs? He needs an education. He needs help with his disability. I said how is putting him into care going to solve this? "I am so angry that they would do this to families. It seems that because of money they are putting a vulnerable child with a disability out of his home." Child psychiatrists and the local MP, Kevin Hopkins, have all written to Luton Borough Council urging them to give Curtis greater support. Mr Hopkins said Curtis needed a residential specialist education in an institution which specialised in Asperger's Syndrome and similar conditions with their associated behavioural problems - not being taken into care. Home tuition Educational psychologist Allan Willis said taking the boy into care would be potentially counter-productive and an inappropriate response in this case. On Tuesday a statement issued by the council said there were no plans to take Curtis into care. "We are doing our very best to meet Curtis's educational needs, which are currently being reassessed. "As an interim measure we have offered home tuition from a highly qualified tutor with substantial experience of working with children with the specific special needs Curtis has. "As with all children, our aim is to support the family in caring for Curtis at home. We have no plans to take him into care."