Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Rick Mercer: Conservative policy -- 20 minutes fresh. Always. | Main | CHRC cleared of "hacking" allegation »

Thursday, January 29, 2009

U.K. social services remove children from grandparents care, insist on adoption to same-sex couple

In a bizarro world, the government decides which children get to live where, and for what reason. Welcome to England:

The five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister were being looked after by their grandparents because their mother, a recovering drug addict, was not considered capable.

But social workers stepped in after allegedly deciding that the couple, who are aged 59 and 46, were "too old" to look after the children.

They were allegedly stripped of their carer's rights and informed they would be barred from seeing the children altogether unless they agreed to the same-sex adoption.

The distraught grandfather said: "It breaks my heart to think that our grandchildren are being forced to grow up in an environment without a mother-figure.

"We are not prejudiced, but I defy anyone to explain to us how this can be in their best interests.

"The ideal for any child is to have a loving father and a loving mother in their lives."

His wife added: "It's so important for children to fit in, and I feel our grandchildren will be marked out from the start when they draw pictures of their two dads."

The case raises fears about state interference in family arrangements, and concerns about the practice of adoption by same-sex couples.

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on January 29, 2009 in International Affairs | Permalink

Comments

Something tells me this couple is being lied to. Under no circumstances does any regulatory body have the right to deny you anything based on what you do or do not agree to. It sounds more like they know they have a shaky case and are trying to bully the grandparents into silence. If I were this couple I'd call a lawyer immediately.

Maybe this is my chauvinism speaking, but it appears that most of these arbitrary new quasi-judicial bodies are staffed almost exclusively by women. Or to be more specific, rude, cranky, ugly dominatrices who apparently didn't make the grade to become teachers or nurses. Like these two professions, they seem to have no respect whatever for the rule of law. Perhaps they've decided that habeus corpus and presumption of innocence are tools of the patriarchal tyranny.

I live for the day when some couple finally loses it, cases the feet of one of these self-righteous skanks in concrete and heaves them into the river. Hell, I'll contribute to their defence bill.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-01-29 2:45:04 PM


I have to agree with Shane. There seems to be more to the story here.

Far be it from me to side with authorities taking children away, but as reported, this case seems to be so outrageous as to defy common sense. I would caution believing it until the entirety of the information could be presented.

By the way, if I were the grandparents, I would be getting a very good lawyer!

Posted by: Conrad | 2009-01-29 2:58:10 PM


Shane: "Perhaps they've decided that habeus corpus and presumption of innocence are tools of the patriarchal tyranny."

Just like the HRCs here in Canada, these bureaucrats see anything that interferes with their radical social engineering agenda as sexist, racist, homophobic, transophobic, etc. It's just a reflex for them and unfortunately, people let them get away with it.

I guarantee you that if the child's relatives were a gay couple (no matter how old, sick, or unsuited to parenting they were), there would be an army of government bureaucrats fighting for their "right" to parent.

Posted by: Jeremy Maddock | 2009-01-29 5:01:03 PM


The legal system is in place to take care of the best interests of the children (of the judges and the lawyers).

I'm not surprised at all that the government was able to wear down and bankrupt two grandparents.

Posted by: Grant Brown | 2009-01-29 5:56:11 PM


Will someone finally admit that there is a radical gay agenda at work? It is no longer about coexistence. The radicals want to force society to follow their demented blueprint.

Posted by: Toby | 2009-01-29 8:45:40 PM


So they take children away from Grandparent's who are their own family, because they are too old to raise children...and give them to a same sex couple. This amounts too kidnapping as far as I'm concerned. Even though its been legalized, its still a crime. How completely offensive and disgusting.
I guess things like this are a lot easier to do to a disarmed population. Stalin had that one all figured out too...

Posted by: JC | 2009-01-29 9:10:02 PM


Shane....agree 100%. These losers are completely out of control and no one has the balls to stop them. They feel the power. Anything queer is good and anything straight is bad. The inmates have definately taken over the asylum

Posted by: peterj | 2009-01-29 9:28:48 PM


I'm going to go way off the ass-backward legal concepts put forth in the article and think of this from the kids perspective. At 5 and 4 those kids are aware of whats going on. They may not understand it, but they know some thing bad is going on. Removing them from the familiarity of their grandparents, to the unfamiliarity of something that they've already been taught is bad. . . . I'd be surprised if these kids don't attempt/commit suicide when they're older. This is going to screw them up really bad.

Posted by: Sam | 2009-01-30 8:22:52 AM


I do not believe this story for a second.

Why are you always so gullible, Western Standard?

Just how many Nigerian bank scams haev you responded to?

Posted by: epsilon | 2009-01-31 11:56:01 PM


Do a bit of research, epsilon. If we're gullible, so is the Guardian, the Telegraph and *all the major media in the U.K.*

Some help while you're researching: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1298027035

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-02-01 12:09:10 AM


Who do you think I am? Your damn secretary?

Do your own friggin' research! You're the one with the newsblog!

What a gullible twit you are!

Posted by: epsilon | 2009-02-01 12:20:42 AM


No, epsi, you misunderstood. I'm pointing you to all the media on this issue. I am trying to show you that there is overwhelming evidence to believe this story.

I did my research. Now do yours, before you insist on calling people gullible or naive.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-02-01 12:23:35 AM


Perhaps Epsilon is unaware of the coercive assault on liberty, by the political elite, taking place in the western nations. Most people are.

Posted by: JC | 2009-02-01 7:16:23 AM


For anyone interested, full the full story.
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/to...-be.4930358.jp

Based on that information, my comment is:

The grandparents couldn't give appropriate care to the children and willingly decided to give them up to fostering. When they decided to put them up for adoption, how would giving the children back to the grandparents who had not been able to care for them two years ago be the right choice?

Posted by: P. Albright | 2009-02-01 12:45:49 PM


P., that's an incomplete link. I suspected there was more to the case than met the eye, but it's nevertheless true that an increasing number of government groups and ministries are being given quasi-legal powers without the checks and balances given to the police and courts. At any rate, the abuses of power seem to be increasing.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-02-01 2:36:27 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.