The Two Systems Available in Child Welfare Contact Orders / Parental Rights & Responsibilities ~ Page 2

The two systems that operate are ineffective, as they are based on punishment without trial at the first stage, and furthermore put you and your family at risk. If you do get a proof case, you are put at risk under the surroundings you have to expose your self and your child’s details. And there is no guarantee that a child sex offender is not sitting in the public gallery grooming all your child’s details.

I was not convinced the people involved in my case had the paramount interests of my child at the forefront of their mind, when they could not operate civil respectful surroundings. How can any of this be in the best interests of your child?

I could not possibly comprehend that these people had the best interests of my child at the forefront of there mind, and made me seriously campaign and push for law reform within this shameful system for the most vulnerable members of our society.

These are possible labels/issues you might be given if you challenge / question any of the elements of this system:

• Over protective parent / guardian
• You will be forced to condone violence either on you or your children
• Process abuser
• Manipulator
• Liar
• Represent your self and pay the price
• No privacy to compose yourself, should you show emotion or vulnerability
• Placed at risk in the same room / corridor with a violent ex-partner
• Exposed to the same surroundings as criminal offenders
• Threatened with financial penalty if you don’t comply
• Threatened with imprisonment
• Threatened that your child will be taken from you
• Told this is a welfare test (with no guidelines/ legislation)
• Exposed to unqualified / un-vetted people, who will gather information    about your children
• Sheriffs that have no background / training in family matters / Law, and will    accept recommendations about your child’s future from a solicitor who is not    qualified /trained /vetted to make these recommendations
• Told a sheriff can do what they want, and that you have no rights in this    system

Corrupt Documents Findings

A sheriff - Brian Kearney - who lead the enquiry into the Orkney scandal (which cost £6 million) made the following statement for child care policies below. This sheriff also conducted the enquiry into child care polices in Fife (27/10/92) - "We must make sure frontline professionals have the training, support, and confidence (we should add proper vetting) to make well founded judgements if that is what is best for a particular child or young person."

Questions composed and addressed in Parliament:

[ Click to here view insert... ]

[ Click to here view insert... ]

What I could never understand, is that if no specific sheriff is allocated to a child welfare case, how can they have experience of the skills of a solicitor. And as my case demonstrated it was a floating sheriff who ordered Reporter X into my home, so a great deal does not add up here. And remember I have experience of being in these closed rooms and have heard what familiarity the sheriff has of the case, which is nil.

How can someone accept the recommendation of a person employed to address points of law, who is not qualified / trained / vetted or regulated / governed? Is it not just an insult to children to be riding off the backs of them and trying to convince people you have the paramount interests of them at hand, when you cannot even allocate competent people to undertake such a responsible task?

As the below documents state, the sheriff principal is responsible for these lists. Why are these people not adhering to legislation, with no proper vetting system in place. Why is nobody governing them? Why are they not operating any policy practices / procedures in working with children? Why are they allowed to operate and monitor children at the weekend in play centres / non- resident parents home?

[ Click to here view insert... ]

[ Click to here view insert... ]

Back - Next

[ 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 ]