Baby P and the Witches of Salem

I have refrained from posting about Baby P until now.

Of course, Haringey Social Services are crap. Almost all of our social services departments in England are crap. I hold no brief for the inadequate provision we make for children or their protection in this country. See previous posts.

BUT the media hysteria and their love of finding people not only to blame but to demonise is now beyond a joke. Well, there is an exception.

Sharon Shoesmith (Haringey's Head of Children's Services) hardly covered herself in glory by spending £19k on media training presumably designed to pad her bottom from the impending storm. She is also, but this is simply my impression, not particularly children friendly in appearance:

Politicians in Haringey have resigned. That was honourable. That the operational head of children's services should fall on her sword was immediately obvious to the whole population of the planet except, perhaps, just one. She seemed to think that the marketing guys could save her.

Perhaps, we should require potential heads of department at local authorities to sit a basic intelligence test. Possibly also, they could be asked to take an "emotional intelligence" test (whatever that it is). Almost certainly, a basic humanity test should be mandatory.

Local Authorities are very good at setting tests or performance targets or whatever so this should not be difficult. However, these are tests that would apply to them and not others. Oh, it might take a little longer then!

I forgot to mention: they would be required to pass the tests! Oh, and they should not be allowed to set the pass mark.

The caveat I started out to put forward is that we should not conduct a witch hunt of the troops on the ground. In my experience (as a lawyer in care cases - a period of my life that is, thankfully, over) social services personnel begin as idealists but quickly become corrupted into judgmental harridans - or the male equivalent - I incapable of not absorbing the departmental assumption of infallibility.

Don't worry about the Pope. He is an intelligent man and I doubt very much whether he really believes that he is infallible. He is probably too intelligent to believe in a divine being (whether called God, Allah or the Spaghetti Monster). Social Services (is it genuinely a coincidence that they managed to choose a description that abbreviates to SS?) really do believe that they are infallible.

I have now entirely forgotten why these people do not deserve to be persecuted (sorry, I might have meant prosecuted).

Oh, it is lack of money. We get the Social Services we deserve and are prepared to pay for.

The SS: Yes, The Acronym Has The Correct Associations For Our Social Services

The title link leads to what is far from the worst Social Services case of which I am personally aware. Fortunately, the Firm gave up its legal aid franchise some years ago and I no longer have to deal with dispiriting child care cases. This case, however, represents at a fairly average level, the arrogance, incompetence and self-confidence of our SS. That is why it is important. It is not an aberration.

It is the "self-confidence" that really grates. They never admit even the remotest possibility that they could be wrong. Once you come on to their radar; you are finished, your life is finished.

AND IT IS A LOTTERY WHETHER YOU ARE TARGETTED OR NOT!

This is the real disgrace. It is not about funding (although, it is about that as well). It is simply about which neighbour picks up the telephone and reports you.

Read the story; for once the Daily Mail have got it right.

The Wicked Messenger

Cyberthiefs are exploiting the genuine Madeleine McCann website by typosquatting.

These disgusting bastards include, according to The Times, "chat rooms, estate agents and dating sites".

Click on the title to view The Times's article.

I am a bit surprised that chat rooms and dating sites should resort to this practice. The fact that estate agents are involved causes no surprise whatsover.

I have met one honourable estate agent so they should not all be tarred with the same brush.

Name & Shame: I will publish a list of these miserable bastards once I have verified their status.

Madeleine, Frankie Lee and the Judas Priest

The Internet has ensured that there is nowhere on the planet that Madeleine McCann's kidnapper can hide.

The outpouring of prayer and support across the globe is touching and brings tears to even the most hardened cynic's eyes.

But the doomsayer in me says that it may also have hastened Madeleine's death.

He (it is almost certainly a he) is now the most cornered rat of all time. As such, he will resort to desperate measures without analysing the consequences.

Even as a non-believer, I pray not. But does prayer have power? Madeleine McCann's fate may thus be God's ultimate test.

He may already have failed you. I pray not.

The picture above symbolises the most perfect of happy families. No-one but a sadistic pervert would seek to render it asunder. Unfortunately, the rat knows that and his instinct for self preservation may lead him into unthinkable territory.

Children's Evidence

I have been told off recently (severely criticised would be another way of putting it) for trying to present a child's point of view via a letter sent by the child to me. This was in the context of a financial dispute between the parents but the child's views were highly relevant to the outcome. Who was the child going to live with and how did that impact on their respective financil needs?

I was therefore heartened to read the following case:

LM v Medway

In that case, the child was 10. Her evidence was relevant.

OK, it was care proceedings.

My "child" was 17 and her evidence was not only irrelevant but an "abuse".