Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Yes Reg
I think Peter would agree with you there
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Whatever one says here could become a hot potato. Proscription lists and all that...best keep one's head low, what!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
lets see if rotheram council says any more
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
tom in 17 quotes the police "no criminal offence committed", perhaps in future a law could be drafted that ensures children are not taken away from a happy environment by cold hearted officials?
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
My apologies Howard. That post, and that quote, were in response to the 'scurrilous' point that was made regarding the Political colour of the Council in Rotherham.
The particular story to which I allude only touches upon the story of these children in it's official rear-guard knee-jerk response being another example of tick-box action trumping common-sense.
I knew I should have stuck to commenting while firmly keeping the children as the focus. Sorry.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
The way in which social services operate concerning the protection of children, ie in total secrecy, flies in the face of natural justice. The phrase 'power without responsibility' could have been drafted with such cases in mind. Hopefully this case will blow the lid off.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I don't want to be the kill joy here but in reality social services cant win
look at cases where children may/may not have been abused
they are wrong if they remove the child and get it wrong
they are wrong if they leave child and they found tobe with abusers.
Also, sadly social workers are overstretched which adds to the problem.
That said this does not go away from this strange decision by Rotherham
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
As Dave has so far resolutely refused to apologise for his "closet racists" remark it appears that Rotherham social services and the Conservative portion of Government sing from the same sheet.
Did the world not take heed when Dave warned against the instigation of a gay witch hunt?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
If this catches on, it could lead to an institutionalised persecution of UKIP members.
This is worrying! Not least because the "being anti EU" card is played here, when we all know that EU membership is against the British Constitution, including the varying treaties that have been signed, not least the Lisbon Treaty.
If this becomes a last-ditch attempt on the part of the pro "One-European-State" activists within the Institution to silence opposition to their failed "United European States" project, then it could be very worrying indeed.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
DC is correct not to apologise as he clearly believed what he said but he was wrong. It is also totally wrong to take from that, as Tom does, that 'the Conservative portion of government' thinks the same.
Do not get so excited Alexander, ignorant and bigoted action by a few dumb social workers in Rotherham does not extend to any massive conspiracy. It does demonstrate appalling pc attitudes of many social workers.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,888
I agree with Barry's last sentence and that pc attitude comes in a direct line from the department head, their boss and ultimately central government directive whose ideas can easily be misinterpreted. I wonder how many ethnic children have grown up in care because there were not enough foster parents for their particular background. There are more important things in life than learning about your ethnic culture, maybe that is why immigrants in the distant past eventually blended in to form our present culture, there were no pc directives.
A loving home for a child regardless of their country of origin provides so many basic life skills that sadly those in care must miss out on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Integration is essential, this multi-cultural crap is socially damaging and divisive, a modern form of apartied.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i have known a west indian family adopt a white baby and a few white people adopt or foster children from other racial backgrounds.
all worked very while from what i saw.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Presumably Rotherham SS are equally justified in sticking to their opinion, as to hold the opinion that UKIP are a racist organisation is enough to say it is so, it is surely enough to act upon?
The fault lies with them setting aside the track record of the household.
It is a tasty cake your eating, that you have there Barry.
Yes, it is misguided to retain children in a care home and deny them a loving, caring foster-family home on the grounds of ethnicity, but this practice must have informed the teaching/training of the majority of those qualified to work in the children's SS field.
However, there are real issues which greatly complicate the lives of young people fostered out of their culture, peer-pressure is high on that list.
We each may earnestly wish for a better world, but sticking to ones guns irrespective of the harm ones views have is not the likely way to move things along.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Tom, you are indeed a worthy successor to Thersites, that you can agree with Barry on the principle yet carp at the detail.
I am sure that nowadays a child with an ethnic minority or mixed heritage would not be placed long-term with a white English couple unless such a couple were in a same-sex partnership; however I'm not so sure the reverse is true as refusing to place a white child with non-white foster parents would obviously be discriminatory. (Choosing my terms very carefully here, to avoid upsetting anyone who might be offended on behalf of any vulnerable person or group against whom I might unwittingly be appearing to discriminate.)
You see, according to the accepted doctrines, only white British people can be racist, except of course the few British descendants of non-white immigrants who have joined UKIP.
George Orwell couldn't have made it up.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Peter, not to be able to differentiate between principle and detail is a bit like not being able to see the trees for the wood.
The detail here we shall never learn. i.e. the circumstances that led to there being, on file, a comment from a Judge regarding the importance of ethnicity in the fostering process.
As to why the comments of a Judge took precedence over a common sense approach is a symptom of the present new-age methodology which itself supersedes the historical practices that were found wanting some thirty years ago.
That the fostering habit, such as it is within the indigenous population, has not kept pace in the various ethnic groups with their own spawning of 'orphans' is, I am sure all would agree, not the fault of any child.
What was the alternative path here?
Rotherham SS could have stuck to it's guns and continued fostering in this one particular household and prioritised the care and nurture of these children in defiance of the courts wishes?
We may all of us wish that it were so, and yet none of us can know the circumstances that brought this case before a Judge in the first place.
Happily, the children are still together and receiving excellent care, we are assured.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Fortunately for all Barry, I see no need to point-up the freedom of choice exercised by Conservatives vis-a-vis children in care.
One must cut ones cloth to suit in either Savile Row.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barry,nothing wrong with the deaths head logo,as long as its got glory written underneath it [cap badge/motto] as in.......answers on a postcard please.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
I am by way of descent from both parents: Anglo, Saxon, Jutic, and Celtic.
No problems, no recriminations, no poiticising.
Hopefully the children who are object of the debate in Rotherham do not become pawns in a political tug of war and are not manipulated for political ends.
