Don’t let a few perverts strangle society

A mate of mine played Hockey for Redditch for 34 years and his son followed in his footsteps.  He and his whole family are  known to everyone in the club as part of the social fabric.  He would like to offer his services as a coach to the new breed of young hockey players but he can't without putting himself through some form of vetting procedure to ensure he is not a paedophile so he hasn't bothered.

My wife and I have 4 grandchildren.  The eldest will start school soon and naturally we will want to record the event on camera but we won't be able to in case we are actually more interested in all the kids around him for perverted reasons.  Oh by the way we haven't been able to record his first football lesson, visit to the library or swimming class.

In a Big Society as I understand it people know life has risks but we don't constrain the entirity of living for the worry of the very unlikely.

Don't accept the principle of fear that one childs death at the hands of a paedofile justifies laws or interpretation of laws that contrain the daily life of us all.  We will never stop perverts totally lets get back to living life for the benefit of the 99.9% rather than in fear of the .1%

Why is this idea important?

A mate of mine played Hockey for Redditch for 34 years and his son followed in his footsteps.  He and his whole family are  known to everyone in the club as part of the social fabric.  He would like to offer his services as a coach to the new breed of young hockey players but he can't without putting himself through some form of vetting procedure to ensure he is not a paedophile so he hasn't bothered.

My wife and I have 4 grandchildren.  The eldest will start school soon and naturally we will want to record the event on camera but we won't be able to in case we are actually more interested in all the kids around him for perverted reasons.  Oh by the way we haven't been able to record his first football lesson, visit to the library or swimming class.

In a Big Society as I understand it people know life has risks but we don't constrain the entirity of living for the worry of the very unlikely.

Don't accept the principle of fear that one childs death at the hands of a paedofile justifies laws or interpretation of laws that contrain the daily life of us all.  We will never stop perverts totally lets get back to living life for the benefit of the 99.9% rather than in fear of the .1%

Class grandparents as immediate family

If one of your grandparents die, and you have no holiday days left with your employer, you have NO right to take time off to go to there funeral.

When we're young, often our grandparents bring us up, as our parents work. Yet, you have no right to take compassionate leave from work to respect them at there funeral.

If your employer isn't very understanding, there is nothing you can do,

Why is this idea important?

If one of your grandparents die, and you have no holiday days left with your employer, you have NO right to take time off to go to there funeral.

When we're young, often our grandparents bring us up, as our parents work. Yet, you have no right to take compassionate leave from work to respect them at there funeral.

If your employer isn't very understanding, there is nothing you can do,

Remove the requirement to notify the government of “private fostering”

If I were to arrange for my 15 year old child to stay with a friend for 28 days over the summer holidays, I would be legally obliged ot notify the government, and a social services would need to assess the friends my child is staying with.

Parents should be able  to make arrangements for their childrens' care without unnescessary interference from the government. The requirement to notify the government of "private fostering" should be removed.

Parents are responsible for the welfare of their children and the government should not intervene in private child care arrangenents unless there is reason to suspect a child may be at risk of harm.

There is even a government web site which encourages citzens to snoop on each other in order to report suspected cases of "private fostering" which the government may be unaware of.

This site should be abolished to save costs.

Why is this idea important?

If I were to arrange for my 15 year old child to stay with a friend for 28 days over the summer holidays, I would be legally obliged ot notify the government, and a social services would need to assess the friends my child is staying with.

Parents should be able  to make arrangements for their childrens' care without unnescessary interference from the government. The requirement to notify the government of "private fostering" should be removed.

Parents are responsible for the welfare of their children and the government should not intervene in private child care arrangenents unless there is reason to suspect a child may be at risk of harm.

There is even a government web site which encourages citzens to snoop on each other in order to report suspected cases of "private fostering" which the government may be unaware of.

This site should be abolished to save costs.

Scrap forced adoption and allow birth parents free speech !

Thousand of babies and young children are taken by social workers from their mothers for "risk of emotional abuse".These children are then ordered by compliant judges to be freed for adoption by complete strangers.If parents complain publicly they are jailed (around 200/year according to Harriet Harman) ,and more recently for sending birthday cards or waving as their children passed by in a taxi ! The UK is the only EU country with forced adoption(against the will of parents)  except "possibly Portugal" according to Baroness Hale in a House of Lords case and it is time for 3 reforms to remedy these flagrant injustices.

1:- In the interests of free speech the legal GAG on parents involved in family courts must be scrapped.Parents like rape victims should be FREE to make public the details of their personal histories and experiences in the family courts if they choose to do so.Parents visiting children in care should not have their conversations censored by social workers or their contact stopped if they dare to disciuss their case.

2:-Forced adoption  where parents oppose adoption in the courts) should be scrapped and all adoptions should be "open" so that birth parents know where their children are and cannot be jailed for communicating with them.Closed adoptions often mean that blameless loving parents lose track of their children for the rest of their lives because one parent may have mild learning difficulties,or be the victim of domestic violence,or quite simply being perceived likely in the future to emotionally abuse their children.FORCED ADOPTIONS AND CLOSED ADOPTIONS should be banned.

3:-A burglar facing  a possible 6 months jail can demand trial by jury ,but a mother can lose her children for life without that possibility.Judges hesitate to overule social services even when they criticise them in court probably because they themselves fear subsequent criticism whilst a jury becomes anonymous after the trial and would have no such inhibitions.In any case involving long term separation of parents and children the parents should have the right to demand hearing by a jury.Juries already act in the civil courts in libel cases and would be more than capable of deciding if children should or should not remain in the care of their parents. 

Why is this idea important?

Thousand of babies and young children are taken by social workers from their mothers for "risk of emotional abuse".These children are then ordered by compliant judges to be freed for adoption by complete strangers.If parents complain publicly they are jailed (around 200/year according to Harriet Harman) ,and more recently for sending birthday cards or waving as their children passed by in a taxi ! The UK is the only EU country with forced adoption(against the will of parents)  except "possibly Portugal" according to Baroness Hale in a House of Lords case and it is time for 3 reforms to remedy these flagrant injustices.

1:- In the interests of free speech the legal GAG on parents involved in family courts must be scrapped.Parents like rape victims should be FREE to make public the details of their personal histories and experiences in the family courts if they choose to do so.Parents visiting children in care should not have their conversations censored by social workers or their contact stopped if they dare to disciuss their case.

2:-Forced adoption  where parents oppose adoption in the courts) should be scrapped and all adoptions should be "open" so that birth parents know where their children are and cannot be jailed for communicating with them.Closed adoptions often mean that blameless loving parents lose track of their children for the rest of their lives because one parent may have mild learning difficulties,or be the victim of domestic violence,or quite simply being perceived likely in the future to emotionally abuse their children.FORCED ADOPTIONS AND CLOSED ADOPTIONS should be banned.

3:-A burglar facing  a possible 6 months jail can demand trial by jury ,but a mother can lose her children for life without that possibility.Judges hesitate to overule social services even when they criticise them in court probably because they themselves fear subsequent criticism whilst a jury becomes anonymous after the trial and would have no such inhibitions.In any case involving long term separation of parents and children the parents should have the right to demand hearing by a jury.Juries already act in the civil courts in libel cases and would be more than capable of deciding if children should or should not remain in the care of their parents.