Open letter to MP and Member of the European Parliament.
It has recently come to our attention, that healthy babies are being removed from loving parents on very flimsy evidence and at best conjecture. These children are then fast tracked through the secret family courts for adoption aided and abetted by social workers, guardians, expert witnesses, solicitors and barristers.
If criminal charges are not pursued by police due to lack of evidence, how can social services claim significant harm has taken place?
Most of the cases where social services alleged a child has suffered significant harm are never pursued by the police, because there is not enough evidence to charge and obtain a successful prosecution.
Why would parents take children to A & E departments and GP surgeries if they had injured their child?
Loving and concerned parents unwittingly take their children to an A & E department and/or GP only to find themselves accused on non accidental injury and subject to care orders and court proceedings.
Why don’t paediatricians make every effort to rule out non accidental injury?
Paediatricians do not make any attempt to rule out non accidental injury. They do not carry out a detailed assessment of the mother and child’s birth or physical history to establish an underlying medical condition. Instead they simply rule in non accidental injury as the only explanation.
Why don’t medical experts ask to see the child in person?
Medical experts who are hired to give their opinion never meet with the children who they are supposed to be giving an opinion on. How can they give a medical opinion when they have never met with the child, the parents, and have no first hand information?
Where is the medical research?
Paediatricians and so called medical experts say injuries sustained are as a result of handling outside the norm of acceptable parenting. Where is the medical research and clinical evidence that can categorically say that a child was injured due to rough handling?
Where is the evidenced based practise?
The NHS quotes that it uses, ‘the best evidence available’. What is the best available evidence used to diagnose non accidental injury or risk of future harm? Is the evidence used to diagnose non accidental current and up to date? What research base are doctors using to inform themselves and their opinions? Are doctors up to date with current research?
How then can parents be put before a family court accused of significant harm?
If a parent is accused of significant harm, then surely they should be charged and put before of court of law and a jury of their peers, where reasonable doubt is the benchmark? Cases in family courts would not stand up in a court of law due to lack of evidence. Any burglar facing a prison sentence of 6 months or more can demand a hearing before a jury, how can it be right or just that parents who risk losing their children for life are denied this option?
Why are parents denied the opportunity to submit independent expert evidence?
What is more concerning is when parents make attempts to try and clear their name, they are deemed to be a bigger risk because they do not accept the courts findings. Why would any innocent parent accept a courts findings if they have not caused any harm to their child? If you attempt to instruct independent medical experts for a 2nd opinion or seek an independent X-ray, you are accused of child abuse. There could be no more case of abuse than parting a child from a loving parent.
Why are parent who have been accused of harm denied the right to be trialled by judge and jury?
In family courts, they work on the basis of probability and only 51% that a parent hurt their child. The evidence against them is always biased and in favour of the admitting hospital and medical experts hired. Expert witnesses always confirm the hospitals findings. Hospitals never make any attempt to disprove non accidental injury and rule it out, instead they simply rule it in as the only probable cause.
Where is the Article 6 Right To A Fair Trial?
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a provision of the European Convention which protects the right to a fair trial. Parents put through family courts do not receive a fair trial. The odds are stacked against them from the moment they enter the court. They are denied access to independent medical experts, social workers and risk assessments, which could all prove that they suitable parents.
Where is the equality before the law?
Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.” It seems that family courts are no longer working to uphold equality before the law, and are simply ignoring this point.
Why are social services not making all efforts to keep families together?
Social services are meant to make every attempt to keep a baby with the parent or at worst within the family. This does not seem to be happening. Social services go to great lengths of making a case to have the child removed and placed outside of the family. How can this be in the interest of any child?
How can removing a child from loving parents and given to strangers be in the best interest of a child?
Children are routinely removed from their loving parents and limited to minimal contact in order to break the bond between parent and child. This leaves both parent and child traumatised and in a state of shock and paralysis which renders them hopeless and helpless. Parents and children end up in a worse state than before proceedings started.
Human rights act Article 3: Prohibition on Torture No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The whole process of care proceedings and treatment by all invloved is torturous and inhumane. Parents are subjected to degrading treatment from all parties invloved and worst than criminals. Those charged with a criminal offence have more opportunity to fully present their case and receive a fair hearing.
Why are parents gagged from speaking out in public?
Parents are put through a torturous time during the proceedings and suffer great distress and trauma. The affects are far reaching. Parents are warned not to go public or their child will be adopted, worst still they will be gagged or imprisoned. If you want to be able to clear you name, why wouldn’t you go public?
Where is the right to respect for private and family life?
Article 8: Right to Respect for Private and Family Life
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This should be the guiding principle in all cases.
Why are family courts in the UK allowed to hold hearings in secret?
Family courts are held in secret, with no reporting allowed. How can fairness be assured when they are not transparent and open to scrutiny from the outside? Family courts should be open and subject to rigorous scrutiny to ensure that parents accused receive the opportunity to exonerate themselves.