General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

New Military Records

New military records

Was your ancestor a war hero?

View thousands of brand new military records, including Chelsea Pensioner records, Military Nurses, Prisoners of war and much more.

View military records today

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Foster parents lose children

Page 0 + 1 of 3

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 24 Nov 2012 10:27


A couple have had three foster children removed from their care because they belong to the UK Independence Party.

Rotherham Borough Council said the children were "not indigenous white British" and that it had concerns about UKIP's stance on immigration.

It said it had to consider the "needs of the children longer term".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20474120

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 24 Nov 2012 10:31

I find the above amazing. There's a presumption that, if you belong to a political party you agree zombie-like to their policies.
Even MP's don't have to agree with all their party's policies!!

Quite frankly, if the foster parents had a 'thing' against non-indigenous children, they could have refused to have them, there are plenty more children waiting.

Strikes me the Council didn't really care about the well being of the children, more about flaunting their misplaced power.

JustJohn

JustJohn Report 24 Nov 2012 10:38

I saw this story this morning. The children had settled and called them "mum" and "dad" Rotherham were going to give their response, but have not gheard their reasons yet.

Often people link UKIP and BNP together as racist parties. UKIP has 8% of electoral support and is not far behind the Liberal Democrats. UKIP's policies of a 5 year moritorium on immigration and all immigrants having to prove they can afford to live here is fairly attractive to a lot of mainstream voters - and I doubt many of their supporters are racist.

Rambling Rose

Rambling Rose Report 24 Nov 2012 10:47

Look at it another way though, all parents, carers and people who come into contact with children are at this time under scrutiny, for everything from inappropriate physical behaviour to the mental pressure of 'imposing' ( even without intending to) a cultural expectation.( as per the daughter who was murdered because she wanted to live a 'westernised' life..so called 'honour ' killings'.

Whilst I don't think UKIP is a racist party as such, it is true that a number of their policies are not 'immigrant or multicultualism friendly', it may be a knee jerk reaction on the part of the council, but I can see why they might consider it.

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 24 Nov 2012 10:52

The Labour party is looking int the situation - still it doesn't help the children.
I agree John, because UKIP is against unchecked immigration they're branded as racists.
Likewise, for a time, homosexuals were seen as predatory. In both cases, by people who want to read what they want to read, carefully avoiding the facts because it doesn't suit their mind-set or preconceived ideas.

Rambling Rose

Rambling Rose Report 24 Nov 2012 10:59

Not suggesting that the children 'couldn't have settled in , but they haven't been there long and it may not have been considered a 'permanent ' placement, which no doesn't help the children, but may explain somewhat why the council is looking for the most suitable home?

"The unnamed couple, from South Yorkshire, who have been fostering for seven years, took on a baby girl, a boy and an older girl from an ethnic and troubled family background in September."

~Lynda~

~Lynda~ Report 24 Nov 2012 11:01

How did the council know how the carers vote? Nobody ever asked me questions like that, they asked loads of other stupid questions though.

Perhaps, like most things, there is more to this story, perhaps the carers devoted more time to the party they voted for than they should of, i.e appointments were missed because the party became more important, who knows, but I bet it wasn't just because of how they voted.

Before anyone asks, I'm not at all suggesting that this couple are dodgy, just that how you vote wouldn't influence if you're a good foster carer or not.

Porkie_Pie

Porkie_Pie Report 24 Nov 2012 11:08

Nothing surprises me when it comes to decisions made by Labour councils such as Rotherham, Barnsley or Doncaster

Childcare in these labour run councils is appalling,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-20345581

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-19218601

Roy

Hayley   Empress of Drama

Hayley Empress of Drama Report 24 Nov 2012 11:08

I found that the first question I asked myself how do they council know how they vote? Unless they are very active members of the party.

I agree with Rose the welfare of the children must be consider at all times it comes first and formal, would they not give the couple the oppertunity to leave the party and if they did and they refuse?

Sharron

Sharron Report 24 Nov 2012 11:20

Worst case scenario. German couple long-term fostering Jewish children in,say,1934.

What happens then?

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 24 Nov 2012 11:37

Depends on the foster carers and records held at the time.
The children, would also be German, and the foster parents not necessarily Nazi!!

Under Rotherham's 'rules', one can only assume any Councillors and MP's are automatically banned from fostering children.

Sharron

Sharron Report 24 Nov 2012 11:42

The foster parents may well not have been National Socialists but ,within a few years they would have been obliged by law to be so.Anti semitism was compulsory.

The National Socialist party was extreme and illogical and would have stood no chance of power under normal circumstances but Germany was desperate,as are so many people at the moment.

Rambling Rose

Rambling Rose Report 24 Nov 2012 11:43

Damned if you do , damned if you don't?..imagine the headlines in a couple of years?

" Children, fostered by couple whose allegiances were to a political party opposed to multiculturalism, claim that they were isolated from their culture and brought up to believe they were unwanted in this country and should 'go home' as soon as old enough' ...worst case scenario?

I'm not suggesting this would be the case here, but I do think social workers etc are in such a difficult position, trying to make the right choices for individuals, How many threads on here have been along the lines of "but the social workers/authorities did nothing !"

Porkie_Pie

Porkie_Pie Report 24 Nov 2012 11:49

This is what the couple had to say about what happened

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9700001/Foster-parents-stigmatised-and-slandered-for-being-members-of-Ukip.html

Roy

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 24 Nov 2012 11:55

I see what you're saying, Sharron, but that is the worst case scenario, and though I'm not fan, UKIP isn't the BNP.

I can also see the problem with indoctrinating children with the foster parent's political views, but that means anyone who belogs to any political party being banned.

Homosexuals can now foster - does that mean the children will be indoctrinated into the foster parents sexuality?

What about children from a non-religious family being fostered by Christians?

If every foster carer was assessed with a microscope, there would be no foster parents!!

AnnCardiff

AnnCardiff Report 24 Nov 2012 12:01

surely the council should have checked this out before they put the children with these foster parents - another cock-up by social workers no doubt - and what a ridiculous reason to put these children through upheavel - they've no doubt had enough of that in their lives already - UKIP is not a radical party FGS

have a feeling this will be overturned and the children returned the foster parents

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 24 Nov 2012 12:05

This wasn't a permanent placement - it was an emergency one, so the chances of the children staying there for years was small.

Here's a rather horrifying account of 2 brothers' experience:

http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/07/10/care-system-failures-breach-childrens-human-rights/

I'm sure they wouldn't have given a damn what political party their foster parents belonged to, as long as they could have stayed inone place.

Paula+

Paula+ Report 24 Nov 2012 14:04

Joyce Thacker, Rotherhams council's Director of Children and Young People's Services, said
“These children are from EU migrant backgrounds and Ukip has very clear statements on ending multiculturalism, not having that going forward, and I have to think about how sensitive I am being to those children." The wife is reported to have said “These kids have been loved. These kids have been treated no differently to our own children. We wouldn’t have taken these children on if we had been racist”

The Council are now having a re-think about the sitiuation, its a pity they did not engage their brains before opening their mouths.




Porkie_Pie

Porkie_Pie Report 24 Nov 2012 14:51

UKIP Immigration policy is not much different to that of other political parties the main difference is that UKIP are against the EU deciding who and how many immigrants we should let in, They just think that We should decide for ourselves and not have it dictated by the EU

If we just let the EU dictate we will in the end become a state within the country called Europe

Just as Hitler intended but thats another story

Roy

Sharron

Sharron Report 24 Nov 2012 15:46

If you think about it, the EU is the Anschluss(?) and that was forbidden by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.