Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

(UK) Foster parents, members of UKIP, have children removed from their care.

Options
24567

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    matrim
    Registered Users Posts: 7,516 ✭✭✭matrim


    googled eyes wrote: »
    This is along the lines of what John Waters said could happen if the children's referendum was passed. One social worker has the power to decided if a couple who have been fostering for years are now unfit to foster non uk kids because of their political beliefs

    This could probably happen in Ireland even without the Childern's Referendum. We are talking about foster parents and AFAIK they have no leagal right to keep the kids.


  • Options
    #33
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    the couple in their 50s live in a village in a neat detached house,the husband was a royal navy reservist for more than 30 years and works with disabled people, while his wife is a qualified nursery nurse,they took in ,a baby girl,a boy, and a older girl,all from an ethnoc minority and troubled family background in a emergency placement ,the youngsters have thrived in their care,the couple were discribed as exemplary foster parents,the baby put on weight and the older girl has even began calling them mum and dad,


  • Options
    #34
    googled eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 4,629 ✭✭✭googled eyes


    matrim wrote: »
    This could probably happen in Ireland even without the Childern's Referendum. We are talking about foster parents and AFAIK they have no leagal right to keep the kids.

    I didn't mean the foster parents had legal rights to the children. I ment that one social worker has what seems to be absolute final say over where these children are placed. From what I've read this couple seem to be fairly decent people and because the social worker may not agree with their political beliefs they're deemed unsuitable to look after these children.


  • Options
    #35
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    I was born into a Catholic nationalist (not staunchly) household in norniron. Would it be appropriate, had I needed care as a developing child, to place me with foster parents who were dyed-in-the-wool DUP paisleyites?

    No. It would be a fucking stupid mistake. SW's are supposed to place children in an environment that is culturally analogous to the one from which they hail.

    In the olden days they used to take children from 'savages' and place them with 'respectable' people. It was savagery that allowed such a practice to happen in the first place.


  • Options
    #36
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    getz wrote: »
    the couple in their 50s live in a village in a neat detached house,the husband was a royal navy reservist for more than 30 years and works with disabled people, while his wife is a qualified nursery nurse,they took in ,a baby girl,a boy, and a older girl,all from an ethnoc minority and troubled family background in a emergency placement ,the youngsters have thrived in their care,the couple were discribed as exemplary foster parents,the baby put on weight and the older girl has even began calling them mum and dad,
    Wow, they sound like total monsters ;)
    The more i think about it, the more disturbing and worrying this news story becomes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Shryke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,199 ✭✭✭Shryke


    UKIP are a terrible party, but 2 members of it may well be moderates, and will probably have their own take on things. After the politicking is said and done they chose to take in and care for some children. God knows what kind of sick implications they must be suffering under, whatever their nationalist/isolationist ideals (neither of these things needs racism to function).
    There's a fine line with all of these things. I don't like UKIP but I would never jump to the conclusion that someone being a member makes them racist. There are plenty in it I'm sure, but that goes for all walks of life and it makes this move seem all the more cheap and offensive.


  • Options
    #38
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    DiggingDeep wrote: »
    This is the unfortunate way that the UK is headed. Take airport security for example, nothing to do with terrorism but just an exercise in enforced normalness. Take anything with you (no matter how harmless) that isn't clothes, toileteries in a silly plastic bag and an iPad or laptop running Windows or Mac because only dissidents use Linux, and you'll be given hassle.




    There is always a risk. A government-loving fully paid up Labour member could inject heroin into his schlong one day, lose the head and give his foster child the biggest kick he's ever given.




    With the children's referendum in we have opened the door at least slightly more to allowing this sort of thing to happen in Ireland as well.



    It is enforced normalness, diversity isn't valued there. I wonder how much hassle someone who's into survivalism, enjoys a spot of hunting, lives off the grid in the countryside would have in fostering a child. I'd say such a person could forget about it - mandatory town house where everything was done by registered installers and builders.



    It is unfortunate that you don't see the diversity destroying effect of your 'take no risk' approach. If these kids aren't showing up to school with whipping scars on their back chances are they're being looked after just fine. Unless you're one of those who believes teaching religion = child abuse.



    For now, not as bad but mostly because the money isn't there. The new atheist young adult group actually seem to support a lot of this government monitoring and what have you because deviating from the norm apparently doesn't fit in "modern society" and "ppl r dumb, sure they believe in religion!" so the mentality that people should be herded into a certain fixed lifestyle by a technocratic government comes into play.
    great post. Do you have a blog?


  • Options
    #39
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    I was born into a Catholic nationalist (not staunchly) household in norniron. Would it be appropriate, had I needed care as a developing child, to place me with foster parents who were dyed-in-the-wool DUP paisleyites?

    No. It would be a fucking stupid mistake. SW's are supposed to place children in an environment that is culturally analogous to the one from which they hail.

    In the olden days they used to take children from 'savages' and place them with 'respectable' people. It was savagery that allowed such a practice to happen in the first place.
    i bit more intermixing would not of done northern ireland any harm, , we have already proved that the UKIP are not racist,they have a election going on in london at this time and their candidate is a black west indian, from what i can gather is that the children are from a ethnic EU background finding a perfect match would be impossible,if the couple had racist views why would they have taken in the children in the first place,


  • Options
    #40
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,066 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    The parents belong to a party whose entire policy can be boiled down to:

    "dem outsiders tuk ur jebs".

    So the kids being placed with parents who are campaigning to have people like them removed is clever how?

    Fair? maybe not. Wise in the long run, i think so.

    Well who gets to decide on the criteria used to restrict those eligible for fostering, and more importantly who those criteria are applied to?

    What about all the politicians that were happy to support an illegal war based on lies and deceit, and by extension the murder of thousands upon thousands of people? Or those socially conservative types that are uncomfortable with homosexuality or whatever? Should they not also be disallowed from fostering kids?

    It's a slippery slope, and one that the UK are traveling down at great speed at the minute.

    Presumably these people were deemed to be fit as parents before kids were placed under their care, their membership of a completely legal political party shouldn't come into it.


  • Options
    #41
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    getz wrote: »
    i bit more intermixing would not of done northern ireland any harm,

    Not forced by the state by way of child protection placement policy though. Get real.
    we have already proved that the UKIP are not racist,

    Great but that doesn't mean the placement of the children was culturally sympathetic.
    finding a perfect match would be impossible,

    Strive for excellence not perfection is the saying isn't it?
    if the couple had racist views why would they have taken in the children in the first place

    The probably weren't racist at all. The SW who said that they were was an uninformed twat.

    My points stand.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Seems a dumb decision.

    I don't think the childrens referendum here would stop dumb decisions either, they'd still happen.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #43
    LivelineDipso
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 510 ✭✭✭LivelineDipso


    matrim wrote: »
    This could probably happen in Ireland even without the Childern's Referendum. We are talking about foster parents and AFAIK they have no leagal right to keep the kids.


    That's what the referndum was about and THIS WILL happen here.

    All of this is being driven by QUANGOS, which are funded by the EU to subvert democracy by creating a kind of police state Franco-Germanic traditional totalitarianism across Europe and especially on these island with our long traditions of social justice and pluralism.

    We had been coached to believe that homosexuals marrying is a civil right, while parents have no natural rights to their own children. I am not anti-Gay marraige, just pointing out that often these hype up ideas of social justice are often used as a smokescreen for state injustices on others. That's why political correctness was invented.

    The only thing wrong with UKIP, is I can't vote for them here in Ireland. To listen to some of the muppets on here comparing them to the BNP shows why we are ****ed in Europe.

    No measured thinking - everthing reactive. The end result is self-evident, divide and conquer under the CCTV camera.


  • Options
    #44
    LivelineDipso
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 510 ✭✭✭LivelineDipso


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    I don't mean to sound all "Run_to_da_hills" conspiracy-esque.
    Britain does seem to have this "group-think" mentality.

    A level of PC extremeism where dissent from the norm is crushed.

    Another example is James McClean for not wearing a poppy.
    Its weird that no one on UK screens was without one.


    Run to the Hills is right on a lot of this kind of stuff - the problem with fellas like him is they focus on too much 'out there' stuff. If the CT folks posted and made a point of more issues like this they would win a lot of friends.

    Less Alex Jones and more Mother Jones and they'll be on the right path.


  • Options
    #45
    LivelineDipso
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 510 ✭✭✭LivelineDipso


    larry_duff wrote: »
    UKIP are in favour of the uk withdrawing from the EU , how does that make them racist

    Did you not listen to the Pro-Lisbon Treaty 'debates'?

    Anyone skeptical of the EU is obviously a backward, knuckle-scraping halfwit who hates all that is good in the world.

    RTE told me that.


  • Options
    #46
    swimming in a sea
    Registered Users Posts: 937 ✭✭✭swimming in a sea


    You have to remember most of the top brass in the civil service in the UK joined up in the 70's. Most of these weirdo lefties went to bed with the little red book under their pillow.

    UKIP is a libertarian Party, it wants the UK to get out of the EU and believe in small government, that's a nightmare for career long civil servants a lot of whom see a job in Brussels as their holy grail.


  • Options
    #47
    Shryke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,199 ✭✭✭Shryke


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Not forced by the state by way of child protection placement policy though. Get real.

    ....

    My points stand.

    Your point doesn't stand, you're mixing criteria and your comparison is poor. The state in this case is forcing apart what sounds like a healthy family unit and it's not under an extremist backdrop but an insinuated slight against political affiliation that has nothing to do with the care or treatment of the children involved.


  • Options
    #48
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    I was born into a Catholic nationalist (not staunchly) household in norniron. Would it be appropriate, had I needed care as a developing child, to place me with foster parents who were dyed-in-the-wool DUP paisleyites?

    No. It would be a fucking stupid mistake. SW's are supposed to place children in an environment that is culturally analogous to the one from which they hail.

    In the olden days they used to take children from 'savages' and place them with 'respectable' people. It was savagery that allowed such a practice to happen in the first place.

    Children should be given to the best parents. These foster parents had these children for 7 years and the council decided to take these kids from their parents because of a political party. That's so daft.

    Why do you bring up savagery? It has nothing to do with this case, unless you consider it savagery that someone should be involved in UKIP?

    Finding kids a culturally analogous setting isn't 1) always possible, or 2) always necessary particularly if they come from minorities not represented widely in the foster scheme. Sure you could say put them in a culture that is like their own, but even then there are arguments to be had about which cultures are like which. Leave it out and just put the kids with good parents and leave them there.


  • Options
    #49
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    philologos wrote: »
    These foster parents had these children for 7 years

    Read the OP properly before you start spouting your crap. If the children had been with them for seven years it would be barbaric to remove them for some oversight in best practice.
    The couple, who have been approved foster parents for seven years, were eight weeks into the placement when they were approached by social workers about their membership of the party.

    (My emphasis)


  • Options
    #50
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Read the OP properly before you start spouting your crap.

    (My emphasis)

    Fair enough. Nonetheless though, they had proven themselves as foster carers for 7 years.

    Would you mind evaluating the other criticisms I had of your argument that people should be put into a "culturally analogous" settings.

    What the heck does that even mean in practice?


  • Options
    #51
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Shryke wrote: »
    Your point doesn't stand, you're mixing criteria and your comparison is poor. The state in this case is forcing apart what sounds like a healthy family unit and it's not under an extremist backdrop but an insinuated slight against political affiliation that has nothing to do with the care or treatment of the children involved.

    Would you mind quoting the specific points and refuting them?

    You've painted over my points with a broad brush.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,066 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Meanwhile - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237786/Is-UKs-worst-parent-Woman-leaves-child-outside-betting-shop-tied-reins-goes-place-bet.html

    What a place! The Mother probably votes Labour though, so it's not a big deal.


  • Options
    #53
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    philologos wrote: »
    What the heck does that even mean in practice?

    I'll make it simple for you.

    Putting children with Afro-Caribbean heritage with Afro-Caribbean FP's.

    (You'll love this one)

    Not putting children with Christian heritage with Muslims and vice versa.


  • Options
    #54
    Shryke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,199 ✭✭✭Shryke


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Would you mind quoting the specific points and refuting them?

    You've painted over my points with a broad brush.

    Would you mind addressing the brunt of my post in any meaningful way instead of being evasive?
    This "brush stroke" talk... I replied to your post, I don't like this trying to imply manipulation of context where there is none.


  • Options
    #55
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    I'll make it simple for you.

    Putting children with Afro-Caribbean heritage with Afro-Caribbean FP's.

    (You'll love this one)

    Not putting children with Christian heritage with Muslims and vice versa.

    What if that isn't always possible, or in the event that there is a foster parent with a brilliant track record who will take good care of the children who isn't from a certain cultural background, or of a certain religion?

    Also, what age does this start being relevant in the child's case?

    Finally, a question that you brushed over last time. In the case of minority groups let's say a child of Bangladeshi origin, and let's argue that there isn't any foster parents of Bangladeshi origin available to take the child what happens in this case? Let's say there is a family of Pakistani origin available to take the child. Who is to argue as to how similar the cultures are?

    Your solution is utterly impractical. It's not the States job to act as cultural analysts.

    It's encouraging to see that Michael Gove is going to investigate this, and most political parties have condemned this. It also seems that the council is going to reverse its ignorant and ill-informed opinion.


  • Options
    #56
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Shryke wrote: »
    Would you mind addressing the brunt of my post in any meaningful way instead of being evasive?
    This "brush stroke" talk... I replied to your post, I don't like this trying to imply manipulation of context where there is none.

    Sorry Shryke but I'm not being evasive. You made the claim that my points don't stand.

    Which points exactly? I think it's only fair you treat them as I have Getzs' points above and break them down instead of me second guessing which ones.

    I'm having three people question me at this point so be fair.


  • Options
    #57
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Oh, another point as well. The fostering system shouldn't be dependant on how multicultural a State is.

    If a state didn't have anywhere near as much diversity and let's say it was fairly homogenous something like 90% of a particular ethnicity. There is a child of an origin which isn't widely represented and there is no foster carers present (of that ethnicity) to take care of them. What do you do? Leave the child without foster parents?

    A policy or a law that is based on how diverse a population is (something the State has no control over) in respect to this is very clearly an ass.


  • Options
    #58
    donegal_road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭donegal_road


    its a smear cmpagn against UKIP, an in particular Nigel Farage. He is not popular amongst the EU beurocrats, in particular Martin Schulz, as he seems to be one of the few who are exposing the European Union for the fiasco that it is.

    Farage worked as a trader with his own brokerage for 20 years, he understands how the markets work, and how they will eventually destroy the Euro project.

    Schulz went as far as his high school final exams, and ran a book shop after that. Now (by whatever pull he has in high places) he is the president of the European Parliament.


  • Options
    #59
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    philologos wrote: »
    What if that isn't always possible,

    As close as you can get.
    or in the event that there is a foster parent with a brilliant track record who will take good care of the children who isn't from a certain cultural background, or of a certain religion?

    They will be considered of course but the children's culture/heritage will be given due regard.
    Also, what age does this start being relevant in the child's case?

    Birth.
    In the case of minority groups let's say a child of Bangladeshi origin, and let's argue that there isn't any foster parents of Bangladeshi origin available to take the child what happens in this case? Let's say there is a family of Pakistani origin available to take the child. Who is to argue as to how similar the cultures are?

    In the UK or Ireland I guess they will place the child with Asian/Muslim heritage with FP's of an Asian/Muslim heritage.
    Your solution is utterly impractical. It's not the States job to act as cultural analysts.

    It's not my solution at all - do you think I'm making this up as I'm going along?. You trying to take me down a peg-or-two again? Think my ego is out of check is it?


  • Options
    #60
    Shryke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,199 ✭✭✭Shryke


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Sorry Shryke but I'm not being evasive. You made the claim that my points don't stand.

    Which points exactly? I think it's only fair you treat them as I have Getzs' points above and break them down instead of me second guessing which ones.

    I'm having three people question me at this point so be fair.

    I see that you are. It's the fundamentals that I disagree with you on.
    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    I was born into a Catholic nationalist (not staunchly) household in norniron. Would it be appropriate, had I needed care as a developing child, to place me with foster parents who were dyed-in-the-wool DUP paisleyites?

    Not applicable. Just not applicable. There is no comparison between the situation you're describing and a couple in England that happen to belong to a political party.
    If you want to paint a picture for me of the troubles and all the crap that came with it superimposed on this modest couples life in England I would like to see it. And basing this entirely on their subscription to a political party? Ludicrous.
    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    No. It would be a fucking stupid mistake. SW's are supposed to place children in an environment that is culturally analogous to the one from which they hail.
    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Great but that doesn't mean the placement of the children was culturally sympathetic.

    They're children. They're growing up and developing as people and they're doing it in England. They didn't just get off the boat from an extremist camp in the middle east.
    England is one of the most multicultural countries in the world. They were with caring parents. Your criteria would see no children being placed anywhere. It's unrealistic and damaging to the welfare of the kids. What they need are good parents, not ethnically correct ones ffs.

    Tbh you're saying they should stick with their own kind, which doesn't come off too well at all and it's more the attitude I would expect to hear from a UKIP member than this couple who have been treated so poorly for wanting to provide a good home.

    Segregation and ghettos for minorities or diversity, care and understanding in a multicultural society. It's a tough one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    donegal_road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭donegal_road


    is it any coincidence that this was from three days ago.. dont mess with the elites

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFGD6VChlJw


Advertisement