General Chat

Quite incredible to me, some of these occurences.

These children need love first and foremost, food, warmth. And they all live in a Britain that is multi-cultural. So if they are fostered out tp people of a different racial background or different religion, is ther any problem?

Is the problem that some foster parents prevent these children from learning about their background and their ethnic roots? I honestly think if my natural parents had died when I was 8 and living in Wolverhampton, I would have been delighted to have been fostered by a newly arrived West Indian couple. Much better than moving from a loving family home to a care institutional situation, surely.

And I think I would still have felt Welsh - I would have appreciated their West Indian culture a bit more and would have felt secure, but it would not make me a West Indian. Just that I would have loved them as foster parents.

We had this happen to us once when we fostered, understand this, if you can..........

A child with us was mixed race, his mother was abandoned at birth, through testing, it was thought that one of her birth parents was white, the other black, she was adopted to a white family.
The father of our boy was white, so he would of been quarter black. His whole background was white English, as his mother didn't know where her ancestors came from. A
fter a few months we had meeting with Social services to see how it was all going, he had settled in well, and was one of the family.

First comment from social services to open the meeting, directed to our foster son .......

" We'd firstly like to apologise to you for placing you with a white family, but there were no mixed race families available"

I don't care what colour any child child is, I just want to do the best for them, and see they do well.

The quicker this black/white thing is no longer commented upon, the bloody better we'd all get along famously without mentioning what colour someone is as though it matters :-|

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

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

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.

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.

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

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!!

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

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 !"

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.

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.

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

What happens then?

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?

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

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.