Return our Stolen Children was the request of the 8-day demo outside Downing Street and the title of our petition to the House of Commons. It was changed to Children Placed in Foster Care.
Melissa’s son is one of many foreign children who are targeted by the child snatchers aka state kidnappers: their parents get imprisoned and deported without their children, after a lot of pain, confusion and losing court proceedings.
In addition to acting in court, this is a direct approach to the Barnet Council, to ensure
- the welfare of the child – based on the check list of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
- that shared parental responsibility is complied with
- and that Local Councils don’t simply hide behind rogue courts and judges.
This is the email we sent to the Head of Children’s Social Care at London Borough of Barnet:
Dear Ms Pymont
Thank you for your considered response to which we are making these comments:
“Z is subject to a Placement Order made under the Adoption and Children Act 2002 which means that the court has determined that he is to be placed for adoption and that your client is to have no further role in his care.”
This is an incorrect statement of fact.
“found that further contact between your client and Z would be emotionally damaging to him and made an order under section 34(4) of the Children Act 1989, permitting the Local Authority to refuse all contact (please see enclosed order of HHJ Mayer dated 8 March 2012).”
This is an incorrect interpretation of the order and an untruthful assertion of the facts. The order states that the local authority in its discretion is not required to facilitate contact. The reason is that the order is not made under section 31 Children Act 1989 in respect of an overseas national.
“Notwithstanding that there is no legal requirement for the Local Authority to facilitate contact between your client and Z, the Local Authority has reviewed at regular intervals whether it would be appropriate for any form of contact to take place.”
There is a legal requirement under an international binding treaty the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
“For reasons relating to your client’s presentation and the impact that this has upon her ability to engage appropriately with her child and with professionals, the professionals working with Z remain firmly of the view that contact is not in his best interests.”
Please supply urgently evidence of this claim along with the names, positions, involvement with the family, professional designations and relevant professional bodies of these “professionals”.
“I am therefore unable to agree Ms Laird’s request for Skype contact to be arranged. Given that a Placement Order is in force, I am also refusing Ms Laird’s request to pass on her contact details to Z’s school as she is not entitled to have any direct involvement in his education and is not entitled to know his whereabouts.”
Section 434 of the Education Act 1996 reads as follows:
“Registration of pupils.
(1) The proprietor of a school shall cause to be kept, in accordance with regulations, a register containing the prescribed particulars in respect of all persons who are pupils at the school.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), the prescribed particulars shall include particulars of the name and address of every person known to the proprietor to be a parent of a pupil at the school.”
“Section 2 schedule 2 Children Act 1989 reads as follows:
(2) Where a child is being looked after by a local authority—
(a) the authority shall take such steps as are reasonably practicable to secure that—
(i) his parents; and
(ii) any person who is not a parent of his but who has parental responsibility for him,
are kept informed of where he is being accommodated; and
(b) every such person shall secure that the authority are kept informed of his or her address.”
These provisions are intended for those with parental responsibility for a child to protect the child from the extensive neglect and abuse that pervades the local authority child care system dating back to the Utting Report of 1997.
You clearly have little, if any, understanding of child care and protection law and appear unsuitable to work with children.
So that we may approach the relevant authorities to suggest that you are prohibited from working with children, please can you supply:
Your Employee reference number,
Name(s) and registration number(s) of any relevant professional body(s),
The name, position and contact details of your line manager.
We look forward to hearing from a competent person.
We also now require copies of the learning, health and development assessments following Section 2 of the Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage, along with the contact details of any early years providers involved.
The Order that you rely on will be challenged, as Ms Laird was far from being able to exercise her rights of appeal due to imprisonment. As a blatant lie, your colleague claimed that Ms Laird was represented when she was not and when Judge Mayer in that hearing even REFUSED legal representation.
John Hemming MP has published Barnet’s intentions on his blog: mother to be deported whilst child is kept for adoption.
How anybody who ‘cares’ for children can find it in a 4-year-old boy’s interest to separate him from his mum over night, and NOT facilitate contact is clearly beyond genuine caring.
We look forward to hearing from you again asap,
Sabine K McNeill
Melissa Laird – fighting for her son
… and other victims of the UK ‘protection’ and ‘care’ system
Write to your MP and ask for a National Investigation into child abuse coverups
… the Source of Tom Watson MP’s Prime Minister Question Time
EU Parliament: Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent
…submission with over 1,700 signatures – incl. yours?
Dossier of Evidence, 10 pages in support of the petition
…statistics, media coverage and human outcry online
Victims Unite! > 260,000 visits since August 2010
… Empowering victims of financial exploitation and legal oppression
21a Goldhurst Terrace – London NW6 3HB
T: 020 7328 3701 – M: 07968 039 141 – Skype: sabine.kurjo.mcneill
- SKYPE contacts with my son are essential for ensuring his best interests (melissalaird.wordpress.com)
- ROUTINE Violations of Art 6 (Fair Trial) and Art 8 (Family Life) by UK State (victims-unite.net)
- TAKING Parental Responsibility for Children in the ‘care’ of local councils (mckenzie-friends.co.uk)
- EMPOWERMENT MONDAY with KELLIE COTTAM to Expose Forced Adoptions – despite the Storm (victims-unite.net)
- Empty Pushchair Horrors on Empowerment Monday: 30 September 2013 (publicityonline.wordpress.com)