RSS Feed


It’s Dr SUESS plus SUSPICIOUS MINDS    (it’s like a Mash-up, if you’re simultaneously down with the kids and about 8 years late to the slang)

It is family law, mostly child protection; and a blog that is mainly centred around showing you the key bits of stuff that you didn’t have time to read in full, and adding cynical asides. In my own description, it is “cut and paste plus sarcasm”

Suesspicious minds is overly fascinated by law, and particularly child protection law – I’ll write mainly with a slight Local Authority slant, though I’ve walked in various shoes during my time in family law, so I’m no rabid pro-eugenicist.  I appreciate that not everyone else is quite as law-geeky as me, so I will be trying to break up the very technical law posts with opinion and newsy stuff.  Outside of law, I love sport, fashion, music, beer and cheesecake.  None of the stuff on this blog will ever be a substitute for legal advice, and I won’t ever be talking about individual cases, nor reading (or printing)  any comments that talk about individual cases.  [unless they’re law report cases]

Oh, and obviously, the name is derived from a combination of healthy cynicism, a talent for doing impressions of the vocal style of Roland Gift, and a love of Dr Suess.

A quick addition on comments – I do have to come in and approve them if you’re a first time poster, so don’t automatically assume that you’re being censored, when it may just be that I haven’t gone in to approve them yet.  And after twenty eight days, any individual post is locked down for comments.

I have censored some posts, but with reluctance, as well as the incredible amount of fascinating spam that I get, but I’ve posted a truckload of comments which have had a starkly different view to mine, many of which have been fair, eloquent and reasonable, and some which have not been,  including some which come pretty close to calling me crooked and corrupt.

Boo, hiss, censorship, what about Voltaire and free speech etc. You’re free to have whatever rules or policies you want on your own blog, but  this one is mine, and after twenty eight days on a topic, I’ve run the course of wanting to log in each day to read posts about how I’m a nazi in the pocket of the system, sorry.

237 responses »

  1. Pingback: What Should You Do If Social Services Steal Your Children? A Lesson in How Culture Can Cloud Common Sense « Researching Reform

  2. I read quite a lot of your blog etc. You say that your a family lawyer and you dont believe that social workers lie. I can not only prove that wrong but show you just how corrupt some of them can be. Also my sons can likewise (especially now they are over 21yrs old and allowed to speak for themselves) It is dangerous to think there is no smoke without fire, especially when it involves breaking up the family that can destroy, yes, destroy a child’s life. Care, whether fostering or children’s homes is (and proven) highly damaging to a child, emotionally and educationally. Forced adoption for many is no better.

    • Dear Sheila

      Do I believe that social workers don’t lie? I don’t know that I would go that far. I believe that, as with every profession, there are good and bad people within it, and that even those good and bad people have good and bad days. I think more often than not, where mistakes are made, they are where a social worker has a professional opinion and it is wrong [sometimes they can be very wrong in their opinions, even unfair, without lying], rather than them actively lying; but very very sadly, I do know that social workers, being human beings, do sometimes tell lies.

      It has happened to me very rarely in Court, maybe twice in nearly twenty years but I can think of a telling example where my social worker had filed a statement and was about to give evidence about very detailed conversations they had had at a meeting on X date, and I was taken aside by a group of troubled advocates to tell me that such a meeting had never taken place. On further enquiries, yes, it turned out that the social worker had filed a statement lying about a meeting that had never occurred, and he was sacked that same day. So yes, it happens.

      Do I think it happens routinely? I hope not. Does it happen to some families and do awful things happen as a result? I’m afraid so. Does every single instance of that come to light by careful cross-examination of the social worker and the truth revealed before the Judge makes decisions? It should always do, and the system is based on that being the protection a parent has against professionals telling lies. But in reality, does it always? I’m afraid probably not. Mostly it does, but even a tiny fraction of cases where the truth doesn’t come out, such as yours are tragedies.

      • Dear Suesspiciousminds

        I was encouraged to read your blog as I am currently embroiled in Childrens’ Services myself.

        I would very much like to discuss engaging you to act on my behalf.

        How would we go about having an initial consultation?
        In anticipation


      • Hi Daniel, I’m afraid that this is a law and child protection discussion blog, not a business where I take cases on. I actually work for what a lot of my readers would term “the bad guys”…. I think just above your comment, should be some suggestions I made for good places to get help. I wish you luck.

      • Hi,
        Expert Speakers This is a free event.
        Children screaming to be heard and The Silent Witnesses Conference to be held on July 25th 9am to 5pm at the resource Centre for London on the Holloway road.
        We Invite you or any member of your organization to attend this seated and ticketed event.
        There is no charge a donation to the registered charity is appreciated on the day all tickets can be collected on the day from a member of our team.
        The aims of the conference is to which aims to prevent physical, emotional and sexual abuse and neglect of children
        by promoting the physical, emotional, and social well-being of children. We aim to promote the rights of children
        as citizens, through multi-disciplinary collaboration, education, campaigning and other appropriate activities’
        1:-The fact is that parents who have committed no crime are losing their children to forced adoption!
        2:-Experts who depend on court appearances for a living, nearly always agree with the local authority.They make predictions that parents just might abuse their children (including newborn babies) in the future ,so these parents lose their children to permanent fostercare or adoption,not for something they have done but for something they might (or might not) do!
        3:-Over 1000 UK children /month are taken into care ,Fosterers are paid an average £400/week per child (birth mothers get around £20/week),and a foster agency founded by social workers getting around £1500/week per child was recently sold for £130million !A real money driven industry !!
        4:-Parents whose children have been taken are gagged and threatened with prison if they protest publicly;At contact parents are gagged again and forbidden to get emotional,to speak any foreign language,or to discuss the case with their children otherwise contact will be stopped.
        5:-More children are taken for emotional abuse than physical and sexual abuse added together.Despite “baby P” the number taken for physical abuse is steadily falling as a percentage of the total number of children taken.
        6:-What are the solutions?
        (a)Impose criminal rules of evidence in family courts so children cannot be taken unless parents are proved to have committed a crime affecting their children. Also parents would be free to obtain a second opinion from an expert of their own choosing.
        (b)Abolish all gagging of parents leaving them free to protest openly if their children are taken, and also to say what they like to them at contact without censorship ! Two very simple changes, two very obvious solutions.,but will anyone impose them and derail the money-train ?
        Don’t hold your breath.
        Our Facebook Page
        Email Andy
        Telephone 01469 510 558 Mobile 07827731060

      • i cannot help but notice that you mentioned cross examination of the local authority, i sadly in all honesty can say that the only persons that were cross examined in the family law court were myself and my partner, niether of our barristers cross examined anyone, with the end result being forced adoption of our children, was this fair, i think not

      • That is very sad. You would have been entitled to have had questions asked of the Local Authority witnesses. Ultimately, whilst a barrister may give you advice and they may well have damn good reasons for that advice, if you disagree with them, you can still tell them what you want them to do on your behalf.

        There is a principle of advocacy that you only ask questions if it will improve your case, so that might be a reason for them advising against it; but a barrister does have a duty to ‘fearlessly represent’ you and your instructions, even if you are going against their advice.

    • Wendy Wolfendale

      Please can anyone help.
      My daughter and her partner have no idea what happened to our 3 year old back in September 12.(she had been smoking weed for some years – so not completely a Mary Poppins) But a consultant said it was “child abuse” -nb he specializes in this subject. A further £3000 report basically said “I don’t KNOW either, so I’ll agree with him”. Suddenly they are in the “pool of perpetrators”. Self infliction or a medical condition are just ruled out – bang.
      So a Lancashire in January. No more contact from Social Services or the Guardian; done deal as far as they are concerned.
      Relationship broken, new house, drug free, city and guilds in Childcare course. Counted for NOTHING.
      Friday 17th May – adoption.
      Friday 24th May – final goodbye booked.
      This is madness, sheer madness – she has lost her baby for something that NO-ONE saw or knew about. Police have said from day 1, there is no case to answer as there is NO evidence at all that they “injured” him.
      We hardly have time to breath, let alone launch and appeal –

    • I know some of them lie I’ve been on the backend of their lies managed to win the case but it destroyed my career and left my future in doubt if I can’t go back to work how am I meant to provide a role model and a decent living for my children. Something which social services don’t give a shit about having told me it isn’t their problem and I should retrain get a new career despite being highly qualified and experienced in childcare

  3. I totally agree with Sheila. My 12 year old daughter and I are currently waiting for final assessments , so we can go to court and have the Care Order lifted.
    She has been in care for nearly 5 years.
    ‘Risk of Emotional Abuse’ category ( seeing her dad had anger management issues NEVER directed at her, but only towards others, sometimes in her presence).
    The most tragically absurd thing is: she suffers FAR GREATER EMOTIONALLY in her foster placement, her health suffered SIGNIFICANTLY due to poor nutrition and constant worry and stress in her life. She is also subjected to RACIAL discrimination – being of a mixed race ( almost porcelain-fair skin complexion), SW decided to place her with Jamaican foster carer, her daughter and another Jamaican fostered child.
    So my daughter is always told she is not ‘full-black’. not ‘one of them’, et cetera.
    Its all too much for anyone to comprehend these atrocities happen in this day and age in the modern society, the country that signed the European Convention of Human Rights.
    My little girl developed more ’emotional issues’ during this 5 years in ‘so-called care’,
    she is now scarred for life. We will be bearing these scars for the rest of our lives.
    Dont tell us about good and bad people and social workers.
    The amount of harm to come from an average bad person before they end up is jail is nothing compared to the amount of harm from a social worker throughout their questionable career-and ,surprisingly,its very rare they get prosecuted/convicted and locked up.
    Any action taken against them is investigated by their own… you get my drift.

    • andrea marley

      I totally agree with you Anastasia in everything you say. My wee boy is mixed race wuth a white family. He’s broken hearted. Them sw don’t realise they damage the child. They do lie and they are heartless. I’ve seen it all. My boy has only been away a week over nothing saying my mental health is doolally which I was diagnised with diabetis and the medication was making me I’ll. I hope them sw get what’s coming to them. Theyr evil demons. Andrea

  4. I totally agree with Sheila. My 12 year old daughter and I are currently waiting for final assessments , so we can go to court and have the Care Order lifted.
    She has been in care for nearly 5 years.
    ‘Risk of Emotional Abuse’ category ( seeing her dad had anger management issues NEVER directed at her, but only towards others, sometimes in her presence).
    The most tragically absurd thing is: she suffers FAR GREATER EMOTIONALLY in her foster placement, her health suffered SIGNIFICANTLY due to poor nutrition and constant worry and stress in her life. She is also subjected to RACIAL discrimination – being of a mixed race ( almost porcelain-fair skin complexion), SW decided to place her with Jamaican foster carer, her daughter and another Jamaican fostered child.
    So my daughter is always told she is not ‘full-black’. not ‘one of them’, et cetera.
    Its all too much for anyone to comprehend these atrocities happen in this day and age in the modern society, the country that signed the European Convention of Human Rights.
    My little girl developed more ‘emotional issues’ during this 5 years in ‘so-called care’,
    she is now scarred for life. We will be bearing these scars for the rest of our lives.
    Dont tell us about good and bad people and social workers.
    The amount of harm to come from an average bad person before they end up is jail is nothing compared to the amount of harm from a social worker throughout their questionable career-and ,surprisingly,its very rare they get prosecuted/convicted and locked up.
    Any action taken against them is investigated by their own… you get my drift.

    • I so understand your situation. Children who know they are loved and feel secure can cope with situations where there is disagreement and even arguments between parents and even anger for other people. They actually grow up knowing that life is not perfect and that life is full of ups and downs but they can learn from it and not only survive it but do better. They also learn that in spite of life’s ups and downs and differences there is something solid that cannot be broken, the fact that no matter the parents imperfections they are loved. To a child, this is something solid that the child can build on.
      To remove a child in these circumstances not only puts the child at greater risk of ‘abuse’ of all sorts but ingrains in the child that anything less than ‘perfect’ is unacceptable.
      The truth is that no-one is perfect but a child will have a view of him/her self that he/she is also not acceptable in the path of life.
      For you, so very sadly your daughter has also suffered racial issues and it is a fact of life (unknown or ignored by some social workers) that there is many forms of racial abuse, not just between black or white but beween different ‘shades’ of black of white. Just as there is between working class to the rich. Not many want it but it exists. But like you know, life and our existence on this planet cannot be rushed and until the time is right no person or govenment can enforce a global world of harmony until its ready.
      In the meantime I send my love and respect and feel so sad that your daughter is subject to such hostility. But I think there was a short straw drawn here as so many Jamaican people are such loving people. I so hope that it is resolved soon.
      And yes, I also agree with you that to spend time in jail is nothing compared with losing your child or having social services spending every day involved in your life in a negative way.
      They are not the child protection they say they are. The problems to the child can be far more severe than anything suffered within their family. x

  5. I understand fully what you are saying, as do my sons. To put a child in care as most solicitors already know is not in the child’s best interests. Yet these care orders are still put through in their hundreds every day of the week leaving children scarred for life with terrible emotional, physical and sometimes sexual abuse received during care. The govenments answer to this is rush through adoptions. For a seriously abused child this may be the answer, the chance of a life within a family that hopefully will love and protect them. But the sad truth is many forced adoptions do not work, care has been proven not to work and there needs to be a time when the system will finally accept that for many children the answer is to work with the family. At least this should happen with most families unless there is proven sexual abuse, serious violent behaviour or serious drug problem. Would this protect the children? I think it would have a better chance than the child protection system at present. And for obvious reasons, on research there is more abuse within care than outside of it, children failure rates (education and emotional) are far higher with children who entered care, documented abuse is vast within care, a high number of children leaving care have no-one to support them, often due to the social workers and courts removing all family, including extended family from their lives, children are far too often removed from caring and loving families and the child, then adult, leaves care with an intense hatred of authority, (as do children who have suffered some emotional/physical abuse from parents) for the reason they understand that no-one helped their parent/parents in a crisis/ill health/housing etc. They then see a cruel and uncaring world where if they had a problem the system would only condemn them just at it did their parent/parents. Yes these people who remove children, from social workers to county halls to all involved need a reality check.

  6. SS lie, Cafcass lie, solicitors lie, they all collude together in this billion pound industry. They are all in bed together. They are cold hearted, emotionless people who purport to have the best interest of children and families, THEY DO NOT. The way they conduct themselves is a national disgrace, SS get millions in government funding for meeting adoption targets.
    The most disturbing part is is the trauma that parents and children suffer from being parted. You need traumatised people because they are then dependent on a health care and social care system that simply does not provide care. Traumatised people are also compliant and conform to what they are told. They never aspire to much because they have no fight left. They struggle with the trauma on a daily basis and to live a good life.

  7. I tried to comment on one of your posts (what to do when social services steal your children) i would like to share my experience both as a parent and an ex- professional. I will cut the long story short. My child disclosed that another adult exposed his penis and let my daughter touch it. i reported this. She also disclosed to police, social services and nursery. I alerted social services previously that this man had an alleged past and the mother was a risk but they failed to act, My daughter was returned a year later, and my social was accused by both myself and another social services of failing in the duty of care. On return my daughter disclosed what had happened. Social services became vexatious, altered meetings ensuring i went to the wrong location, falsified medical records, falsified reasons for child protection, falsified police investigations blah blah. They snatched my daughter last year and mislead the courts. In court we proved they had lied. I have to be supervised because i am a risk because i think pedophilia is wrong and perjury is wrong. Social Services thing is is normal what my child has said. Social Services constantly canceled contact sessions and we had evidence of police hearing them cancel contact but social services lied saying i canceled contact. The judge ignored police evidence supporting me. It came out that this man was reported my his ex wife 25 years ago for his other daughter saying similar thing. Another person came forward that he had done things to him as a child. Social Services had no concerns of sexual abuse.

    Social Services said it was emotional abuse reporting suspected abuse and also i was wrong to follow their advice – yes that is correct i followed their advice and they said i should not of done what a previous social worker to me to do.

    I was also considered a high risk because i made complaints, contacted my MP and was a fan of the X Files. These were the reasons given that social services hijacked my court case against them for failing to protect and make it public law.

    I am ordered to see a psych and until i say that child abuse is acceptable and there could be a logical explanation that 3 children from 3 different generations have all said he exposed and let him touch his penis i am a risk to my daughter.

    • Its a seriously bad situation when you try and protect your child and you have the whole weight of social services against you. Any parent who reports any abuse especially sexual will become a target for the social services and consider that parent as a greater risk than a offender.
      When you consider a child is at high risk of abuse within ‘care’ it becomes very ‘dubious’ as to what ‘care’ is really meant for. And all the knowledge and research I have done proves to me that there are some very sinsiter motives, besides financial gain, for all parties removing children.
      Yesterday I replied to a blog, again on dishonesty of social workers. And I will say it again here, most social workers are NOT angels working to protect children, nor are most carers including children’s homes, foster carers and adopting parents. If the financial rewards were taken away, not many would be left in the bag, so to speak. If these people really cared about children they would be whistleblowing most days, campaigning with the many groups, campaigning with people who have suffered abuse in care, and giving their time helping parents who have had their children wrongfully removed. They would also not work within a ‘regime’ of social services care without fully complaining about bad decisions and alerting the top of the tree. On top of that they would spend time campaigning, writing to MPs fighting for change in family law and signing petitions to open up family courts.
      Adopting couples and singles would also insist on full knowlege of any child they may consider adopting and would certainly expect the parents to have contact with their own birth child, even if this was by supervised contact until no risk is proven.
      But the sad fact is, history has proven these people do not work in the best interests of the child and so many of them have proven who and what they really are.
      Therefore it is true that social workers, carers, foster carers and adopted parents will lie, work against ethics, tamper and change reports and assessments, add false information, accuse you of the unthinkable, build a negative profile against the birth parent and fail to assist the birth family.
      In all of this, the child is of no real concern to them. They are all fighting for their own personel gain.
      It is only the birth parents and extended family who are fighting for the rights of the child. They are the only ones where the love of the child already exists.
      This means that most cases that go before a court can be broken up as such.
      Out of every 100 children there are perhaps 10 who should have been removed and given a chance of a life within another family. And those are the cases of proven serious abuse.
      The rest range from no harm to the child and moderate harm where in all the cases I know and have researched should have been resolved by no action or support by a ‘caring’ supportive social system.
      Givin that the financial burden to the country would be less, the damage to children would be less, that there would be less people obtaining financial gain, less adopting families having a chance of adopting, less private children’s homes having financial gains (some charge on average £3,500 per week) less high ranking council officials making money out of them, and the list goes on.
      I cannot see an end to all this yet, until birth parents can realize their strengths, compile their cases and unite in a large group to prove the corruption. Of course so many parents are so distraught, so damaged and so worried about their children that paperwork is bottom of the list. Parents are also not lawyers and the system is not geared ln a legal way to deal with these corrupt social workers and carers.And nor is the law itself, the family courts are not there for any form of justice.
      So ALL birth families should realise that it can happen to anyone (especially the vulnable or those in crisis) If you are not a lawyer you can lose your children. And even being one will not always protect you against the vast headhunters that exist within a corrupt system.
      For all of you fighting for your children and anyone who reads this whether in law, social services, care, carer or other please help build a better future for ALL children. A negligent and damaging system such as it stands is destroying lives every day.
      And as the letter says above. The system is also keeping sexual abuse as a taboo subject and therefore does NOT help real victims of sexual abuse to speak out nor does it encourage those who are concerned of it in reporting it.
      Just as being a victim of domestic violence, many women (and sometimes men) lose their children, every day for this reason.
      The system makes a victim a lifetime victim. It is a non-working model.

  8. Much sense spoken on this blog :)

    • I speak a fair bit of nonsense too though Jennifer, but thank you very much. If that is, as I suspect, a pseudoynm, then you have chosen well, it was one of my favourite songs growing up. If it is your real name, then wow, top name!

  9. I recently lost my children to a secret court and had no chance of securing their return. They were taken because we didn’t have a dentist (just moved in to the area) and the fact that my eldest son was told off for stealing at school.
    We’re an independent film company based in the UK and with out skills and knowledge already collected from families we intend to release a 90 minute Documentary in the style of Roger Cooke and Micheal Moore. We have plenty of interest from media sources.
    Below is a brief synopsis of our intentions:
    Have you been affected by the Social Services? if so we need your assistance. We’re currently making a 90 minute documentary highlighting the corruption within this department.
    We’re looking for families destroyed by trigger happy social workers, having their children taken for the most ridiculous reasons.

    If you would like to take part and get your story heard then please contact us. We can promise total privacy if you wish to stay that way or give you the airtime you deserve. I can travel to you for interviews etc, they will be no cost to you, only an hour of your time to share your story. It will also receive global coverage.
    With your help we can show the corruption within a service sworn to protect!

    If your interested please contact us via email or PM me and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

    Kind regards,
    Emma Ibbitson
    Producer at Pete Middleton Pictures.

    • Hi Emma,

      I hope it’s not to late to contact you, maybe you or someone else can help?

      Just found this site and the discussions within.

      Just sent my sister an email with the links and said to her this is incredible, If my family and I were not going through the hell of our family being torn apart with the same sort of trauma right now I would honestly think this was fantasy, sadly I know only too well that every comment on this site is too believable.
      I am shocked and devastated that in this country in 2013 that children can be taken away from their immediate and extended family with no abuse or neglect taking place and with the full knowledge and collusion of officials who would usually be expected to help and support being responsible for destroying families.

      I’m disgusted that anyone as long as they can afford go to university and get qualified can then act as judge, jury and exceutioner in a childs life, and yet as soon as one SW makes a biased decision or personal opinion that you are either innocent or guilty, suitable or not suitable they can freely make accusations without proof and yet with the full support and endorsement of all around them.
      My nephew has been taken into care, my mum as his guardian was given 10 mins to get a solicitor and attend court and has been battling unsuccessfully since January this year, the final court date is set for 2 weeks and yet the reports make it clear that they have no intention of returning him and in fact ending contact with all of us so he can stay with foster carers in another county.

      • Hi Donna
        I wonder if you saw our story in the Daily Mail this week. We lost our little boy in another case of SS cock-ups. Do they care what pain they leave in their wake?

  10. Dear ‘Dr Suess’

    I came across your blog as I searched how to keep your children with social services involvement, I will not go into details publishing my experiences online, I ave been sanctioned for it before but I wondered if you knew if moving from the grasps of one local authority and though it may harm my case toi say so one HIGHLY unprofessional social worker, to another would help me, you see I am now pregnant with my 3rd child and lost custody of last two. I wish to show that I have changed, made many sacrifices, found courses in confidence building, emotional management and parenting, all things I have done before but am happy to do again to prove to a judge that I am willing to do anything it takes for this child. Then one day I can apply to have my others returned to me?

    I would appreciate an email reply in your own time of course x

    Thank you

  11. Hi there, I came across your blog occidentally when searching on social services, I have been involved with them for 4 years, rather them me really but it has cost me 2 children courtesy of one social worker who I won’t go into but I can prove highly unprofessional and a downright lier, yet have never been given chance. However right now my main concern is the fact I am 10 weeks pregnant. I have already told the local authority here, I have moved towns and councils and pray this gives me a chance to be assessed as a sole carer, something that has yet to happen!

    I have given up smoking, admitted faults with first child, moved home, in fact was homeless and dragged myself with major morning sickness to estate agents begging for help till I managed to acquire a 2 bed house which is costing me £30 a week out of my £60 a week benefit just to keep hold of. I am job-seeking for the first time in a decade. I have found a women’s centre where I have applied for multiple courses, a children’s centre and applied for parenting courses, everything and anything I can think of to find support and a solicitor.

    If you can pls think of anything else that may help me then pls pls feel free to message me or email. I am so so desperate not to lose another child. I am a wonderful mother, if I could call witnesses in court I would have hundreds.

    Thank you x

    • Hello, it is a bit difficult to give advice here, but it sounds to me like you have made the best possible start, you’ve moved away and made efforts to fix the problems that were there in the past, and you’ve actually taken practical steps. You should be given the opportunity to show that the changes that you have made mean that you can safely care for a child and I would hope that you would be given that opportunity, which you need to grab hold of with both hands. It really does sound to me that you are a different person now, and I hope very much that things work out for you. Don’t lose your cool, even if the social workers don’t want to give you that chance, you can still fight the case in court.

    • I would suggest beg, borrow (but not steal ;-) ) to get a private independent parenting assessment that you have at the ready. Not sure why you would divulge to the LA that you are 10 weeks pregnant, they may see this as an invitation to harass you and prepare a case against you. If you can, also get a private, independent mental health assessment to show you are sane and possess no risk. You could try contacting charities to see if they can help with either funding or free third sector assistance with either of those things. Prepare yourself with as much evidence as possible, don’t trust anything to fate or chance. They will play dirty more than likely and you need to be prepared.

      I agree with others about social workers lying, they did it outrageously with us and sometimes knowing independent witnesses were there to prove they had made it up. Such is their arrogance and feeling of untouchableness they have no compunction in doing it. Rather than assuming most social workers are good with only a handful of rotten apples, I would say it’s more likely the other way round. There is just such an outcry out there about social services doing this. The system protects them and they know it.

  12. Sorry Moderator – I need to edit a couple of things

    I have a friend.. I know it’s a cliche – who had a quarrel with her extended family on holiday abroad -part of ongoing strife for many years.
    When she returned she was met by police at the airport – Her child (age range 10 – 12) and her sister and her niece (with both of whom she had argued) were taken by the police to another city 50 miles away for a social services interview. My friend was left at the airport unable to put her side of the case.

    The rest of the family must have planned this meeting before leaving the country where they were holidaying. They went off with her luggage and she was left alone in the airport. She had no idea who to call or what to do and it was 11pm.

    By the time Social Services arranged to see her 3 days later she was too ill to get to the appointment. Her daughter is now in the ‘protective custody’ of other family members and although they are required to make visiting arrangements they don’t respond to calls from her solicitor or social worker and my friend is not allowed to contact her daughter direct. She has not been able to contact or hear from her daughter for 9 weeks now.

    She engaged a solicitor who told her that legal aid is not available for these cases and charged over £900 for a preliminary appearance in court which achieved nothing. The police interviewed her over the family’s allegations that she beat her child – there were no marks or any other evidence. The Mum had quarrelled with her family and they had sided against her so the holiday had been ruined, There had been shouting on both sides but no evidence of any kind of abuse and any possibility of charges was dropped.

    My friend was at breaking point so we paid for her to go away for 2 weeks to come to terms with her bereavement and gather strength.

    When she returned the solicitor had done nothing to collect statements – My wife and I are both happy to testify that her daughter has shown no signs at all of physical or mental abuse over the years we have known them but he has not contacted us.

    The solicitor said he needed a copy of the report showing her innocence and charged over £90 to obtain it.

    He had to adjourn the court case for two weeks because he had not asked for the report before.

    Last week he said that the next court appearance – ‘which would definitely result in arrangements for visits’ – would cost about £300

    This week he said he needs to be paid £1000 to attend court.

    All her hopes are fixed on this court appearance. So if she does not get the £1000 she fears that she will lose her daughter. She has been told that her daughter does not want to see her but this is based on a videoed interview (which her nice lied the mother had given consent for) just after the holiday when her daughter was upset and vulnerable to suggestions and influence. We do not know of any contact between social services and the niece(who has protective custody) since the videoed interview so how do they know the daughter still feels the same way?

    My friend has no job and has suffered terribly since this happened. She is staying at our home -hates the idea of returning to her home without her daughter. We have funded her legal fees but cannot afford to any longer.

    What kind of system is this? – I phoned the social worker on her behalf when she was too ill to make the appointment and was stunned at the disbelief and cynicism in her voice. The social worker has been on holiday almost all the time since but was shocked that my friend needed a break.

    Although my friend was available by phone during her break neither solicitor or social worker contacted her for an interview or to mention the police report in her favour – they only expressed disapproval that she needed a break.

    My question is – How are people expected to pay thousands of pounds when their children have literally been kidnapped by the state and they have no income?

    Is there some support group? – Surely family law should be accessible to families – with all their faults, quarrels and financial hardship. Not run by middle class professionals with middle class incomes for middle class professionals with middle class incomes.

    Is family justice now a consumer commodity for the well off?

    Is there a way of going to mediation rather than the courts with all their costs?

    The Small Claims court provides mediation alternatives if people argue over money.

    if there is no mediation alternative to court for families this shows us all where the true heart of this nation and its governors lies. – In both senses of the word

    • This all sounds very awful. The availability of free legal advice depends on whether this is ‘private’ family law (i.e the argument is between your friend and her family) in which case most free advice has now gone due to changes in the law, or ‘public’ (i.e that the argument is between your friend and Social Services) in which case free legal advice ought to be available. It sounds to me that although the child is staying with family members, the quarrel is really between your friend and Social Services.

      I’m afraid I am not able to give specific advice on particular cases, but the first thing your friend should do is work out if this is a private family law case (in which case the applications will be for Residence or Contact) or a public law case (in which case the application would be made by Social Services and would be for a Care or Supervision Order). If the latter, she can get free legal advice.

      If the former, she won’t get free legal advice, but there are alternatives to paying the sort of sums that she is paying. One would be to find a solicitor who wouldn’t be charging so much (those rates sound on the high side to me), and another would be to find a MacKenzie Friend, who may be able to help with advice and how the court system work. Some of them do charge, but not to the levels talked about here. I also heartily recommmend Lucy Reed’s book, Family Courts without a lawyer (which is a guide to the basics of family law) and her website here

      If you want a MacKenzie Friend, several of them post on this site – it would depend whereabouts in the country you are, but if you look on this site for Jerry, I am sure he can point your friend in helpful directions, to find someone who can genuinely help your friend in this awful situation.

  13. lauri brierley

    Can you give me an email I need some emergency advice
    Regards lauri

    • Hi Lauri, I’m afraid I am not an advice site, so can’t provide advice on any individual case. Good sources of advice are Lucy’s site, linked to in one of the earlier comments, MacKenzie Friends or solicitors who are on the Children Panel. If you google “family solicitors in X” (X being your nearest big town or city) that should turn you some up.

  14. At the very beginning of this conversation you stated that not many social workers will lie, that some may be having bad days and so on. So could you answer this please.
    1/ Does a solicitor for an LA fact find before presenting a case into court for a social services department.
    2/ What are your thoughts on the huge immunity that social workers have in a family court
    3/ If it is proven in a family court that the social worker lied why do the LA solicitors continue to fight to present a case for the social worker involved and against the parents
    4/ Why do most Judges refuse to act on this contempt of court and or perverting the course of justice by the social workers and refuse to hold meetings or pass the matter to the police.
    5/ Why are the children still not returned in these cases
    6/ Why are records held at social services still not corrected by the information given in court.
    7/ Why when the evidence in court proves lies and deception by the social worker does the LA then insist on psychological reports on the parents when it should be done on the social worker who has with malice destroyed a family.

  15. And to move these questions on to a question of ‘sinister’ motives as given on so many blogs and family rights activists.
    1/ Why having realised that the above is in fact, FACTS, why is there NO legal aid assistance for parents who have proved the above to take a case against the LA and social worker.
    2/ Why are Judges refusing leave to appeal.
    3/ Why are forced adoptions allowed in this country yet banned in most other countries.
    4/ When the reason for cash incentives was made it was to help children who have been lost in the care system for some years. But it in fact brought a fast track route to forced adoptions, 4000 unborn babies on child protection registers and the list goes on. FACT most children are adopted under the age of 4yrs old because adopters want the perfect family adding to the knowledge that too many are doing it to satisfy their own needs and not for the child.

  16. Spin doctors.
    Why are cases of child deaths by parents/step parents so highlighted and for such long periods of time when:-
    1/ Cases of child deaths by adopted parents, foster carers and carers hardly ever reach the headlines.
    2/ Child deaths or serious injury have also occured by restraints against a child/young person by carers within the care system but not reported on.
    3/ LAs social workers and children’s home carers and managers are not financially punished by the system for children who are not receiving education but parents are financially punished and/or receiving prison sentences.
    4/ Why are draconian measures used by serving injunctions on parents and sometimes entire families when a social worker has been proven to lie in court,

  17. SCRs are important where child/baby serious injury or death has occured and much can be learnt from them. (sorry but usually LA or social worker or system negligence) BUT
    1/ Where are the SCRs on child suicides within the care system.and up to the age of 25yrs when the LA are stilll responsible.
    2/ Where are the SCRs on serious injury or death within LA care on illegal restraints, excessive use of legal restraints, bad drug administration, failure in duty of care, child inflcted injury, self harm, carer abuse and the many other instances where child death or serious injury has occured while under state care.
    3/ Why are there no serious case reviews of children that have been failed by the protective industry by receiving poorer care under the state care than had they remained with their birth families. i.e. Children that have experienced serious sexual, physical, emotional and neglet within the LA care.

  18. Also under the heading of serious case reviews should be the lack of care to under 25’s in accommodation assistance to those leaving care.
    The reasons being thus:-
    Most care leavers are offered hostel rooms already let down by the system of protective care. These young people are also being denied a key worker support.
    These hostels are renowned for inapproiate accommodation where drug abuse is common, no job seeking assistance, crime and lack of role model support that has led to serious injury, suicides and drug problems for young people.
    These young people have been long term seperated from their birth families and often for little or no reason. Some do not even know where or how to contact their birth families.
    For those that do manage to contact their birth families, the birth family may not be able to offer the extent of support needed for such damaged young people.
    These young people are no longer children, the system does not want to know them. The birth families are left to mop up the damage and try to reshape a better future for their off spring. Yet ironically they were the ones deemed unfit to parent in a family court.

  19. Political hypocrites
    Failure to bring in legislation to protect human rights in family courts.
    Failure to bring in legislation to protect the birth family against offences by public service workers and civil servants.
    Failure to protect children or care leavers from state abuse.
    Failure to bring in legislation to protect the children against their loss of identity or give legal assistance appropiate to their age.
    Failure to protect the children from offences by public service workers and civil servants in family court proceedings and therefore also denying their human rights.

    The Lord Justice Sir James Munby has just scratched the surface, he has been the only person to have at least attempted it. It is in the childs best interests that he continues to do so.

  20. Ashamedtobebritish

    How do you fancy writing a blog on the plight of some friends?

    The coroner did not see an inquest to be important as the local authority are blameless, this child had pneumonia, if he’d been taken to hospital as begged by the parents he’d be alive

    • Wendy Wolfendale

      My Grandson was taken from our family because of a suspected Non Accidental Injury, this was then impossible to prove so the judgement was a Lancashire Finding ie He did and she covered it up or vice versa, either way the Court couldn’t blame anyone. But then handed down the maximum sentence – adoption.
      We have NO IDEA where he is or who he is with? We don’t know if he is safe or not. Would the adopters take him to hospital if he was ill or would they be scared of the same fate we suffered because we took him to the doctors?
      This country stinks. I never thought you would hear me say that,

      • Ashamed to be British

        Am working on a case of exactly the same issue, it has been proven, child A is still displaying the same behvioural problems nearly 3 years after removal (but the LA say there is nothing wrong) and child B has been hospitalised after suffering an epileptic fit (but the LA refuse to accept this)
        So what happens next? Parents are getting frightened to get their child medical assistance in case they are accused – if they don’t take them it’s medical neglect
        I’m so sorry to hear your plight, hang on to the fact that he will come looking they always do

    • Dear Sandy, this is a very awful and sad case. I am surprised that there is not going to be an inquest, and that is obviously very disappointing. It must be right that this is properly investigated and the facts set out. An inquest would, it seems to me, to have been the best way of doing that with proper independence. This family are entitled to know whether this could have been prevented.

      • Ashamed to be British

        They already know it could have been, they begged for him to get medical help as he had breathing problems and severe conjuctivitis, all treatable with antibiotics, but they were refused
        The LA is guilty of medical neglect and causing or allowing the death of a minor under the age of 16
        The parents weren’t informed until 4 and a half hours after his death, there should be a national outrage over this, JJ was a clean, happy and well loved little boy in his parents’ care, yet dead in the ‘care’ of the LA
        The so called justice system just tried to cover his death up, disgrace

      • If it had been his natural parents there would have been an inquest, the parents implicated for neglet and a SCR.

        So sadness will not do, disappointing will not do, sympathy will not do. This child is ANOTHER one who died because of 2 reasons. The negligence of the social services, the bully tactics of over powered and corrupt social work departments and their managers who blindly take children to cover their own backs and make money at the same time. And keep a load of idiots in jobs.

        I can quite understand when f4j wanted to kidnap a politicians child to let them know how it feels. But then it would not have given the full impact, their stolen child would have at least been looked after properly until returned and returned it would have been. Unlike the thousands of innocents parents who never see them again.


    Message more important than the F word below

    Tip of the iceberg, so many children being abused and or murdered by foster carers, in children’s homes and by adopted parents.
    Forced adoption should be made illegal
    Social workers should be prosecuted for perjury and contempt in a family court.
    Anyone removing children for anything other than a serious reason are on the bandwaggon of abuse to children.
    Patch up on a non working system does not protect children or innocent parents. Social services should be removed from any child protection and made to work with birth families to trouble shoot any concerns.
    Where serious harm is suspected it should be a police matter only. And the child removed to respite care until a full and proper investigation is carried out. Supervised contact should be a must to oversee the children are properly cared for and ALL and EVERY PERSON including the parents should have the rights to have concerns investigated.
    Family court proceedings should only happen when the police can prove a crime has been committed by a parent or parents.
    No child should be subject to adoption unless a crime can be proved in a criminal court.
    Emotional should be dealt with by social workers, as poverty, crisis, ill health and relationship breakdown giving support and practical assistance.
    Unexplained minor injuries if frequent or doubtfull (cig burns, bites, etc) could mean a move to respite care for 3 months to monitor the minor but frequent injuries before police intervention.
    Fractures etc should be properly investigated for all options of a medical condition. If major concerns then respite should be used for 3 months.
    Respite carers should be properly trained and registered.

    It is quite easy to do a new blueprint. Why does it not happen. I

  22. I am tired of writing FACTUAL and proven facts and nothing being done. Blogs, campaigns, protests, letters, MPs, solicitors and all the crap. At the end of the day these social workers are gaining powers beyond all explanations, they continue to be negligent where they ARE needed and the whole system is corrupt and negligent at best. Even the decent social workers will state that. Whistleblowers are punished, parents are bereaved and in huge trauma, mental health is on the increase and children are being murdered and abused on a far greater scale than by natural parents.
    Somewhere I can see the point of taking the law into your own hands. This country is DEAD in the water. It has NO principles, does not care for those that fought for it, has NO heart and is run by those in ignorance and money powered.
    Sad but true.
    No wonder the people are demanding some power in every country around the world who are suffering the same.
    To the rich and powerful who ignor the warnings, I can only say. YOU WILL LOSE. You will have no-one left who cares or will protect you.
    As for the crap social workers who get off on these blogs. F–K you, your days will be numbered.
    You no doubt have no soldiers in your families because your all money grabbing deceitful and cowardly excuses for human beings.

  23. And no I will not take that back and will not apologise. Because I have seen too many children suffer at your dirty hands.

  24. I went to court to fight for my son. I won the case with the local authority admitting at the final hearing all their concerns about me were unfounded. My son was never removed from my care and the social services admitted their concerns were mostly relating to my son’s father however the initial court papers were full of inaccuracies most of which I could prove were not true at best and bare faced lies at worse. The haphazard apology I received from the local authority does not make up for the 7 months of hell I went through neither does it excuse the fact my career was left in tatters thanks to their actions.
    But you can win cases even if your child has been removed by doing everything they want even if you don’t agree. I gave that advice to a young girl whose son was put into care and now she has him back permanently some social workers are jobs worth but for anyone fighting the system there is hope if your a good parent who doesn’t neglect or harm your children you just have to tow the line and prove it

    This is my story. Does anyone know a doctor who would look at the photos of my grandson on that fateful hospital trip and offer an answer. My daughter or her boyfriend did not harm her baby, so there has to be a real reason – I’m not a doctor, could you help?

    [Sorry Wendy, have taken out your surname just in case it is the same surname as the child’s. If anyone is able to help Wendy though – put your email up and she can contact you directly. Suesspicious Minds]

    • Ashamed to be British

      Hi Wendy, a friend put your case before me a couple of days ago, have you looked through facebook to find family army open group? If you join there I’ll let you in, we can try to help

  26. Hiya Sues I dunno if you remember me but I was the lady who posted about being pregnant right after losing my last child to their abusive father and was determined to do all I can to keep custody of my unborn baby.

    Since then I have been working with my LA and SW’s and managed to sort a house, a voluntary position for a women’s centre as admin and found, myself, so many local networks and charities willing to support me that my SW has joked many times they should be paying me their wages!

    I have admitted my faults from the past and at the same time proven that the last SW I had in another town WAS corrupt, not only am I keeping ym unborn child BUT this has also meant I have been fast tracked to a final court hearing where I am expected to be granted weekend access to my last child.

    The SW put in a report from Feb 2013 I never reported any abuse from my ex in the past to them

    I now have in my possession an incident report from a children’s centre that not only shows I DID report abuse but the very same SW helped me find a safe place to stay for the night at a friends house!

    Ironic there were concerns on my apparent not reporting his abuse… but granting him custody when admitting he was ‘has problems’ is something the SW’s in THIS town are questioning as they know I am right.

    I wanted to update you and thank you for your advise. By maintaining a good working relationship with the SW’s here but at the same time proving myself right whilst admitting where I went wrong with my first child (not my second) and showing I am determined to do I can to prove myself with my 3rd, I am now much more hopeful for the future :)

    So thank you


    • Hello Kelly, I am really pleased to hear that – everyone should have the chance to show that they can change, and you are proof that people can. I am delighted that things are going well for you and your family, and wish you all the best for the future. Well done – it isn’t easy to do.

  27. Wendy Wolfendale

    Many Thanks – My daughter does Facebook, I will get her to do as you have suggested. MANY THANKS

  28. You can all say what you want,but you can’t work with people who are stealing children for money. As the more you work with them the more lies and wrongs they do to try and take you child away And whoever you were who said they come from different end of the spectrum to Ian Joseph, must be a corrupt evil sick twisted individual as Ian is a kind,honesty,helpful caring individual,who has only said the truth in his every word about the system and the people in it,why they do it and what they do.

    • Here, here! Ian Josephs doesn’t make a single penny from the free advice he gives to desperate families – unlike Social Services, Legal Aid Representatives, Adoption Agencies, Local Councils & more – who are all riding the gravy train of Forced Adoptions!

  29. Social Workers don’t lie? What planet are u living on suesspiciousminds? Take a look at the evidence submitted by ppl directly affected on your own blog already – they’ve provided links & proof to back it up! These are not stats, they’re real ppl, many who thought these so-called ‘wild rumours’ about social services would never effect them, til 1 day they did! That’s when a person wakes up to the madness of it all – secret family courts, trumped up charges of ‘potential emotional harm’, social workers, lawyers, doctors, police & judges – all going against perfectly normal & innocent families. It’s became an industry, ss & councils being paid big fat bonuses for increasing adoption numbers. Wake up & smell the coffee ppl, b4 it’s too late! Ban Secret Courts & Outlaw Forced Adoptions!

    • You probably want to read my very first response in this series of comments to the first person who said that I believe that social workers don’t lie. I’m not going to say it all again.

  30. Christopher Patch

    Lying is a pejorative term, and one that doesn’t adequately describe the process of what frequently happens as cases progress. Blind protectionism, or systemic misfeasance, might be a better description, though the outcomes for the family are much the same as less calculated lies would be.

    Accusing S/W’s of lying actually lets them off the hook by being insufficiently precise. What seems a lie from the victim’s perspective, from the S/w’s perspective begins as just a poor decision, or hasty, ill-thought phrasing in a casenote. The behaviour is wrought via inadequate training in increasingly complex procedures, pressure to meet targets, remote management, digitisation, overwork, an endlessly growing caseload, and the callous slur of demotivation which cubicles and flourescent lighting inflict on many office workers. The problem is not so much the lie – or poor decision – in the first instance. They are to be expected in the circumstances form time to time, as you rightly say in your first response.

    No, it is the routine stubbornness of clinging to that poor decision, justifying it, re-enforcing it… That is what creates intractable problems.

    But a S/w who makes a mistake these days seems to feel they have little choice but to protect that mistake in any way they can; even though it means compounding it. If they take responsibility for the mistake in this toxic climate ( post baby P..) they will quite possibly be scape-goated.

    Anyway this is our experience. A fairly innocuous series of errors has been compounded by unwarranted protectionism on the part of Social Services. It has been resource-intensive for them, and horrible for us, because in clinging to their error, they must also do their best to justify the massively inaccurate records that they are now maintaining on our children.

    As we have trudged through the complaints process, they have added layer upon layer of misrepresentation, obfuscation, tendentious interpretations… I am doing my best not to use the term ‘lie’ here, but there is in the end no option, we have demonstrable lies in writing from two different Directors of Children Services, as well as proof that the LA sent false information to the LGO. Even though this was incontrovertibly proved to the LGO, the LA were still not found guilt of any maladministration. Which lends much credence to some of the posts above – in re-enforcing how unlikely the system is to be fair to the victimised family.

    We did nothing wrong, and Social Services quite quickly accepted that. But they could not accept that they might have. As a result, our children have unlawful, unwarranted records – and we have to prepare a case to take to barristers. What an waste of life, and time!! For which the arrogant, mule-headed attitude of Social Services is entirely culpable.

    If they have behaved like this with us, where they quickly acknowledged no fault – it is no surprise that there are thousands of desperate victims of their injustice, or at least their insensitivity, baying for blood.

    • Erm, I have to say there are outright cases of lies too. Such as a SW recording that I had prevented my children from speaking at a meeting they requested, held in a public place, with witnesses that this was not the case whatsoever (quite the opposite). Multiple lies were recorded. Multiple false accusations were made. Witnesses at meetings saw how they said one thing and then changed it later. And this went on all the while there was plenty of professional evidence to counter the false accusations and claims being made, which they had been copied in on. It’s not all about errors or ignorance (though I agree there is a wealth of that too). There are nasty people working as SWs. I submitted a complaint about them – it was sent to them to investigate. There was never any official outcome, it just resulted in me sending a letter that if they ever harassed us again I would go legal.

    • Any thoughts Dr. Suess? (…or is theres rats in them hats…)

  31. Ashamed to be British

    Boom! Someone who gets it, hats off to you for your restraint in using the word ‘lies’ – because essentially that’s what they are.
    A well written response, you are so so so right in everything you have written, most cases don’t really need to go further, if someone just piped up and said “I’m so sorry, I was wrong, you have proved that” I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that, it is, as you say, when they refuse to put that right, leaving a trail of destructive untruths that stays with you for life

  32. Hi SM – I was not able to post this link at the relevant post (sexual abuse allegations of mother vs father), but this seems an interesting study about the “guaranteed outcome” in such cases. Should be of interest.

    • This article is required reading: a detailed exposition of what is, at the very least, a poor judgement. At worst, a callous and corrupt one. Either way it has no place in british justice, as it causes unwarranted suffering to all parties – the child and the parents, for no discernible good reason.

  33. Ashamed to be British for work very hard in this country and social service removed my children because we have strong family support and no arm was done I was frame by the Doctors of the Hospital in my area that baby was shaken when there was none evidence of arm two medical paper where done type and the hand written was the same day when CPO and I was home not at the Hospital then the expert witness for case used the medical papers against me when I have been with St.John Ambulance for 7 years when I have older children that I have when I complaint to cafcass I was unhappy the way i was treated even the social worker lied in court in front of the Judge that I have none medical training been around the london attacks 2005&07 I was PTS transport driver in london till I moved to Berkshire started new family then attack by Social service bring police to arrest me and my partner at how son school when there was nothing wrong just my partner was very stress and bribe by Cafcass guardian while the court was going on

  34. Dj Gadgetman: I am afraid I am having some difficulty making out exactly what you are saying. To clarify: I believe you are saying Social Services took your children. When did this happen? Was this via ICO into foster care, or for placement for adoption?

    Did you get them back?

    Who was the expert witness used?

    In what manner did cafcass guardian bribe your partner?

    Which hospital are you referring to?

  35. Dear suesspiciousminds,

    I was just wondering; if the Court of Appeal decides that a case should be remitted for a rehearing because of a bad welfare analysis, but the threshold has been crossed, what happens to the children? The care order/placement order is usually set aside by the Court of Appeal, but does that mean that the children go home to their parents?

    Thank you in advance!

    Kind regards,


    • That is a good question. If the case is resubmitted for a re-hearing, when FINAL orders have been made, the Care Order would be discharged and usually replaced with whatever order was in place as an interim order before the final hearing took place. That might be an Interim Care Order (meaning foster care) or a residence style order (meaning relatives) or an Interim Supervision Order / no order, meaning staying with parents.

      That might be a bit different if the appeal happened a long while after the final hearing and there was no stay (an order saying don’t make any changes before an appeal). If the children had already been moved to new placements, there would have to be a decision by the Court of Appeal as to whether the children should go home pending the rehearing or stay where they are.

      We often don’t see that bit in the judgments to explain what will happen to the children whilst that rehearing is awaited, so it was a really good question – I have to say that I can’t recall seeing a case where those arrangements are spelled out.

      • Thank you for your speedy reply!

        Just to be sure, if prior to the appeal there was a care order, and a case is submitted for the rehearing, the CA will then grant an interim care order under s.38 Children Act 1989?

      • That will probably be the outcome – but it might be that the Court of Appeal are asked to decide whether there should be a different arrangement – they would PROBABLY look to reset things to how they were before the Court started the final hearing (but that might be affected if the children moved after the final hearing and there’s been a long passage of time since then – for example, if the children were subject to ICOs and in foster care, Court makes a Supervision Order at final hearing and sends the children home and the LA appeal, I can imagine that the Court of Appeal would not make an ICO and have them removed all over again before the re-hearing)

        It partly depends on the case, but I think starting point will be go back to what was in place before the final hearing.

  36. Hi, I really need help. My children are wards of the court and the LA has taken them into foster care. Mitigating factors meant it was difficult for five years and we were locked into the country as a family. I struggled as a single parent with no family or friends but have a good network around us now. The main issue has been wardship which has reduced my right to move hone to cheaper accommodation and being unable to locate the absent father. With no funds to go back home to the states where I would have support of family or even take a holiday for some r and r. LA have tricked me into signing a section 20 by calling it a medical consent form and have immediately said they will be issuing care proceedings. They are refusing to do a parental assessment until after care proceedings. Kids have been in care for six weeks and no court date has been given to us. Thus is traumatising. Any feedback would be helpful. Kids taken for nessy home.

    [Have removed your name so that you don’t get in any trouble by identifying yourself or the children]

  37. A messy home does not make anyone a bad parent BTW! People have the right to live in the manner they wish, so long as the children are well-fed, safe, have necessary health care and are loved, how often or how well you do your housework is completely your business. This nanny state, this interfering dictatorial attitude from the state is appalling.

  38. Ashamed to be British

    That depends on the mess, some homes are extremely dangerous, with knives, scissors, razor blades, cables, broken glass, nails all there for the child to seriously hurt themselves (I have seen the outcome of such a home, it’s not pretty)

    On the flipside, I have OCD traits so my house is immaculate, that didn’t stop my 10 month old grandchild smacking his poor head on the table today :( I was more upset than him

    • That’s not a mess, that’s a danger zone. There is a big difference and I am sure Kat’s home was not full of razor blades and broken glass. If someone has some crockery in the sink, their is a bit of dust, there are bits of laundry lying around, they don’t have a clean coffee cup at that moment, etc. that is not of itself a parenting issue. Children grow up in mud huts in Africa and all sorts of other environments, well loved and cared for.

      With social services they can find any reason to condemn you. If they visited your OCD house, especially in view of your grandson’s injury, they could accuse you of being so housework obsessed that you neglected your grandson. They would prospectively accuse a parent of having their priorities wrong in that situation. They could also accuse the parent of abuse because taking a child with a head injury to hospital for injury, especially when it’s a baby who cannot explain what happened, they can think and say what they want. It’s guilty until proven innocent in the UK. child protection industry. And I use the term ‘industry’ purposefully.

  39. …hence I had said “… so long as the children are well-fed, *safe*, have necessary health care and are loved, how often or how well you do your housework is completely your business.” in my post.

  40. Ashamed to be British

    I’m not that OCD, it can wait until he goes home. But as for the rest, I totally agree, you really are preaching to the converted

  41. Oh I wasn’t suggesting you were ;-) Only pointing out that this is how social services would view it!

    • Ashamed to be British

      Your house is too clean, too messy, too many toys, not enough toys, they will manipulate ANY situation to suit their agenda

  42. Your blog was recommended to me earlier this evening. I would like to receive notification of new posts please.
    I will look forward to reading them.
    Thank you

  43. Dear suesspicious minds.. can you please do humanity a favor and comment on this case, once the judgment is out? This story circulates on the blogosphere and social media and the allegations are so awful and the air of conspiracy is so thick, one can hardly breath without choking.

    I hope I am not committing an offence by posting this link..
    [Have removed the full link, because it does contain a video with children in it – if people really want to know more, they can find it, I’m sure. It is an allegation that children have described adults sexually abusing children and murdering babies and yet the police are not acting – Suesspicious Minds]

    Is the UK drowning in a sea of satanic filth or is this yet another case of too many people spreading their personal madness on to the net where it takes on a life on it’s own?

    Sometimes I think – perhaps people got other things to do but form mass abuse rings and then drag parents into court to silence them, and there are still mostly completely average functioning human beings in the UK that just happen to work as judges and lawyers and police men and social workers. On the other hand, all those recently outed child abuse cover ups have raised many (still unanswered) questions which relentlessly fuel the wild life blogosphere hype that says that Britain is ruled by Satanic judges (and social workers, and teachers, and police men, and grannies, and shoe makers, aso).

    Anyhow.. if you got a word to say on this case, I would be grateful for the judgment and your analysis. The case is heard in a 12 day hearing in the High Court since the 16th of February. Thank you.. No sensationalism required. I like your style even though you do work for a council :D

    • We will have to see what the High Court say about it – if they make the findings it really will be a major news story. I’m of course mindful of the Orkney case, where children made these sorts of very amazing allegations leading to almost the entire island being accused of Satanic abuse and there wasn’t a grain of truth in it. The thing about accusing adults of murdering babies is, in order for them to do that, there are some missing babies to be accounted for. In England, a missing baby is front page news and lead on the television news. So, missing babies in the plural, seems a bit unlikely.

      I don’t have any more facts about the case than the claims made on that website – I’m sure the children are saying that this happened, and I’m sure there are those who believe them. I’m just with Hume on this – extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

      [For example, taking the Austrian case with the man who kept all of his children in a cellar for generations – if you heard that extraordinary claim you’d be entitled to be very sceptical – yet we know that it did happen, because there was extraordinary evidence to substantiate it. This story might be true, on face value it seems unlikely to be, but I have not seen whether there is extraordinary evidence over and above the children saying it happened]

      • I posted 3 links regarding the story (was pending moderation). Within those you will find that the children named body markings (such as red spots, warts) on a variety of the accused in private places (genitalia). The accused were challenged to be examined by an independent doctor to confirm or deny the presence of these personal marks. That would be sufficient evidence for the claims.

      • “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” I’m interested in what way you mean extraordinary.

        Not ‘every day’? As we all know, across the world heinous ritual practices have been conducted within many cultures for all sorts of reasons. Only recently think of the torso of a young boy found in the Thames.

        Extraordinary because those in positions of authority/with money are implicated? Again, we know people in those positions abuse them every day too. They are no less likely (in fact maybe more likely, because they have the money and connections to get away with it, just because they can).

        Extraordinary because it’s awful? Do you not see accusations of abuse against parent as extraordinary too? Why do family courts require so much less burden of proof of evidence than criminal courts then? Children are removed on the say-so of a social worker without a shred of evidence.

        Why should those in power who have abused children be treated any less harshly?

      • If you are making a serious allegation, you need evidence to back it up. To take a safe example (since he is dead) – if someone had said in the 1980s that Jimmy Saville was sexually abusing young people, including in hospitals and that there had been professionals who knew about that and turned a blind eye, that would be an extraordinary claim. As we now know, there really was a huge amount of evidence to prove that, and it happened. As we know from other criminal trials, serious claims have been made against a number of celebrities and some have been backed up by evidence that stood up to scrutiny, and some didn’t.

        So extraordinary things, things that at face value you wouldn’t believe CAN happen and WILL happen, but the person claiming them does have to provide evidence to show it.

  44. Ashamed to be British

    You know the kids retracted this right? The case is ongoing with mother, stepfather and MKF in exile curently

  45. Yes, I know they have retracted very early on, it’s all on the net.

    I believe there is much to be said about this case, and I do not like what was done here in the name of mob justice. Names of people who are alledged to be satanic abusers and involved in ritual murders are all over the net. Assuming these people may be totally innocent – how can anybody justify posting such things? The WHAT IF stain will forever cling on them, lives may well be destroyed. Who will apologize to these people? Fix their reputation? The various “freedom fighters” who posted their names on the net?

    Surely, I too ask myself WHAT IF this is all true? But I also ask myself WHAT IF the children were indeed coached to say all this? How can anybody really know? And is it right for the children’s faces and names to be all over the net? We may not be able to answer any of these questions satisfactory in particular since such outside pressure was created.

    I personally don’t believe this is the right way to find out about the actual truth behind the various what ifs, but I also acknowledge that the public trust in the proper working of the police and system as a whole is at a very low point and encourages such renegade behavior by the “super bloggers of the resistance”.

    • Ashamed to be British

      We’ll never know, there are so many inconsistencies it’s unreal, I’m not particularly impressed by the mother doing a runner and leaving these poor kids in care not knowing which way is up.
      My main concern is that they HAVE been abused, by someone, they have anal scarring, explained by the girl as ‘maybe i slipped in the bath or something’ it’s a bit odd that they both retracted after being so clear and adamant within a week of being in care, but there are also many ‘oh dear’ moments involving mum and partner too …

      I really am on the fence regarding this case, but these children have been emotionally wrecked by various, I hope they’re getting intense therapy now, because they’ll still be sitting in that therapy chair in 30 years time, what a terrible terrible situation for them regardless as to who did/said what

  46. It’s interesting that you are saying the children could have been coached (meaning by the parents) but have not suggested they could alternatively have been coached to retract by the authorities. There were quite a few children said to have been involved. Are you saying all their parents coached them? If you are so ready to believe there is such a high rate of abusive parents within such a small area, you should likewise be equally prepared to believe paedophilia exists in high places. Evil is evil and humans are humans. Money and power always bring corruption alongside. Let the truth be outed and those guilty of whatever crimes have been committed, punished appropriately.

  47. Ashamed to be British

    They both said, with conviction, that they were forced to say it by the stepfather, I still remain on the fence. here is the mother, the stepfather? Run away … why?

  48. If these children were coached by either party is one question and there is a bigger question within what coaching actually is as it is used so often in courts – sadly all too often against protective parents (Parental Alienation aso). However, nobody from the freedom fighter ranks seems to care about all these people who have been “outed” en masse on the net as satanic abusers and much worse, without trial, evidence and so on and so forth. This is mob justice and absolutely condemnable. What if people turn up at these people’s doorsteps demanding to see the torture chambers? Or at Christchurch school, which is now smeared for ever as a satanic dungeon?

    This mob mentality amongst the family justice folks has reached a new sad peak of short sightedness amd unstable thinking. Hence it so important that the UK is really coming clean over child abuse cover ups and injustice at the family courts and beyond. Otherwise the island may sink. Propably by mass mob lynching…

  49. Suess, can you please delete my mentioning of the school’s name. Thank you.

    • Have searched but I can’t find where you mention the school’s name. If I can find it, I’ll snip it out.

    • It doesn’t matter that you’ve named the school, it’s all over in public anyway, however it wasn’t Christchurch (although it’s mentioned as one of the schools that participate) it was Hampstead junior school.
      One thing that does disturb me is why the media weren’t all over this? It kind of sways me a little, I know they are controlled to an extent, but a story like this which is on the lips of every person surely, would be widely reported along with the retraction made

  50. Are you sure? Babies go missing from care regularly, it’s nothing new. Of this is happening I’m sure there are babies born that no one knows of, bred for just this purpose

  51. You’re speaking of ppl with real clout here, as far as I know they’ve never been asked to show what they’ve got and the head mistress has started tattoo removal therapy, I have no evidence of this

  52. I have heard the whole gruelling five hours of police interview so yes you are correct in that was what the children say, but we live in a multicultural society, an 8 and 9 year old would assume these babies are drafted in from abroad, the girl is very very specific on what country each of her school friends come from, she’s very determined to make it clear that a is Russian b is Ukraine c is polish and so on, I find it strange that she insists on telling the officer who’s from where, would she even care after suffering such abuse? Again I’m still very much on the fence

    • From the snippet I saw, the children said that it had been going in since they were younger. So when it started, they would have been too young perhaps to fully understand the gravity of it all. Maybe it seemed like a game of some sort (the alleged murders of babies). But people become numb and even immune to the horrors of things after a while, the mind blocks things out to get through what’s happening. So I do think it would be quite possible to focus on other details despite the horrors. In fact, it’s very interesting that you say she was being so specific about details, liars and story tellers are usually more vague.

    • This was one of the links I posted: According to this, the headmistress has a birthmark in a private area, I don’t think tattoo removal will work with that. The children were said to have been introduced into the paedophile group at ages 3 and 4. I just can’t see children making up things like this: “The children like Gabriel who could not tolerate the pain and screamed too much were given injections by a nurse.” If an adult (step father or whoever) really has coached them into saying everything they have said, it constitutes a sick individual who needs a lot of therapy and children with an amazing capacity for detailed story-telling without batting an eyelid at the horrors of it. It says in the article:

      “Several people are alleged to be involved and have a good opportunity to clear their names.

      “Mr Hxxxxx could for example prove that he doesn’t have red dots over his privates.

      “Miss Mxxxxx could for example prove that she doesn’t have a wart on her privates, the size of a 5p coin.”

      • Ashamed to be British

        Sabine is not nasty, she’s very naive, she just rushes in believing what she is told without question, this led to her and another being fined as MKF’s for £5k.
        (Suess did blog on this)
        She still doesn’t understand the mess she’s in, they’ll promise her the crown jewels to get her back here, she’d be arrested, these children have been physically and emotional pounded, it’s going to be lovely for them to find themselves all over youtube, facebook and other sources when they get older, what was she thinking? Getting word out there? At what cost to these two children?

        It is procedure to remove children from family contact immediately when they disclose sexual abuse, this prevents the family members from ‘coaching them’ it’s to protect the child and the resident parent, if this is not done, the accused will walk free on the basis that the child has had too much chance to be primed, Sabine needs to learn law and procedure before trying to take these cases on. By all means she should use her dwindling clout to continue her campaign against forced adoption, but playing barrister really isn’t for her

  53. I do think in order to get a grasp on the horrors these children were coming out with, you need to listen to the interviews, that’s a lot of intense questioning without one slip up from an 8 and 9 year old. Still, having said that I have been left with more questions than answers – what I can categorically conclude is these kids have been abused by someone and attempt to cover up anal scarring with excuses such as “I probably slipped in the bath” sounds like coaching to me, not so confident in their retraction statements either, how do 2 children get the same scarring by accident, their statement is very detailed in what can only be described as hard core porn, they know too much yet that’s not been questioned, just accepted. There are inconsistencies on both sides that just don’t add up, but right now I feel the LA have been ordered to get these children to retract on the hurry up, the evidence is compelling, the retraction is not

    • Do you have a link to the full interviews?

    • When I click your username, I get an error message “can’t find the server at deleted”.

      ” it’s going to be lovely for them to find themselves all over youtube, facebook and other sources when they get older”

      Isn’t that a far lesser evil than continuation of their abuse? If someone has to take extreme measures to stop such abuse, isn’t it worthwhile? A child would suffer far more by continuing to endure the abuse and to hide it and blame themselves for years.

      Why should the state punish someone who was trying to save children from abuse? It’s all the wrong way round.

      When you think about how many wrongdoers get away with things due to technicalities and loopholes, why pursue a case against someone doing something for a good reason, under extenuating circumstances?

      Why otherwise are there differences between murder and manslaughter? It’s intent and circumstances.

      The law is meant to be there to protect, not to punish the wrong people.

  54. That’s where one has to be careful – my opinion is exactly that, I don’t know as I wasn’t there, but I believed every word those kids say … Until the retraction, they retracted within days … Hmm

  55. Suess, would you mind passing my email address to planet autism? Tia x

  56. Ashamed to be British

    Lie detectors are inadmissable due to their unreliability

  57. Because it’s not my blog, I’ve just realised they’re downloads, which I can give you direct, how can I contact you?

  58. “So extraordinary things, things that at face value you wouldn’t believe CAN happen and WILL happen, but the person claiming them does have to provide evidence to show it.”

    There is already physical evidence that the children have been abused. There are also statements of bodily markings on the alleged perpetrators that can be checked out by an independent doctor.

    There are witness statements from the children, it’s important that an *independent* child psychology expert investigates whether the statements are true or there has been coaching, and if so by whom.

    The question is, why the delays, why no arrests/statements from the accused?

  59. Did anyone watch this interview: It’s very, very compelling. It’s the interview of the McKenzie Friend about the case and it is about more than just the two children in question.

    • Would it be alright not to post videos? I will let this one go, but I suspect there’s some pending litigation about this case and I don’t want the site to fall foul of any orders that the Court may make about this situation. Happy for you to have the discussion (ideally without mentioning names of those involved).

      • Surely if there are potentially pending actions, they are not yet current and no laws have been broken? These links are in various places on the internet, I would imagine they would have to apply any actions to all the websites containing them to be fair, which may prove difficult. But sure, I won’t post any further videos in respect to it being your blog and your prerogative.

      • It would be more that if the litigation ends up with orders that all offending links be taken down, I would have to go back through the comments to seek them out. If people want to say that if they wish to know more they can go to WhistleblowersRUs or what have you to find out about it, then I can live with that.

  60. Remember she’s trying to save her ass, there are three videos in the series, keep an open mind

    • Well, she claims that she didn’t publish the link in question, that someone she copied the email took it upon themselves to publish it. But like I said before, why should the law punish someone acting in good faith to protect innocent children anyway.

  61. Why aren’t the media all over it like a rash? It’s a huge story and no worries about identifying the children, too late for that … IF this is true you’re dealing with ppl who are extremely powerful

  62. This is a possibility, however that person is freely doing whatever she likes, it’s Sabine the police want.

  63. Ashamed to be British

    It depends if they have evidence that says she helped this family to coach the children, which as you’ll find out in due course, should be a hanging offence

  64. Ashamed to be British

    Well … without getting myself in to trouble, maybe you should do a Google search on Sabine McNeil and Belinda McKenzie (who I have met and spent time with), very nice ladies who are very active in anti paedophile campaigning, you’d need a few hours, but my advice with anything like this, is … dig deep and decide for yourself, big egos? True campaigners? Attention seekers?

    • All I can say is, she seemed genuinely upset about the abused children. I think it’s easy to label whistleblowers to deflect, so you need to also question the motives of anyone disparaging them out there on the internet. Whistleblowers often end up targeted for what they have uncovered.

  65. Ashamed to be British

    I think Suess is right to be fair, it may be detrimental to the investigation, although I understand it’s already ‘out there’ they are trying to pull these videos as fast as they go up (which leads me to feel there is something to hide – you know my views on this case) unfortunately when these things go viral at such a speed, it’s difficult to keep them under control.
    Maybe if the prosecution service were to be a little more transparent, the public wouldn’t be constantly keeping these things ‘alive’ with share share share!

    I know what you’re saying about whistleblowers, we have seen them wind up dead in a field, poisoned, apparent impossible suicide and so on, Sabine looks afraid to me, she doesn’t normally present as a nervous person, far from it, no matter what, someone HAS abused these children and no one seems to be overly interested as to who.

    Again, WHY is this not all over the press, TV, news etc?

    • Yes, the silence of mainstream media is absolutely deafening. But it wouldn’t be the first time the media have been involved in unsavoury things if there are ulterior motives afoot. The course of events from the state have only added fuel to the fire. Ten policemen in one go after the mother “for a talk”, the lack of understanding of whistleblower motives in trying to get help for the children (“malicious prosecution”), the secrecy, the police closing the file as “no crime” when the children have clearly suffered abuse by someone, the removal of mother’s contact and increase of the father’s, the mother’s apparent previous established history as a good parent and sudden questioning of this coinciding with the reporting of the abuse, the lack of police interviews of the accused, lack of verification of identifying features being sought. One of the videos by a Canadian media station of Sabine, the interviewer said other parents have contacted them independently confirming an abuse ring was going on centred at the school in question. It’s extremely odd that the mainstream media has not picked this story up. People power will hopefully prevail despite this. And Sabine strikes me as someone seeking justice for the families and in fear of the unfair consequences, not someone seeking fame and fortune.

  66. Ashamed to be British

    Yes she does seek justice without doubt, no matter how naive her approach is … mum has no contact because she was part of the videoing, you just don’t do that to children, plus she fled the country to avoid arrest along with Sabine and Abraham, so she won’t get contact anyway

    • I’m not sure why you think her approach is naive? If the authorities are implicated and a cover-up is afoot, it stands to reason that she would see doing things “by the book” as ill-advised. I don’t see what other option she had – outside of ignoring the children being abused on an ongoing basis, or the mother fleeing with them abroad. I assume you refer to the naming of the children when you say “you don’t do that to children”, I would say that this option would be far preferable than allowing the abuse to continue, it’s only by shining a light on evil that it gets discovered. The embarrassment and loss of privacy is a far lesser harm than the abuse going on unrecognised and unfettered. They will need psychological therapy for years to get over this, I’m sure having their names in public won’t be the top of the issues needing therapy. We all know, that the law doesn’t always get things right, so people do flee when they are innocent and should not be judged or condemned for this. If you suspect the law (police are said to be involved in the paedophilia) is corrupt, you have every reason to fear it. The mother now probably regrets not taking the children and fleeing abroad, rather than trusting that the truth and justice would prevail, as it stands. Have you seen the grandparent’s video? It’s really sad. The authorities should allow the grandparents to take guardianship of the children – you have to question why this is not happening.

  67. The children have to stay in care while investigations are ongoing, that’s the course of things, the grandparents would be accused of manipulating them by the abuser, that would be the abusers defense and there’d be no case to answer.
    Plus the grandparent would have to return to Russia with them … Leaving them unavailable if other evidence came up.
    As for the filming, to video them saying all this then sending it viral is abuse, children should not be identified in any proceedings let alone become public property, it’s s disgrace and whoever shared this with the world is a c word

    • State care can be very bad for many children, and that’s without the potential criminal acts the state is being accused of here. There is a lot of information out there about the risks and mistreatment many children in care suffer, including abuse. Having to stay in state care is not necessarily the most safe place for them, especially if they are being coached out of telling the truth, that at the very least, constitutes bullying and emotional harm. The grandparents could therefore be by far the safest option (potentially the mother, but until boxes were ticked and until and unless a fair and just outcome was ensured, that option is unlikely). Returning to Russia could therefore be the best option for the children. What they are going through right now won’t be making them happy. At a time when they really need their mother, they were denied her. How is that acting in their best interests? In the grandparents video, they said that on the few visits they have been allowed with the children, they were given a list of questions beforehand to sign to agree they will not ask questions such as “are you being treated well” and other normal questions. What the heck is going on here! The children were said to have become really nervous since being in state care, during visits to be scared to speak, subdued and looking at the ground. I really think identification is the least of their issues, especially if it has prevented further abuse. Under “normal” circumstances, you would hope that children’s identities would be protected, but these are extreme circumstances and there are also other children at risk.

  68. Ashamed to be British

    Oh I know, I as in state care.

    The children are bound to be scared to speak, because no matter what way you look at it, someone somewhere (we have yet to figure out who) has told them to say something that has caused a lot of trouble, be it the allegtions or the retractions, they have been put in a lose lose situation, I feel so sorry for them, no matter what way you look at it – they have been abuse in some form, emotional, physical, sexual, whichever – they are suffering, someone has a lot to answer to

    • Another thing that has occurred to me. If the children were coached by someone in the family with a fictitious story (e.g. to cover-up abuse from within the family), Occam’s Razor (and common logic) says that the lie that would have been told would have been as simple as possible. Liars find it hard to keep a lie going once holes are picked in their story, which inevitably they would have been, stories don’t match, details change etc. So to help their lie succeed, they would pick as simple as possible a cover story for it to work, such as that one member of staff at the school was responsible for sexual abuse of the children. Why would they invent all the satanic worship elements and tales of a ring of professionals being involved?

      As Suess says, people will say “extraordinary claims warrant extraordinary evidence”. So the more far-fetched a story sounds, the more difficult it would be for the liar to apportion blame on the accused because how do they prove it and also, another *huge* point, is that if the abuse came from within the family (i.e. wasn’t the persons currently accused), why would the family suddenly highlight abuse having taken place, by *anyone* because it would put themselves at great risk of being discovered as the abusers(s)? So unless something compelling comes forward showing the mother/stepfather or someone else within the family as unreliable witnesses or perpetrators of a crime, I do believe what the videos state.

      I don’t think anyone in their right mind believes slipping in the bath causes anal scarring, especially on two children in the same family. Buttocks have the propensity of padding your fall and making that area of the body inaccessible, unless you fall on a protruding/sharp object – and for both children to have had this exact same accident?! This supposed cause of the scarring was suggested only after the children were in state ‘care’.

  69. Severe constipation can cause scarring in children…

    • That would be a rather massive coincidence wouldn’t it. Especially as neither child has spoken of having suffered this. Especially in view of the fact that there are accusations of abuse in conjunction with the scarring.

  70. You make very good points and as you know I have said the same myself

  71. Vegans tend not to suffer with that problem ;)

    • That’s true. I didn’t know that they were vegans… I haven’t really been following this case very closely, the comments just show up in my inbox… I find it so extraordinary overall, I have no useful opinion – just bewilderment.

  72. I think that applies to all of us

  73. A good blog here, which draws parallels to this Hampstead satanic paedophilia case with associated cover-up, with other similar cases: Tallahassee “Finders” in 1980s; Belgium 1990’s involving Marc Dutroux; The Franklin Scandal, the USA in the 1980s. Covered up into the 1990s all regarding elite child abuse: So it really isn’t as extraordinary as people think. Most sadly.

  74. So if a random person wants to send a truly historic family court document to Mr Suess.
    How is that accomplished anonmously?

    [I’d rather you didn’t send it to me – you’d be in breach of the legal obligations about the document]

    • I would ask why you would want to do that?

      • Because I highly regard Mr Seuss opinion. He is sharp :) It will all be in the public domain anyhow shortly

      • If it is coming into the public domain, then I’ll try to write about it once a judgment is published – I do try to cover the cases as they come out (some weeks there are too many cases at once and I can’t get all of them done)

      • Well…as he says, it’s a confidential document. Although I guess if you did it anonymously there wouldn’t be repercussions for you personally, unless Allram Eest is not your real name, it won’t be anonymous however. If you have a document which tells the truth and you want to whistleblow, there are easier ways to disseminate it to a larger audience to get the facts out in the open.

      • “disseminate it to a larger audience” please enlighten/inform me. Family Law isn’t exactly on top of people’s agenda. It is all swept under the carpet imho.

      • I just mean in the same way others are doing, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, websites etc. I agree, it is swept under the carpet. A light needs shining on it all.

      • “blogs, Facebook, Twitter, websites etc” and not trying to be dis-respectful here. The wider Public doesn’t care. That is just the brutal fact. This blog is the only one I have found that gives the legal issues relevance/meaning. Doubt, if I was personally wronged by SS anybody would care to read it. Just the way it is.

      • You’d be surprised. Until it happens to them, or someone they know, people don’t want to know. But there is a growing army of wronged parents out there, publicising what social services and the courts have done and campaigning for change. Contact this FB page:

  75. Ashamed to be British

    I think we are all aware it goes on, in light of the Savile case … to what scale, I’m not sure, it’s very frightening

  76. Surprised nobody brought this up, kinda exciting if you ask me, Latvians are not happy campers

  77. I am this woman who the two hair strand company s got wrong . Kt is a very small part of the case a lot of other things happens really bad on the consequence of this company getting there test wrong they have messed my whole. Life up u wouldn’t believe . I really need some advise and help as no one has taken responsibility for any thing . My children were even abused sexually in care its all a shambles . Now I’ve got a life of depression. And a whole lot of other problems do you no anyone who can help me please .

    • Dear Amanda

      I’m really sorry to hear that. I’m afraid that I can’t give advice on this site, but your best course of action would be to talk to either a solicitor – google “solicitors + children + your town” or a McKenzie Friend if you can’t get legal aid or are disillusioned with solicitors – the same sort of google search.

    • Apply to join Facebook Group: Social Services and the Family courts UK. For practical advice and help.

  78. Ashamed to be British

    Take the case to Latvia by all means, but this poor child should never be returned to the mother.
    Second chance? Well supporters, she’s had several but did not want them, how the child is still alive is a mystery, this time the police and social services got it right, it’s not their fault the mother refuses to see her many failures (which involves plenty more than just being accused of being drunk on an occasion) they tried and tried to resolve the issues … as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink

    • So really, how do you know anything? Enlighten me…or just have an opinion? Talking smack? True. If you do, shut the f*ck up.

      • Mr Seuss, going b4 the Court shortly. Certain, the judgement will not be made public. Surely, Family Courts would never admit to violating Human Rights and acting unlawfully. Who knows, I might be surprised.

    • Never is a long time and should only be used in extreme circumstances where there is no hope of reform. Even people who are bad parents through drug taking or alcoholism can be rehabilitated and would not make the same choices once they were clean. No-one wants a child to be in danger or neglected, but social services are exactly that *services* and not (in the words of LJM) “lords and masters of those they serve”. Support must be given to people to address the problems and yes, whilst they are rehabilitating the child should be removed to safety, and yes even when they are clean they should have their parenting monitored with check-ups and perhaps have to take parenting courses etc. But just removing children without supporting parents having crises is like a GP prescribing medication without having checked what illness he is prescribing it for. It’s only once all attempts have failed to support the parent to reform that such drastic measures should be taken and only when extended family members have been investigated as guardians, that the state should look at adopting. Perhaps the Latvian mother was refusing help because she was under the influence of a substance that once addressed, she would welcome that support. Or perhaps she needed counselling and therapy. No child should be left with parents putting them in danger but there are ways to resolve things that don’t necessarily need to mean permanent removal.

      • I second this. Especially since Social Services do not have a terrific reputation for keeping children taken into their care safe from harm…

      • See this is the problem, you don’t have any insight into the case. You just speculate. Not very meaningful. In fact, it is just annoying. Let’s just say when the Mum moved to a different Burough, the LA initiated proceedings. She co-operated fully with the LA, and no, she doesn’t have a substance abuse problem. How about, the LA recommending adoption without a court order of a young child. That is pretty much the ultimate HR violation.

      • Who are you addressing @UnderArmour? I trust it’s not myself as my comments have been regarding potential circumstances which would in fact defend the mother as opposed to condemning her, so if it is myself, you have completely missed the point. As to being annoying, if this is directed at me I refuse to engage in puerile to-ing and fro-ing and I think you’ll find yourself with no-one to talk to on here if you keep insulting people in this way.

      • When people comment about cases they absolutely know zilch about, it is not constructive. Just because there is a judgement, does it 100% of the time make it an absolute truth? Is there Another perspective to the story, which is not taken into account? That is worth some reflection. There are serious miscarriages of justice, in a few cases, these people need to be allowed legal redress.

      • And they have it. They can appeal the judgment if they think it is wrong. I don’t expect to see that happen.

  79. Ashamed to be British

    What you say?

    • [Offensive comment removed]

      Please read the comment rules. I know that we deal here with very emotional things and tempers can run high, but the rule is that you cannot be rude to other posters. You can disagree with them, you can say that you think they are wrong, but you can’t use personal abuse.


  80. Gotta love it, ill-informed morons having an opinion about something you are clueluss about. Play hard

    • I refer you to the comment rules. People aren’t morons because they have a different view about something to you. Just as you are not a moron for having a different view to them. Play nice, or go somewhere else to play rough. Disagreement is fine, but let’s have a bit of respect for other people.

  81. Paul Summerfield

    I have read the comments on this page and a lot of them are written in sadness and pain.

    If you can and you have proof that the authorities has treated you and your family unlawfully then its your duty Sirs and Madams as a parent to use every laughable trick in law to kick it back into court and to publicise it in any way that harms nobody.

    I lost my children in 2001 at Portsmouth Magistrates court. When I say I lost my children the court could find no wrong I had done and the only order made out at that mornings hearing was an agreement sum to pay child maintenance per month.

    I lost my children because the court welfare officer (now Cafcass) said she was untrained to talk to my children about what my statement contained (it was a history of attempted failed alienation) the welfare off maintenance.

    A year later things got worse which gave me documents that prove just how the authorities act unlawfully to parents and children, the authorities in my case actually committed serious child abuse to step daughter and daughter and were also in contempt of court for using the court welfare report against me without my knowledge or permission of the court.

    If you have been dealt unlawfully in a case such as mine you will find that the court and government will keep its door shut tight to you, but you got to just keep going because one day that door is going to cave in with the pressure that builds up year in year out with us all that keep on going complaining about what has been done to us by them that do as thou wilt.
    It maybe raining but there is something we should understand about the rain.

    • So sorry for the difficulties you have been through. Agree people must make a stand. However, this is becoming harder and harder with withdrawal of legal aid. But I believe children can get legal aid so that might be another option for some families. The trouble is, that power and money so easily lead to abuses of the system, when there is no accountability and no checks and balances, there is free rein. It’s a cosy gravy train that is very hard to stop. That doesn’t mean people should stop trying though. I was surprised to find that Healthwatch can monitor adult social care but not children’s social care. Why should children’s social care be so unaccountable, so untouchable? With the secret family courts and action rarely taken for abuses of the system, they will continue.

  82. Hi Andrew,

    I’m using this as a method to get in touch with you with something which I feel the need to say but which requires more than 140 characters. I’m directing it to you, partly because I don’t know who else to direct it to and partly because Anthony Douglas’ CAFCASS blog does not seem to allow comments to be left (no comment has ever been left on his blog since it was set up in December 2012). And I am posting it here because it seems just rude to guess your Brighton and Hove email address and contact you direct when we have no professional link.

    Here is a link to the most recent CAFCASS blogpost:,-not-thresholds.aspx

    In it AD says this:”‘Significant harm’ in care proceedings covers just about every serious incident happening to a child – it is too wide as a threshold.

    It would be better to think of three thresholds for families on the edge of care: a threshold for intervention, a threshold for removal of a child and a threshold for permanent placement outside the immediate family.”

    I found this profoundly depressing; just because threshold in care proceedings is met, the court does not have to go on to make a care order or to endorse any particular kind of plan. ‘Threshold’ is just that; a threshold, a gateway to other possibilities. And threshold in care proceedings is not merely that the child has experienced ‘significant harm’ – I know I don’t need to rehearse s31(2) CA 1989 to you – but it obviously goes way beyond significant harm in terms of the findings which the court must make.

    AD’s further comment about three thresholds – for intervention, for removal and for permanent placement outside immediate family – is so depressing too. These thresholds exist; the first is by individual local authorities and then implemented on a daily basis by social work teams; the second and third are actually part of the welfare test carried out in care proceedings only once the s31(2) test is satisfied; those tests are set out in Re L-A, Re B and Re B-S, all of which you know. Although these are threshold tests, they are decisions on the basis of welfare analysis. But they shouldn’t in any way be confused with or set up as an alternative to s31(2)!

    There seems to be much confusion between the threshold test and welfare analysis.

    I’ll stop now; that’s enough ranting.

    • Thank you, that’s really interesting. I don’t mind if people want to guess my Brighton email address. I can’t really dish it out, because this is me in my personal capacity rather than my official one (you can also DM me if you want a contact email)

      I sort of agree with both of you – I agree with you that threshold is much more complex than Anthony Douglas posits and that not every serious incident would consitute significant harm, that significant harm involves more than the incident itself (it involves culpability for one thing) and that threshold is a gateway rather than a ‘if this, then that’ equation.

      But I also agree with Anthony Douglas (and that’s not a sentence I ever envisaged typing) that in reality, we are ending up with three distinct layers when you look at the nature of the harm and the outcomes that would be likely to flow from them (it would be wrong to call them thresholds). They are, as you say, bound up with both the issues of harm and welfare analysis (and of course, the ability of parents to ameliorate that harm through their own actions and family/professional support).

      Might there be some value, if Parliament intended (which is where we have been heading and continue to head) that only the very worst cases should end up with adoption as the plan, to actually have a statutory test which reflects that?

      At the moment, as Anthony hints, we have a ‘threshold’ test which is so broad that you could have threshold crossed and yet have an argument about whether an Interim Supervision Order is required to manage that degree of harm, AND in a different case whether Adoption was the only way to manage that degree of harm. I’ve thought for a long time that we need a form of order between a Supervision Order and a Care Order, which places obligations on the LA to support the child at home during their childhood, with some teeth, but does not give them the power to remove the child without taking the case back to Court. That’s a whole other debate, but there’s a gulf at the moment between ‘these parents can basically do it with very little support, and they only need that support for a year’ (supervision order) and ‘these parents can’t do it at all, so adoption’ (care order/ placement order)

      [I have to say, that I’ve changed my views about this about five times even whilst writing my response, so I wouldn’t claim that my response here reflects a settled position, just how I feel at this particular moment)

      • Aside from all of that, there need to be safeguards for parents wrongly accused of harm, serious or otherwise. There is a big problem with children (and parents) with often undiagnosed invisible disabilities such as autism, Ehlers Danlos Syndrome, CFS/ME etc. the traits of which are being erroneously labelled as signs of abuse or neglect or poor parenting. Until such safeguards are cast-iron you will always have children wrongfully removed and wrongful interventions into families that cause distress to everyone – including the children. Another issue is “emotional harm” which is being abused by the state, especially the ludicrous “potential future emotional harm” (Minority Report really springs to mind here!).

        Over-zealous professionals making secretive referrals to social services, in breach of ethical guidelines if nothing else, about transparency unless there is a risk of serious harm to the child/ren or referrer is a massive problem in the UK. The time wasted on persecuting and spying on innocent families takes time away from the genuine abuse and neglect cases. The wide remit of social workers and the lack of accountability for false record-keeping means the scales of justice are severely unbalanced, courts will give credence to professionals’ reports above parents’ accounts. There needs to be some independence involved or corruption will not be stamped out.

  83. I second everything Planet Autism says. And my partner thirds it.

  84. Dear mr suess would you please have a look at hhj Bellamy July 2015 newsletter the first paragraph about advocates meetings and give your comments on it. It is available online what he is saying is what happens in most cases and what he says the parents feel is exactly right

    • I will have a look Lynn. In case anyone else wants to check it out whilst they wait for me to read it, here

    • I’ve never come across a situation in which a Guardian or a social worker would attend an advocates meeting, and if anyone ever suggested it to me, I’d say exactly what the Judge says here – it creates a perception of unfairness (and a parent would be fully entitled to feel that this was not right and proper). I wonder how that ever sprang up, it isn’t something I’ve ever heard of anyone doing before.

      • I can confirm it always happens in Derby Nottingham and Leicester family courts and I’ve heard of it happening in other places when I challenged everyone about it including the solicitors for the parents I was told this was normal and it was so they could hold meetings in confidence without other people in the waiting area hearing. The sad thing is I believed it till I read this. I feel like I’ve let the people I was supporting down so much

      • Ah, now those are two different things. It is not unlawful for any of the parties to have discussions at Court and to have whomever they want in the room for those discussions. What the Judge is talking about is the formal Advocates Meeting that has to be held before the Court hearing, where everyone sets out their position and the lawyers try to put together a schedule of what matters are agreed and what is not, and ideally to prepare a draft order.

        I think it does look bad when the Guardian is squirreled away in a room with the Local Authority and doesn’t do the same thing with the parents, and the better Guardians strive to avoid that, and try to spend a good amount of time with all of the key people in the case.

        When I first started representing Local Authorities it was always a bit of a litigation tactic to get the Guardian into a room as soon as possible. Then I started representing parents, and I’d be sitting with the parents watching the Guardian cosy up with the social worker and saw just how awful that looks and how unfair it is. So I try to avoid it now, if at all possible.

      • I think social services/CAFCAS probably operate on the basis that many parents don’t know their rights and therefore won’t notice when they are breached…

  85. Ashamed to be British

    Oh yes they doooo

    • Hence it says “I have become aware that the Children’s Guardians routinely attend advocates’ meetings and that it is not unusual for a social worker to attend also.” and it is extremely unlikely that it is only Leicester doing this.

      “…and occasionally an actual unfairness (when information is shared directly with the Children’s Guardian and/or social worker but which is communicated to the parents second-hand via their advocate).”

      I would strongly dispute that it is only an occasional unfairness too. The judge seems to be wanting to not create an impression of unfairness, whilst stopping short of saying it is always an unfairness as well as an unjustness and breach of ethics if nothing else – which clearly it is.

  86. In my experience as an advocate for social care ‘users’ as they are sometimes termed, (perhaps because it is a bad habit that is very hard to kick) I have found that the Local authority do all they can to prevent the ‘user’ have any other advocate than the ones that they provide, and routinely refuse to copy in or contact me, despite the fact that the client asks them to, over and again. Is this normal or aberrant behaviour?

  87. Ashamed to be British

    Specifically it breaches the natural rules of justice. I seem to be banging on about them a lot recently … Which suggests the recent paper was long overdue

  88. Ashamed to be British

    Like lots of things that happen in the LA offices and secret courts, bubble buster ain’t it?

    • I agree about the meetings although as you say it does look awful to the parents but I am talking about the meetings resulting in a court order. In one case I attended to support one of the parents the advocates the guardian the social worker all sat in a room for an hour and then the parents solicitor came out and said there’s now an order for no contact except one e mail a week to be sent via the social worker they never even went into the court room. The order was signed later by the judge and the parent received it two weeks later through the post! I really don’t understand how this can be seen as just and fair

      • Hi Lynn, I’ve talked about this before. A good barrister will explain to a parent that their role is to GIVE advice, but to TAKE instructions. They will set out the options for a parent, and give them sensible advice about which of those options is the best thing for them. They may even have to give very robust advice about the likely consequences of the parents preferred option going wrong for them. But ultimately, it is up to the client what they want the barrister to say on their behalf and it is absolutely up to the parents what they agree to.

        I appreciate that there are some people who come out of those conversations feeling like they were given no choice and agreed to something that they weren’t happy with (and that sometimes the ‘robust advice’ crosses the line). It is really important that parents understand that a barrister cannot agree to anything on their behalf unless they have actually agreed to it. If you really want to fight, even if the barrister strongly advises you against it, that barrister must go into Court and fight.

        There is a duty to fearlessly and without favour advance the instructions of the client.

        Think of it like Chris Tarrant on Millionaire – he might be pulling all sorts of expressions and dropping hints that your answer is wrong and you should change it, but when you say “Final Answer” that’s the final answer.

        [The one exception being that you can’t make a barrister go into Court and tell lies on your behalf. ]

  89. Ashamed to be British

    It’s not, it’s a breach of the parents’ art 6, they’re entitled to know the case against them and to defend themselves, the judge should never have made a decision without their presence, even if he’d been told that the parents didn’t wish to be heard, (that happens too) he should not take the solicitors word for it, it’s hearsay therefore they should always seek to hear it from the horses mouth

  90. Wendy Wolfendale

    The Guardian in our case was SO cosy with the SS it was untrue. He saw my Grandson once – who was frightened of him, and played up that day in contact. He NEVER read the contact notes (this was apparent in Court) – so knew nothing at all of the beautiful relationship we had with Oscar. Most of the Court time he was arranging his weekend’s golf with the SS Barrister – and literally laughing and joking while we were in other rooms wanting to die.

    I believed there was meant to be an Independent Reviewing Officer, who I wrote to, (I had a name) but this person turned out to be fictitious. I have since been told that SS are so short of funds that this position is not filled and files are simply transferred to that desk, where no one sits.

    I speak as a Grandma who hasn’t seen her darling little boy for 2 years and have to wait another 13 years before we stand a chance. So I speak with ‘some’ solid personal experience.

  91. “Then I started representing parents, and I’d be sitting with the parents watching the Guardian cosy up with the social worker and saw just how awful that looks and how unfair it is. So I try to avoid it now, if at all possible.”

    But you are falling into the same trap as the judge, it’s a shame if it *looks* awful, but that isn’t what this is about – it’s about the fact that it *is* awful, plain wrong and counter to justice.

    It’s total inbalance of power.

    • Then I phrased it badly – seeing how awful it LOOKED, made me realise how awful it WAS.

      • Sorry I do feel it’s a depate worth having if a parent or a child /young person feels disadvantage and without any means of expressing their views haven’t we all just failed them and justice and democracy

  92. Daniel williams

    Hi there I am the father to 1 of your posts on this page would be great to actually talk to u in person I find your article very interesting to read although there is a few correctional errors haha Anychance of a chat

    • Hello Daniel, if you are on Twitter, you can DM me @suesspiciousmin, or if you post the corrections you’d like to add to the piece, I can add those on. I always try to remember that all of these cases involve real people with real feelings, as well as the wider legal implications, so if there’s stuff that you would want to correct, quite happy to add those in.

  93. Paul Summerfield

    Social Service Portsmouth are so corrupt.

    I am trying to get access to my mothers adult social service report because there is evidence that it contains totally incorrect information about me in it, so I am using the data protection act to get access just to what is being said about me in my mothers report.

    I have just got a refusal from them saying I am not a legal relative of my mother. What the hell are the case workers on in Portsmouth, Acid?

    I just have had to raise a complaint about this to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

    I really really sympathize with parents having problems with the SS as they are absolutely completely up their own backsides.

    • Wendy Wolfendale

      You are so right. We have lost our darling little boy, 2 years ago and suffered basically bare faced lies. He was what you might call a “blue eyed blonde”, and was an easy/soft target. So they lied their way through a court case within which we had no idea what was going to happen.
      We see him again when he’s 18 – he is now 5.

      • Paul Summerfield

        I am sorry Wendy, I do know how you feel I lost my daughter when she was 13 years old not due to SS, but Alienation.

        I can only describe SS Portsmouth as a witches cavern for what they have dared written to me claiming I am not a legal relative of my mother they are completely and absolutely potty doing this with the information and evidence I have given them.

        They are supposed to be protecting the vulnerable, but instead with the evidence I have got concerning my mother they are protecting my mothers surgery and her solicitor.

      • Wendy Wolfendale

        I just don’t know what the answer is. We are innocent of all ‘charges’ and yet you always get the No-smoke-without-fire look. And what the hell is he going through? He was 3 for God sake and had to say good-bye to his mummy, grandma and grampy.
        SS Portsmouth clearly have no more morals than SS Shropshire, I do so hope you have a happy outcome – but you have got a fight on your hands, but you know that.
        Best Wishes.

      • @Wendy, I know it’s probably too late but here is some information just in case:

        Other examples of where adoption orders have been set aside are where there is a procedural irregularity where, for example, notice of the proceedings were not properly served on the mother (Re F (R) (An Infant) [1970] 1 QB 385) or fraud had been used in obtaining the order (Re RA (Minors) (1974) 4 Fam Law 182 or a fundamental breach of natural justice in an adoption made overseas (Re K (Adoption and Wardship) [1997] 2 FLR 221).

        Case of appeal against adoption order:

        Certain individuals can apply for an order for contact with that child, including staying contact, and the application can be made after the adoption order is made. They will need Leave of the Court to make that application. If an individual is able to persuade the Court to give permission to make an application for contact, the Court will only then decide whether contact should actually be granted.

        Relationship the child has with relatives
        ACA 2002, s 1 (4) (f) requires a court or adoption agency to consider the child’s existing family relationships. The court or adoption agency is required to consider ‘the relationship which the child has with relatives and with any person in relation
        to whom the court or agency considers to be relevant.’ S 51A states that the Local Authority can apply for an order for refusing contacts between a child and parents, guardians or other person the child has contact with.

  94. Paul Summerfield

    I tell you what the problem is Wendy is that the complaints system does not work. In my case we have Social Service Portsmouth thinking that they can write false history about me in my mothers report to take the blame away from my mothers surgery and that it would be impossible for me to even know about it. Well I did find out about it by using the freedom on information act to get their phone log of me phoning them.

    The evidence was in the phone log.

    But first they refused to let me see what has been written about me by saying to me that they need to write to the people that have said these things about me in their report to ask them permission to let me view what they have said about me in the report….

    The Cheek of it.

    So I gave SS the names and address of the people that must logically be in the report.

    That was when they refused my request for access because I am not legally a relative of my mother they must know or have made something else up because it does not say that on my birth certificate. But it does not matter under law as to if I am a relative or not because under the data protection act because there is false information about me contained in a report of what I thought was my mother (she is really my mother) because I have the evidence I have the right to see it and put it right.

    They should not be doing this to people they should not be breaking the law to cover things up, but they are.

    Now I have to go Information Commissioner’s Office.

    Why do I have to do all of this, why cant these people play a straight game with families instead or worrying about what the correct percentage is for the removal of children from their families or in my case in my mothers case protecting Doctors Surgeries

    • Please be aware Paul, that you may not get any joy from the ICO. All the regulatory bodies are smoke and mirrors. Little actual enforcement powers, lip service to the rights of the people only. A lot of covering backs goes on all the way to the top.

      • Paul Summerfield

        Well I think your quite right which is why the complaints service does not work which in itself makes the system corrupt But no matter because when they act the way they do it proves to me or I find the truth about what happened to my mother and the reasons why. I know more about what happened now then I did two weeks ago.

        This is all your fault Mr Suess because when you showed that Judgment by Senior Judge Lush at the court of protection when the attorneys were found to be ripping off their mother and we all complained about the judgment because there were no comments in the judgment about the solicitor involved in this case.

        It all sort of set me off again…………

        Because Judge Lush heard my case………….

        I found out after the hearing that my two brothers (the attorneys) paid my mothers solicitor £2000 for the case to go ahead at the court of protection!

        I will be writing to Judge Lush about all of this, I am waiting because I may be able to get a little more evidence with the help of ICO but as Planet Autuism says that may be doubtful.

        But the other worry for me is did Judge Lush receive any of my brothers money paid to the solicitor because Judge Lush did let the proceedings go out of order he admits that in the judgment.

        I don’t think he would lower himself to that sort of thing.

        But the problem is when solicitors act in this way as they did towards my mother it covers disrepute all over the court of protection and in this case Judge Lush.

      • Dear Paul

        I obviously don’t and can’t endorse anything that you allege about individuals, as I don’t know the case and what is involved. I know that you need to vent about this, and I completely get that. If I’m asked by anyone involved to take your posts down, I would have to do that, and I’d ask that you don’t make allegations about particular individuals again. I wouldn’t dream of asking you not to have opinions, but the comment rules are clear that I can’t publish things that people could sue me for.


      • Agree absolutely with what Planet Autism says: even the ICO agree that they are effectively toothless. The best an individual can get from them is that whoever is withholding your data is “compliance unlikely” and you still have to take them to court to get the data. The ICO won’t assist in any way with that.

      • ashamedtobebritish

        To be fair, I did find the ico very frustrating, for a long time, it was only that I kept on and on pointing out what part they weren’t getting, and evidencing it, that finally the lightbulb turned on and they MADE the LA give me the lot, and told them they were watching them to boot (I also have the evidence of that from the LA :D ta LA!)

  95. ashamedtobebritish

    I slogged it out with the ico for SEVEN years, email after email, but I had a trail and they couldn’t state I was out of time because I kept providing evidence and dispelling what the information officer was telling them, in the end they had no choice but to give in to me.
    It’s all down to how you ask, what for and which act you use, although if third parties refuse to be named then they can’t name them, this does not apply to decision makers and agency workers, they are accountable for any unlawful actions they take.
    Don’t give up, if they have lied (that you are not a relative) then they have breached the natural rules of justice, they must take into account relevant information and they must know the law that binds them, otherwise it becomes an illegal decision, it’s malfeasance and entitled you to take civil action

    • Paul Summerfield

      I think your right too ashamedtobebritish because as you say when they refuse they have got to give a reason and if they know something has gone wrong or they are hiding something that reason is going to be a lie and you are going to know its a lie or ridiculous by suggesting that I am no a legal relative of my mother.

      What I find quite sick or wrong is that if I was my mothers attorney or her solicitor they would be able to access the whole file. Yet I am my mothers son and I was her carer for 3 months and I know that their are absolute lies about me in the report but I am not allowed access to it.

      This document which has a false history about me can be shown to anyone even sent up to the court of protection by my mothers solicitors or her attorneys and I would not know a thing about it because I am not allowed to view it or know the information it contains

    • Paul Summerfield

      Thanks for all your help, I wrote a complaint out to the SS including your template and told them that I have appealed to the ICO and suggested to the SS that when writing letters refusing access that they inform the person that they can appeal to their decision by writing to the ICO. That did the trick. I got a letter and a phone call from the SS and they have now changed their minds. but they are still trying to tell me I am not allowed anything from the surgery even if its about me. I told them to just block out the names and send them everything that is contained in the records about me.

      As to if they will send me everything is another matter as you have to rely on the SS being honest johns!

  96. Paul Summerfield

    A Solicitors Scam or how to rob an inheritance from your family

    My mother had a stroke which left mum with short term memory due to lack of care from her surgery and my brothers because both parties did no insuring my mum took her diabetes or take her to the diabetes clinic.

    My brothers took my mother to a bent solicitor where in one afternoon she signed an EPA and made out a new will, all documents must have been prepared for her.

    You see they all thought they would get away with it because mum had short term memory.

    They thought as soon as she left the solicitors she would of forgot what had happened so she would not tell anyone.

    It all went wrong very wrong because my mother had only mild short term memory she could retain new memories and so my mum phoned me up a week later and told me what had happened,

    Thats when it all began.

  97. Paul Summerfield

    How it all ended…………..

    It all ended short time after the court of protection hearing.

    Witnesses had not shown up. Proceedings went out of order in the second half when it was the defense turn. Mum was made to pay all court costs for writing a letter complaining that her solicitor had refused entry and that she wanted me and my brother John also to be her attorneys.

    Proof was given that my mother had mental capacity.

    Mum was staying at my cousins home, my cousin had ripped her own brother out of his inheritance two years previously.

    Just as I was about to go to my cousins home to show my mother all the court documents which would show her what a dirty trick had been pulled on my mother and myself, she had what is known as an addersons crisis this happens when someone stopped giving my mother steroids.

    In other words mum died in very suspicious circumstances because my cousin had a double motive. Its this that has really screwed me up and it is only recently I am able to write about it.


    The Will I hear you asking, well because of what happened my mother’s solicitor was forced to use mums old will made with my father in around 1992 everything was supposed to be spit three ways. One of my brothers were the executor, he refused to give me any breakdown or my mother’s assets… My mother’s solicitor were the administrators of the will , they also refused to answer any of my questions.

    I was ripped off……….They took all of my mother’s processions for themselves, they charged me money claiming that I owed them money which is untrue. I reckon (because it’s hard to give an exact figure because they refused to give me any details) £10000 upwards.

    • Paul Summerfield

      Social Service have just phoned me……………They are refusing to give me any information about me contained in my mothers report…………They claimed I have to be an Attorney to get that information about me contained in my mothers report, so a carer is not only poorly paid but also has no status whatsoever with Social Service.

      I told this SS women on the phone that I so so sympathies now with parents that lose their children with Social Service, because all you seem to do is write false reports about people and all you really care about is keeping the percentage up for removal of children and auguring with yourself what percentage it should be.

      I was told ” I am ending this telephone conversation with you now ………..

      They are going to try and claim now that Social Service gave me the advice to ICO they did not I had to do it myself

  98. ashamedtobebritish

    But you are … feel free to contact me, you may not be stating one little thing that allows them to keep your information from you, the rules are tight in what you ask for and what laws you use to ask for them, I have this little mantra ‘there’s a loophole for everything’ – we will find it

    • Paul Summerfield

      All I am carefully asking them :N not the report but all the information in there which is held about me. From the way they are acting there is a lot of information about me and I know and they know and the surgery know and my brothers the Attorneys know that I can easily prove everything as untrue.

      • ashamedtobebritish

        Here you go:

        Dear Sir/Madam,

        I am requesting information under the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000 as follows:

        * Copies of all records, handwritten AND computerised.
        * Copies of all e-mails, faxes, letters etc. E-mails are very important.
        * Copies of all telephone messages.
        * Copies of all internal memo’s
        * Copies of all Running Sheets

        The only reason you cannot disclose third parties information is if it is detremental to that person, i.e. threat of personal harm or danger to that person, as I have never been a dangerous or violent person, this does not apply in my case.

        I am entitled to be given a description of the data, be told why it is held, who it has been given to, any information about the source of the data, and to be given an explanation as to how any automated decision taken about me has been made.

        Please contact me as to how you wish payment to be made, attached is a copy of my driving licence for ID purposes and a letter for proof of residence

  99. Paul Summerfield

    I think thats great what you have kindly showed me,

    This is the way you must do it.

    Mr Suess should put that somewhere on his site to help others that has an access problem.

    Over the phone just now THE SS WOMEN kept saying to me we cannot give you your mothers file. I kept saying back I don’t want the file I only want the contents that is written about me and as my mothers carer in your files. She returned back to me “We cannot give you your mothers file. I told her that SS were breaking the law trying to cover this up as under the data protection act I am allowed to see contents of any file that has references about me in it.

    I also said to her that I put a complaint to your complaints manager about this. I notice from her letter that she sent to me she did not log my complaint but she just passed everything onto your information officer.

    She then said we are not going to deal with your complaint because it has been six years since your mother died.

    What they are doing they are trying to run away from this like frightened children because they are not protecting here the vulnerable, but doctors surgery’s, solicitors and of course my mothers attorneys……….

    • You should be entitled to see, under the DPA any records that are about you – but they may edit out references to third persons (if they can’t obtain the consent of the third person for you to have the information), so you may end up getting documents that are heavily redacted and hard to follow. They wouldn’t actually HAVE to retain your mother’s file if six years have elapsed since she passed away, but they would be wrong to destroy the file to thwart your request.

      • Paul Summerfield

        Well for six years SS have been saying I am not allowed by law to see anything that is contained in my mothers report about me. But since I made the appeal to the ICO and wrote the template out that AshamedToBeBritish wrote out on here the SS have now changed their minds, but they told me over the phone that I am not still allowed to see anything that is contained in the report from my mothers surgery about me or if my brothers disagreed. I told the SS that I am under the data protection act entitled to see anything that is written about me and suggested to them to just block out the persons that are making the comments about me. The answer was “But you will still know who is making the comments…..

        Partly what is going on here the surgery are secretly blaming me on record for my mother having a stroke when it was nothing to do with me but the fault in fact lies with the surgery and my brothers.

        The worry is that reports can be written about persons in other peoples reports and you would not know anything about it…….I only found out about it by using the freedom of information act to get my SS phone log calls I made to them and I discovered that false phone logs of me phoning them making complaints about my mothers surgery and suggesting my mother was getting worse and was nearly senile.

      • ashamedtobebritish

        I’m glad I helped a little :) as for you knowing who they’re talking about, that’s not their concern, as long as they redact it you can guess to your hearts content- their obligation is not to give you the actual name, so they’re talking tosh

  100. They can also send you the entire report with anything about 3rd parties redacted, leaving only the information about yourself with names and other identifying features of 3rd parties blacked out. They have no excuse.

    • Paul Summerfield

      Yes thats right but ashamed to be british is saying quite rightly if you use the wrong word to them it gives them ground to refuse and that its what they are doing at the moment.

      They just keep saying to me we wont send the report and I am saying to them I don’t want the report I want only the references to me in it. Its a game that they are playing with me but this game reveals they are trying to hide something in that report from me and I also think I know that report was used against me without me knowing.

      Dr.Suess: I have put this problem about access on your site not because I want any legal advise from you but I want to show how us little people find it so hard dealing with the SS and to show the phoney reports they sometimes write.

      I have broken one of your rules by mentioning Senior Judge Lush in this and I want to make it very clear now I know the attorneys were paying money to my mothers solicitor and I have the proof on this, but I dont think Judge Lush was paid any money from this, but something else happened.

      What I am trying to do is to get the evidence to give to Judge Lush and I want everybody to see how hard it is when it should not be. This is what I am trying to do here and ashamedtobebritish has given me a great idea in the template letter to SS Portsmouth which explains what went wrong at the court of protection and it was not any fault of Judge Lush.

      I will publish here if thats ok with you


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,776 other followers

%d bloggers like this: