End the Secrecy

Stop the Suffering

From our own correspondent 

              Adoption as a result of FRAUD is under challenge 

It is worth taking up a point that is 'assumed to be the true'....But which is now under challenge.. I refer to the acceptance that legally or lawfully it is not possible for an adopted child to be returned to its parents from whom it was taken, under fraudelent conditions . ( perjury )  

Now this clearly identifies a legal contradiction....If the child was taken away as a result of perjured statements provided to the court...Then the act of 'taking into Care' and away from the parents,..... was illegal.  

I refer back to the  Uddin case ( Birmingham ) and the judgement by Dame Butler Schloss, the President of the Family Division, in her last case before she retired.

 The sole grounds to challenge an adoption is to be able to show that it was as a result of a fraud ...And perjured testimony by social workers and pediatricians is.... FRAUD.( This also applies in Care proceedings although, negligence also comes into consideration in Care proceedings)   

Which brings us to the final hurdle... " But the children have settled in with their new adopted family".  

If one considers a 5 year old child who was taken into care in 2002 and adopted in 2004:  

The child would be much more of a stranger to the new adoptive parents, than it would be to the birth parents. Today it would have spent 2 years with the adoptive parents and 5 years with the birth parents.  

Older children who were adopted, make the case for a return to the parents even more compelling.  

For very young children and babies who have spent many years with adoptive parents, there could still be quite sensible contact conditions and situations worked out to reintroduce the innocent birth parents to their children. Organised meetings could be held whilst still allowing the children to stay with their adoptive parents. Remember too that many adoptions break down....So the picture of an idyllic arrangement that never breaks down is rediculous...In that event, the birth parents should be contacted as a matter of urgency.  

Those who blanche at the above should be contacting their MPs and insisting that those who give false evidence in a Family Court should be JAILED.....And their homes/assets should be taken to pay the cost of the malicious prosecutions they have encouraged.  

What those who inhabit the gulag of the Family Courts wish us to accept is that an adoption is invoilate..... because the law has so decreed it....But the law has not only been an ass...It is complicit in a system that has encouraged such miscarriages of justice...So we are then expected to ' be quiet'. But it we us who wish the Family Courts to regain the respect they have lost as a result of the perjured evidence by social workers, paediatricians and others. 

Rather like the Deputy Prime Minister , John Prescott, who is reported putting his hand up the skirt of a fellow MP's wife's skirt, besides having sex with a secretary, at his office. .....And you notice that......... Tony Blair is very quiet about this.

The whole ethos espoused by Tony Blair, his cronies and this Labour government, is empathic with the secrecy of the Family Court.......And we are having nothing to do with keeping the lid on false evidence given by social workers and paediatricians in a court of law.......Jail 'em ! Jail 'em! Jail 'em !