Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hitler would have loved you...

    But.. I have to admit, I agree with you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Socmyoligy)
    Yes, that is a very nice picture of Social Services in the UK. The only problem is, it is nothing like that. To give some background, my family has been involved in fostering for the last 10 years and I am employed by a Local Authority and work closely with Social Services. In the whole 10 years my family have been fostering, I have only seen one child adopted. All the others moved around various foster homes until they reached 18, at which point they were spat out to fend for themselves.

    Also, whilst no one seems to think we should sterilise these people, no one seems to want to foster either. In fact, it is a constant struggle for social services to find good foster carers... which is funny given how high and mightly people are about "human rights".
    There's a difference between offering a new born baby fresh from the womb and a young child.

    And my view is that we try too hard to find 'good foster parents' and by raising the bar so high you put people off. I know my mum would foster a child tomorrow if it wasn't for all of the social services crap that you have to go through.

    If any Tom, **** or Harry can parent a child then my view is that any Tom, **** or Harry should be allowed to foster or adopt without jumping through endless Social Services hoops.

    A simple effective CRB check should weed out most bad 'uns. It then would become the responsibility of Social Services to maintain a close watch on the children who are adopted and fostered to ensure that there are no problems.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rayel)
    Well you're right in most cases, but with regards to the story posted above, do you honestly think after 13 children this woman can change?
    I have no idea, btw I didn't use that link as an example of someone who deserves a chance, it was just because it was a story I read today which made me think should she be made to stop making kids but then I thought it is her prerogative to have kids if she wants to...and you never know she may've changed..sometimes it takes a lot of hard knocks to learn a lesson
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XCRUSHESX)
    I have no idea, btw I didn't use that link as an example of someone who deserves a chance, it was just because it was a story I read today which made me think should she be made to stop making kids but then I thought it is her prerogative to have kids if she wants to...and you never know she may've changed..sometimes it takes a lot of hard knocks to learn a lesson
    Hard knocks? I'm sorry but creating living breathing human beings only to have them constantly taken into a care system where they are likely to live an unprivileged childhood is a little more than a hard knock.

    I just feel that with the sheer number of children she's condemned to being without a caring and stable home should lead to HER having a couple of hard knocks on her fertility. She claims social services simply won't support her but the fact she has money for food and shelter gives her no excuse.

    Sorry if it feels like I'm having a go at you I'm really not. The story just really p*ssed me off.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jinglepupskye)
    There's a difference between offering a new born baby fresh from the womb and a young child.
    Few babies are taken into care fresh from the womb.

    (Original post by jinglepupskye)

    And my view is that we try too hard to find 'good foster parents' and by raising the bar so high you put people off. I know my mum would foster a child tomorrow if it wasn't for all of the social services crap that you have to go through.
    Are you serious? We try too hard to find good foster carers? The entry requirements are hardly sky high. And what do you mean by Social Services crap? You mean training? Unless you actually specify what you are referring to, it sounds like an excuse.

    (Original post by jinglepupskye)
    If any Tom, **** or Harry can parent a child then my view is that any Tom, **** or Harry should be allowed to foster or adopt without jumping through endless Social Services hoops.
    Which hoops are you referring to? Background checks? Yeah, who needs that... Maybe we could these kids in supermarkets, eh?? :s The fact that any Tom, **** or Harry can have children is precisely the problem!!!

    (Original post by jinglepupskye)
    A simple effective CRB check should weed out most bad 'uns. It then would become the responsibility of Social Services to maintain a close watch on the children who are adopted and fostered to ensure that there are no problems.
    So, instead of keeping a close watch on the children with their natural parents, you want social services to keep a close watch on the children with the foster carers that, under your system, could be total lunatics????!?!?!

    You are simply replacing bad parents with totally under prepared foster carers. Do you have any idea how much work foster carers have to do? The kid doesn't just rock up and integrate with your family! It takes serious hard work to get these kids back on track. Hell, we have had 14 year olds that couldn't even read. We had kids that could barely talk. Kids that were so scared of the dark they wet themselves EVERY NIGHT!!!

    People really don't understand what does on...

    Wow, just wow...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    No.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EskimoJo)
    No.
    Ok, so are you going to start helping to foster? Thought not...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rayel)
    Hard knocks? I'm sorry but creating living breathing human beings only to have them constantly taken into a care system where they are likely to live an unprivileged childhood is a little more than a hard knock.

    I just feel that with the sheer number of children she's condemned to being without a caring and stable home should lead to HER having a couple of hard knocks on her fertility. She claims social services simply won't support her but the fact she has money for food and shelter gives her no excuse.

    Sorry if it feels like I'm having a go at you I'm really not. The story just really p*ssed me off.
    I guess 'hard knocks' wasn't really the right phrase, but basically I was saying you got to really get hurt and feel a lot of pain sometimes to actually learn a lesson... She may seem heartless continuously getting pregnant all the time just so she can keep one, but with anyone I guess having all 13 kids being taken from you must hurt a lot....even if you have a heart of stone
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Socmyoligy)
    Ok, so are you going to start helping to foster? Thought not...
    Not now, but most definitely when I have my own home and a career/steady income. Most definitely.

    Don't assume things sweetheart. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XCRUSHESX)
    I guess 'hard knocks' wasn't really the right phrase, but basically I was saying you got to really get hurt and feel a lot of pain sometimes to actually learn a lesson... She may seem heartless continuously getting pregnant all the time just so she can keep one, but with anyone I guess having all 13 kids being taken from you must hurt a lot....even if you have a heart of stone
    But if she was actually getting hurt she would have sorted her life out after the first child got taken away. Or the second. Or the third? I'm not a mother so I don't understand fully, but the bond between a mother and a child goes deep or should do anyway. If she was hurt then it should have resulted in her striving to better herself so she could have her kids back in her care where they should belong.

    She didn't better herself. After child number 13 I think its fair to say no amount of "hurt" is going to stop her from carrying out her vendetta against the state and just making a bigger mess than she's already in. It's clear she doesn't want her children back.
    I refuse to sympathise with this woman. She's been handed every opportunity and all she's done is throw it back in everyone face.

    Sterilise the b****.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rayel)
    But if she was actually getting hurt she would have sorted her life out after the first child got taken away. Or the second. Or the third? I'm not a mother so I don't understand fully, but the bond between a mother and a child goes deep or should do anyway. If she was hurt then it should have resulted in her striving to better herself so she could have her kids back in her care where they should belong.

    She didn't better herself. After child number 13 I think its fair to say no amount of "hurt" is going to stop her from carrying out her vendetta against the state and just making a bigger mess than she's already in. It's clear she doesn't want her children back.
    I refuse to sympathise with this woman. She's been handed every opportunity and all she's done is throw it back in everyone face.

    Sterilise the b****.

    I know, but I just hate to be so absolute about something...but she is a ****-up
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Socmyoligy)
    Few babies are taken into care fresh from the womb.

    In the case we are discussing they are.

    Are you serious? We try too hard to find good foster carers? The entry requirements are hardly sky high. And what do you mean by Social Services crap? You mean training? Unless you actually specify what you are referring to, it sounds like an excuse.

    No-one who has children normally does any training. They learn on the job. Why should the same not apply to foster parents and adopters. After all, in most cases they already have experience of child-rearing.

    Which hoops are you referring to? Background checks? Yeah, who needs that... Maybe we could these kids in supermarkets, eh?? :s The fact that any Tom, **** or Harry can have children is precisely the problem!!!

    No-one does background checks on ordinary parents and the vast majority get on perfectly fine with no Social Service interference.

    So, instead of keeping a close watch on the children with their natural parents, you want social services to keep a close watch on the children with the foster carers that, under your system, could be total lunatics????!?!?!

    Normal parents could be lunatics. The vast majority aren't. And I didn't exclude the Social Services from keeping an eye on children with birth parents. It's not a case of one thing or another.

    You are simply replacing bad parents with totally under prepared foster carers. Do you have any idea how much work foster carers have to do? The kid doesn't just rock up and integrate with your family! It takes serious hard work to get these kids back on track. Hell, we have had 14 year olds that couldn't even read. We had kids that could barely talk. Kids that were so scared of the dark they wet themselves EVERY NIGHT!!!

    In truth, if the Social Services did their jobs correctly and removed children at an earlier stage then those situations wouldn't arise. The main failure is the Social Service's desperation to leave a kid in poor conditions instead of doing the right thing and removing them. A parent should be told they have a finite period of time to get their act together or the child/children will be removed. If they don't act in that time - and I'm talking about a maximum of 12 months - then the child should go.

    People really don't understand what does on...

    And some people have their heads so far up their own asses they can't see daylight!

    Wow, just wow...
    Wow right back to you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    this reminds me of a news article i saw recently.
    i think people shud pass tests to become a parent!!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I largely agree with you OP. Parenthood should be a right that can be withdrawn if you have shown yourself incapable of carrying out the basic duties, and this extends to not being able to afford to care for them as well.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I largely agree with you OP. Parenthood should be a right that can be withdrawn if you have shown yourself incapable of carrying out the basic duties, and this extends to not being able to afford to care for them as well.
    There are quite a few ethical issues to take into consideration here:

    Who decides what the limit is?
    When we look at kids as a 'limit' we're considering them like objects and surely that is unethical.
    What conditions, both financial and mental, are considered 'OK' to have a said amount of children?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Halophyte91)
    Hitler would have loved you...

    But.. I have to admit, I agree with you.
    Threesome?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WokSz)
    There are quite a few ethical issues to take into consideration here:

    Who decides what the limit is?
    When we look at kids as a 'limit' we're considering them like objects and surely that is unethical.
    What conditions, both financial and mental, are considered 'OK' to have a said amount of children?
    I realise it is a tricky situation to sort out, but we could at least start by taking out a few of the worst offenders who quite clearly should never have become or be parents. At the end of the day though I think it is unethical to allow them to have children, it is unfair to both the children and society.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I realise it is a tricky situation to sort out, but we could at least start by taking out a few of the worst offenders who quite clearly should never have become or be parents. At the end of the day though I think it is unethical to allow them to have children, it is unfair to both the children and society.
    It is without a doubt a very tricky situation, and I do agree with you on the fact that the worst cases should be sorted. But I'm not sure if preventing them from having children is the solution.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yesioo)
    Also in The Sun. .

    The current welfare state encourges them. They live rent free and get £1,100 a month for basically sitting on their asses. She imho should, as she is just using her children as basically blackmail. And the thing that really pissed me off was the fact that she would keep doing it until they allowed her to keep one child. I mean for christ's sake her sodding "plan" is costing the taxpayers money. Sodding millions.

    ...the story really annoyed me.
    Me too. I don't really agree with sterilisation, apart from in the rarest, worst cases.They should have been encouraged to take some responsibility. How is anyone meant to support 13 kids? I don't see why the taxpayer should have to. It's a hard issue to sort, as we need to balance the physical and mental wellbeing of the parent with that of the children's. I don't really want to be restricted in so far as how many kids I can have, but then again I would use my common sense not to have more than I can manage...
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.