EDL critic defends EDL mother when social services wants to take child

biko

This is a weird one.

In short a UK council wants to take a yet unborn baby from the mother Toni McLeod because they claim to be concerned about the mother’s violent links to the English Defence League and also some convictions for other violence. Not an angel by any means.
Documents seen by the Sunday Express reveal social workers are worried about Mrs McLeod’s previous alcohol and drug misuse, her “aggressive behaviour” and her alleged “mental health issues” .

Durham County Council told Mrs McLeod on Friday her unborn baby was being placed on its child protection register. Last month, a judge ruled that her three other children, who have different fathers, should be permanently removed from her care.

But, a LibDem MP has raised the question about why social services goes after Toni McLeod. He contrasts her treatment with that of the extremist Islamic cleric Abu Qatada, who was allowed to remain with his ­children when he was briefly remanded on bail earlier this year as the Government tries to deport him. He said: “It raises a curious question as to why Abu Qatada is allowed to radicalise his children but the state won’t take the chance of allowing Toni McLeod to look after her baby in case she says something social workers won’t like.

She now wants to move to ­Ireland for the birth to avoid England’s social services. Rifleman McLeod, 31, plans to request a transfer to Northern Ireland so he can be with his child.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/327086

I can understand why social services would be worried about history of drug abuse but tbh to take a child at birth for what appears to be political reasons does not sit well with me. perhaps there is more to this story than meets the eye but it does seem to be differential treatment.

EDIT by biko:
Title changed from "EDL mother wants to move to Ireland to keep child" to
"EDL critic defends EDL mother when social services wants to take child"

Laminations

Difference between worrying about the ideological bent of a potential parent and worrying about a wicked, violent, abusive druggy/alcoholic being allowed raise kids.

PS I hate when people like her are described as 'no angel' as if you get angelic status by simply not being a violent waste of a life. It's like the Chris Rock sketch where he ridicules dead beat dads for trying to claim credit for things that are generally expected of us. So nevermind angels, she is no average decent person.

AlekSmart

Can we first be clear on which "Ireland" is being mentioned here ?

Manach

Offhand, the social services would be running a risk of infringement of the persons ECHR rights, with similar situations in Europe being deemed in breach except in very extreme cases.

biko

I suspect it's the Republic as she'd still be within UK if she moved to NI.

For me the interesting part is why the MP has gotten into this. I don't think he would stand for any "no angel/white trash" parent off the street.

Yes, social service can and will take kids from bad parents, they've already taken 3 others from her, it's not clear why from the article.
But she's never been charged with violence against children.

The social worker’s report states: “Toni clearly needs to break away from the inappropriate friendships she has through either the EDL or break-off group in order that she can model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.


http://www.examiner.com/article/british-thought-police-threaten-to-seize-child-from-nationalist-mother
One of the EDL's most outspoken critics has surprised many by coming to Mrs. McLeod's defense.
Liberal Democrat member of Parliament John Hemming has critisized the threats against McLeod, claiming they are Orwellian motivated:
"This case is one where the 'thought police' have decided to remove her baby at birth because of what she might say to the baby.
I wonder what the baby’s father is thinking when he fights for a country which won’t allow him to have a child because of what the child’s mother might say."

Laminations

biko wrote: »

I suspect it's the Republic as she'd still be within UK if she moved to NI.

For me the interesting part is why the MP has gotten into this. I don't think he would stand for any "no angel/white trash" parent off the street.

Yes, social service can and will take kids from bad parents, they've already taken 3 others from her, it's not clear why from the article.
But she's never been charged with violence against children.

The social worker’s report states: “Toni clearly needs to break away from the inappropriate friendships she has through either the EDL or break-off group in order that she can model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.


http://www.examiner.com/article/british-thought-police-threaten-to-seize-child-from-nationalist-mother
One of the EDL's most outspoken critics has surprised many by coming to Mrs. McLeod's defense.
Liberal Democrat member of Parliament John Hemming has critisized the threats against McLeod, claiming they are Orwellian motivated:
"This case is one where the 'thought police' have decided to remove her baby at birth because of what she might say to the baby.
I wonder what the baby’s father is thinking when he fights for a country which won’t allow him to have a child because of what the child’s mother might say."

Having 3 kids removed already it is not what she might say but what she might do - and what she is. a violent drug abusing alcoholic.

Aside from no convictions for violence towards children can you be sure she has no convictions for neglect or violence in general?

Replace 'no angel' with 'no fit parent'

antoobrien

biko wrote: »

I suspect it's the Republic as she'd still be within UK if she moved to NI.

My family was involved in foster care and we've heard of a couple of these cases over the past 15-20 years where the mother comes to Ireland to try to dodge an order like this. Regardless of the politics of the person in question, the issue is the potential danger to the child, so I'd tend to be in agreement with the council - they don't issue these orders for fun.

This is one case where the "right to travel" should be quashed because of the potential to put the child's long term health at risk.

RDM_83 again

I know this is off topic but for me what I find interesting is that the unborn child can actually be placed on the child protection register (the child/fetus is 10 weeks over the abortion limit*), which to me would imply that the state or at least a branch of the state has granted de facto 'personhood(?)' to an unborn child.

* Not trying to get into the whole abortion debate

Nodin

Article wrote:

“It raises a curious question as to why Abu Qatada is allowed to radicalise his children but the state won’t take the chance of allowing Toni McLeod to look after her baby in case she says something social workers won’t like.

.

Yet the article in the express lists the reasons - her saying something doesn't figure

Documents seen by the Sunday Express reveal social workers are worried about Mrs McLeod’s previous alcohol and drug misuse, her “aggressive behaviour” and her alleged “mental health issues” .

A Daily mail-esque effort.

antoobrien

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I know this is off topic but for me what I find interesting is that the unborn child can actually be placed on the child protection register (the child/fetus is 10 weeks over the abortion limit*), which to me would imply that the state or at least a branch of the state has granted de facto 'personhood(?)' to an unborn child.

Not really - the order is more than likely provisional a order that will only be executed in the even of the child being born.

RDM_83 again

antoobrien wrote: »

Not really - the order is more than likely provisional a order that will only be executed in the even of the child being born.

Hmmm that would make sense in terms of the actual order to remove the child from her care once born, however the article does state

"Durham County Council told Mrs McLeod on Friday her unborn baby was being placed on its child protection register."

I know this is an Express 'article' :rolleyes: (so taking it with a pinch of salt) but I would guess that to even get a provisional order for action the child/fetus would have to be on their registers.

biko

Babies gets taken from their mothers all the time I'm sure. Hopefully for a better life.
What peaked my interest, and I see now I should have worded the title differently, is the fact that a outspoken EDL critic compares her case with that of a radical islamist.

As I said in the OP, it seems to be differential treatment and I'm (fairly) sure the MP would have got all the facts before he publicly addressed the issue.
I've seen other cases where children from islamist* parents in Sweden have been taken into care when they may been been coerced into underage marriages or had death threats from the parents for not following the parents' wishes.



*by islamists I refer to people that won't integrate into the host society and forces their kids to live according to Islam, with what that entails of underage marriage, honour killings and such. I'm well aware of that these things also happen in non-radical groups or even non-Islamist groups

Icepick

If they can limit people's rights to this extent, they should have sterilized her to minimize suffering.

SeanW

This is somewhat troubling, their social services could be so concerned about:

Toni clearly needs to break away from the inappropriate friendships she has through either the EDL or break-off group in order that she can model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.

But yet they have no problem whatsoever with Muslims doing much the same thing. Given the level of honor killing, burkha imposing, female genital mutilation, hate preaching in mosques, the above would be just cause take a significant number of muslim children from their parents, if this same concern were to be applied universally.

This reminds me of the saga of Undercover Mosque, where preachers were found to be telling their flock to "Kill Jews," "bomb Indian businesses," ignore secular law, kill homosexuals, support terrorists, marshall a Muslim army to take over Britain, etc.

The authorities response was not to prosecute the Imams for hate speech but to arrest the film-makers for that crime - for just showing people what these imams are preaching, day in day out, at their mosques to full audiences.

AlekSmart

biko wrote: »

I suspect it's the Republic as she'd still be within UK if she moved to NI.

For me the interesting part is why the MP has gotten into this. I don't think he would stand for any "no angel/white trash" parent off the street.

http://www.examiner.com/article/british-thought-police-threaten-to-seize-child-from-nationalist-mother
"

I'm open to correction,but I suspect that Northern Irelands leglislative system may well be seperate from "Mainland UK" in these matters,in the same way that Scotland manages to have several areas where English rules and mores do not apply ?

Brown Bomber

biko wrote: »

This is a weird one.

In short a UK council wants to take a yet unborn baby from the mother Toni McLeod because they claim to be concerned about the mother’s violent links to the English Defence League and also some convictions for other violence. Not an angel by any means.
Documents seen by the Sunday Express reveal social workers are worried about Mrs McLeod’s previous alcohol and drug misuse, her “aggressive behaviour” and her alleged “mental health issues” .

Durham County Council told Mrs McLeod on Friday her unborn baby was being placed on its child protection register. Last month, a judge ruled that her three other children, who have different fathers, should be permanently removed from her care.

But, a LibDem MP has raised the question about why social services goes after Toni McLeod. He contrasts her treatment with that of the extremist Islamic cleric Abu Qatada, who was allowed to remain with his ­children when he was briefly remanded on bail earlier this year as the Government tries to deport him. He said: “It raises a curious question as to why Abu Qatada is allowed to radicalise his children but the state won’t take the chance of allowing Toni McLeod to look after her baby in case she says something social workers won’t like.

She now wants to move to ­Ireland for the birth to avoid England’s social services. Rifleman McLeod, 31, plans to request a transfer to Northern Ireland so he can be with his child.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/327086

I can understand why social services would be worried about history of drug abuse but tbh to take a child at birth for what appears to be political reasons does not sit well with me. perhaps there is more to this story than meets the eye but it does seem to be differential treatment.

EDIT by biko:
Title changed from "EDL mother wants to move to Ireland to keep child" to
"EDL critic defends EDL mother when social services wants to take child"

Ah Desmond, the man who launched the EDL on the first page of The Star strikes again with more bull****.



Have you stopped to consider why she isn't considered fit to look after a dog? Is that because of her beliefs? Or is it because she is a Facist with a history of alcohol, pschyiatric problems, violence, prison terms and drugs?

This is reportedly the "victim" pre-marriage:

Woman bit police officer after arrest

A WOMAN attacked several police officers, biting one, after her arrest during an English Defence League rally, a court heard.

Police initially went to the aid of Antonia Claire Evans, who was suffering a suspected broken arm after a scuffle during the demonstration, in November last year.

However, Durham Crown Court heard that a stand-off developed, before the officers tried to lift Evans out through the crowd.
Rachel Masters, prosecuting, said Evans shouted and swore and, despite her injury, lashed out at the officers with her injured arm

She punched another officer in the groin and headbutted a third after they tried to pin her to the ground.
Amid efforts to put her into a police van, to remove her and place her in a cell at a police station, she continued to struggle, biting a custody officer’s index finger.

Miss Masters said the officer had to hit her three times to make her release her grip.

The officer’s finger was cut by the bite, while another officer lost clumps of hair grabbed by Evans during the struggle.
Miss Masters said the arrest at the rally, in Preston, Lancashire, was the culmination of a series of incidents involving Evans

It included biting a security guard in the chest on June 3 as he tried to detain her outside the Tesco shop in Newton Aycliffe, County Durham, on suspicion of shoplifting.

In a further incident, in October, she set a Staffordshire bull terrier and an alsatian on her then partner as he left her home in Newton Aycliffe after a row.
Miss Masters said both dogs attacked and bit the man several times, while she landed several punches.

Evans, 24, of Mellanby Crescent, admitted four charges of assault causing actual bodily harm, three of common assault and being the owner of a dog dangerously out of control.

Julie Clemitson, for Evans, said she has spent 123 days in custody, during which time she has progressed with psychiatric assistance.
Judge John Evans said that because of the time she had spent in custody, he could pass a prison sentence of 51 weeks, suspended for two years.
She must undergo 12 months of probation supervision, to include sessions addressing alcohol misuse, while continuing to receive psychiatric help.
She was also banned from owning dogs for seven years.

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/9041017.Woman_bit_police_officer_after_arrest/

I was going to post a picture from her facebook page that shows her proudly posing semi-naked with her police ankle-tag-bracelet-thing but it's too early in the morning and I am sure you get the point already.

Would you let this woman mind your kids? If not, would it be the documented history of violence or her "views"? The answer shold be as obvious (minus the Express spin) to you now as it was to Durham Social Services.

==========================================================

As for the Muslim extremist - I don't suppose you've stopped to consider that his children are adults? It reminds me of Alan Partridge trying to convince his solicitor to demand custody of his grown child after a divorce. Abu Qatada has a lot of children, 1 at most I believe is under 18.

biko

Omar Mohammed Othman has 5 children, 2 since he arrived in Britain 1993 to claim asylum from Jordan.
So you're right they're probably over 18. Good point.

Monty Burnz

biko wrote: »

I suspect it's the Republic as she'd still be within UK if she moved to NI.

For me the interesting part is why the MP has gotten into this.

John Hemming has loads of form in this area. His appearance on the Alex Jones show (basically the Oprah of the Conspiracy Theory world) should set alarm bells ringing.

Bear in mind that Alex Jones subscribes to every single absurd conspiracy theory going (or at least pretends to for the benefit of his customers).

SeanW

@Brown Bomber, if she is such an unfit parent, why did the social workers report focus so heavily on her links with the EDL and/or splinter groups? Surely all this evidence of violence etc. would have been sufficient.

Why give the impression that EDL membership is reason to take someone's baby if that is not the case, and why give the impression that they're concerned about the baby's ability to learn how to make "positive relationships" when clearly there are any number of other reasons (known gangsters, islamic extremism etc) that such a concern might apply?

The report states:

Social workers report wrote:

Toni clearly needs to break away from the inappropriate friendships she has through either the EDL or break-off group in order that she can model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.

Why even mention the EDL?

And as for Muslim parents who attend the Wahabbist mosques, going to be exposing their children to such views as "Kill Jews, Kill homosexuals, Kill apostates, bomb Indian business, praise be the killers of British solders, reject the nations' law until it is replaced by Islamic law" and so on, how the hell are they going to:

Social workers report wrote:

model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.

It doesn't make any sense.

As for John Hemming, he's been involved in these kinds of cases for a while, including that of a woman who had to flee to Spain to have her child.

Brown Bomber

SeanW wrote: »

@Brown Bomber, if she is such an unfit parent,

"If"?

She is an unfit parent (assuming the report of her arrest and detention is true). Due to her documented history of alcohol abuse, drug abuse, rage, violence and prison terms.

My own mother grew up with a violent and abusive alcoholic father and the trauma still lives on with her.

SeanW wrote: »

why did the social workers report focus so heavily on her links with the EDL and/or splinter groups? Surely all this evidence of violence etc. would have been sufficient.

You see this is where it pays to be highly sceptical of any article from the gutter press that tries to portray Muslims and/or Islam in a negative light.

For good reason the innocent children involved in these cases are protected by the courts and the details of the case are wrapped up under confidentiality. Therefore, the Express hack and the mother are free to make whatever claims they desire unchallenged. There is no confirmation from the Social Services that their "report focused heavily on the EDL".

These are the two most important points in the article:

The Sunday Express is unable to give details of the judge’s explanation for legal reasons.

and

The council said it was unable to comment.

SeanW wrote: »

Why give the impression that EDL membership is reason to take someone's baby if that is not the case, and why give the impression that they're concerned about the baby's ability to learn how to make "positive relationships" when clearly there are any number of other reasons (known gangsters, islamic extremism etc) that such a concern might apply?

Sean, who is giving this impression? Is it A- The Sunday Express or B - Durham Social Services?

We haven't seen "B" so therefore it must be "A" The Sunday Express. As for "why" - you tell me.

SeanW

Don't get me wrong, there's clearly some evidence that she might not be a good parent. I just wonder why the EDL came into it, as it was reported that her membership of the EDL featured heavily in the social workers report.

If part of the reason she had this child taken from her is because she's a member of the EDL, then that to my mind is a very serious issue.

If on the other hand, her child is to be taken away ONLY because of the issues of drugs, rage, mental instability, then it is 100% right and there is no story.

However it is reported in the article that membership of the EDL was an issue and that it would prevent her from "modelling appropriate positive relationships ... blah blah blah" and that is the basis for my confusion.

Brown Bomber

SeanW wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, there's clearly some evidence that she might not be a good parent. I just wonder why the EDL came into it, as it was reported that her membership of the EDL featured heavily in the social workers report.

The EDL came into it because she was arrested at an EDL demo was subsequently tried and convicted of multiple assaults carried out in a haze of violent rage.

According to the report the mother needs to distance herself from the EDL for the sake of her children due to "inappropriate frienships" not due to the ideology of the EDL.

If it was found after a thorough investigation that a mother-to-be with a history of violence, alcohol and drug abuse was continuing her "inappropriate friendships" through any other form be it a bible studies group, local chess club or any other medium then it would equally be a factor.

Clearly the Sunday Express has abused this ignorant woman and it's readers to spin this run-of-the-mill Jeremy Kyle story to whip up gullible British "patriots". The angle is to highlight the supposed abuses of what Anders Breivik would refer to as "cultural-marxists" and to do this they have to cherrypick quotes from the report to portray a false scenario where white British are punished disproportionately to immigrants, specifically Muslms. Us and them.

SeanW

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The EDL came into it because she was arrested at an EDL demo was subsequently tried and convicted of multiple assaults carried out in a haze of violent rage.

Yes, that is legitimate reason to mention the EDL in passing, i.e. that she used drugs, had anger issues, and was arrested for assault while attending an EDL demonstration. All fair points.

According to the report the mother needs to distance herself from the EDL for the sake of her children due to "inappropriate frienships" not due to the ideology of the EDL.

Even so, "inappropriate friendships" is very hazy and raises many more questions than it answers.

Going back to the section of the report in question:

Toni clearly needs to break away from the inappropriate friendships she has through either the EDL or break-off group

Question: the report seems to indicate that being involved with the EDL is reason to have one's children taken from them. Is this the case? And if not, how are we to assume that from the wording of this report?

in order that she can model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.

Question: Let's assume this is true (it's not, the EDL welcomes people of all races, and virtually faiths, one of their leaders is a Sikh). But if we accept for the sake of argument that being an EDL member makes you unfit to raise a child, how, for example, is it that someone who goes to one of the mosques featured in Undercover Mosque, or who sends their child to a Saudi funded madrassah, can be said to "model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops?"
Because I would have thought these things to be a contradiction in terms.

Anders Breivik

Nice reference there. Anders Breivhik is getting to be like the Adolf Hitler/Nazis of Internet discussions ...

and to do this they have to cherrypick quotes from the report to portray a false scenario where white British are punished disproportionately to immigrants, specifically Muslms.

To what end?