Child Abuse in UK

craig2536


Joined: 09/06/2007
Posts: 277

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 13:13

Took this link from another forum, but feel so strongly about it that I have put it on here. As civilised human beings I think it is our duty to protect children and never allow it to happen again. I think the people in the social services should be brought to court and charged as well. We cannot imagine what suffering that baby endured. Please sign the pettition http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 925012.ece

Littlenige



Joined: 24/12/2006
Posts: 3594

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 13:21

social workers !!!





I have personal experience of these do gooding ( mainly left wing ) toss pots.



How they sleep at night with their airy fairy ideas i know not.



They do notput the interests of the child first, this should be the case.



Sack em all root and branch clensing is required through out the whole social services department / department of child protection.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 13:59

here,here!

craig2536


Joined: 09/06/2007
Posts: 277

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 14:20

get as many people as you can to sign. let everyone hear how disgusted and upset decent people are to what has been allowed to happen to this poor baby.

cyprusgaz



Joined: 25/08/2008
Posts: 79

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 14:48

I am not here to defend the actions of Haringay Social Services, as the latest failure is indefensible. However "sack them all root and branch!!" What’s all that about?

I have worked in the vulnerable children sector for the last 10 years and there are some dammed good social workers out there in the field. Don’t get carried away with emotive rhetoric such as this it doesn’t help. The press don’t cover issues everyday such as how ‘many young children are saved from potential harm each day’ yes root out the lazy and incompetent but not “sack them all”. The argument makes you foolish!

MaggieAndBernie



Joined: 26/07/2008
Posts: 2012

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 15:01

Oye Cyprus Gaz, does Ozzy know you've been posing for pics wiv his bird???

craig2536


Joined: 09/06/2007
Posts: 277

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 15:14

cyprus gaz all I want only the ones involved in the death of that innocent baby to be brought to task. Sixty visits and they saw nothing.

You think saying "sorry" like they did is enough for the life of that baby and how he must have suffered.

britvic



Joined: 05/09/2008
Posts: 3039

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 15:15

It is so discusting what's happening to children here, only yesturday there was news of two baby's being stabbed by their own mother, and then there's baby P. I agree with Cyprus Gaz there are good and bad in every profession.

Vicki

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 15:34

I don't say 'sack them all' just sack Sharon Shoesmith, the £100,000 a year head of children’s services at Haringey.

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2334

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 15:41

We haven't had anyone saying: "and I would pull the lever" yet. What's wrong with you lot?

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 16:11

".....and I would pull the lever". There I've said it and I'm not ashamed!

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2334

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 16:24

How about a quick "hanging's to good for 'em" ?



Not trying to be trite but I fail to see the purpose of these threads. It won't bring the victims back and we're supposed to be about Cyprus. I'm a father-of-two, I work in the courts and the police hear the most vile child abuse of which the public only get the sanitised version. I don't want to hear or read any more about it.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 16:26

if you sack all the lazy, who would be left? not many i guess.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 16:41

........ I don't want to hear or read any more about it.



PP, that's an unusual comment for you to make. Not like you to give out orders Point taken by the way

rowan


Joined: 04/09/2008
Posts: 450

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 17:12

Littlenige, I worked with deprived children for 22years and object to being labelled as a "do gooding, mainly left wing toss pot"



I certainly would not defend that particular council who, yet again, failed to defend vulnerable children, but who gives you the right to call us all by this name?

hattikins


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 2793

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 17:17

Nige,



I too have worked with special needs children for many years and like Rowan object to your name calling, I have also spent most of my working life delivering Child Protection training and am fully aware, and ashamed, of the shortcomings in protecting our children, but please don,t tar us all with the same brush.

brian24001


Joined: 23/03/2008
Posts: 606

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 17:19

very interesting facts about this matter here from Kay:

http://trncvillaowners.phpbb3now.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5007

Post #6

Littlenige



Joined: 24/12/2006
Posts: 3594

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 17:24

ok I apologise for my generalisation. as concentions people with good intention i may have offended you I am sorry.



I fail to see how it can be right to return a child to ts natural parents when it has been with foster parents for 10 years when the natural parents pluged the childs feet in to scallding hot water requiring 7 years of operations and skin grafts, the child wanted to stay with the foster parent but the " case manager" decided the child should be returned.



When ever emotions and experiences are involved emotions can run high but when will people learn CHILDREN DO MATTER AND NEED CARE not ruls and tick boxes.

smudge



Joined: 07/04/2008
Posts: 160

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 18:58

I am disgusted that any professional or otherwise could allow a child to suffer in the way that has been reported - it is clearly devastating and inhuman - but this is clearly a different argument to generalising all of those who work in such a difficult sector.



I have found your comments offensive Nige - you've tarred a whole group of people who care passionately about safeguarding children and work tirelessly towards this. Some individuals in this role have been abused for the job that they do when protection of the vulnerable has been their goal. Your comments do not help them to do the jobs they have - but someone has to do it......

hattikins


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 2793

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 19:19

Nige has apologised for his earlier comments, he realises it was probably said in the heat of the moment due to his anger at such abuse, anger that I,m sure we all feel, and he accepts that of course there are still many people who work for the good of children in this country. Please don,t be too hard on him.

caroletavy


Joined: 03/07/2007
Posts: 143

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 20:47

I feel that it is the responsibility of the parents to look after their children that they chose to have. To blame the social services is one thing but at the end of the day it is the parents of these children that cause the heartache and suffering. Yet they are allowed to continue and to have more children that they can abuse. It is about time Britain took a stance and rid the county of these morons, it has got to be a reasonable case for the death penalty, Human rights, what rights do the children have? The social services can only do as much as they can, the abusers are the people that need stringing up, no excuses!! Yes, I am a mum!

rowan


Joined: 04/09/2008
Posts: 450

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 20:58

littlenige, thank you for being big enough to apologise for your offensive comments. Of course it cannot be right to return a vulnerable child to abusive parents and those who made those decisions have to live with what they have done. In the UK the protection of children is well legislated and procedures are in place to protect them. very sadly, there are professionals, and I use the word losely, who do not do their job properly and I personally would never condone their actions.

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
14/11/2008 21:22

'I'm a father-of-two, I work in the courts and the police hear the most vile child abuse of which the public only get the sanitised version'.

John I have to ask how do you fit it all in? I am impressed you must be an outstanding and upright citizen to fit all of these things into your life, but please dont get carried away with your duty to society, you know you have children to look after.

mitsi


Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 345

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 20:20

Anyone who harms children and animals should be lobotomised. All the abuse both to children and animals is a reflection of our society and I am ashamed to be part of it. We claim to be superior as the human race! We have apparently EVOLVED? Abuse of this kind has always been in our psyche and it seems to be just as prevalent as ever. Why do we allow these abusers to breed in the first place? Why are we not vetting people beforehand? Our society allows us to marry at 16, have kids at any time, yet legally we can't drink or smoke until we reach the age of 18. I rest my case.

karakum5c



Joined: 18/03/2008
Posts: 1021

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 20:28

A LIFE for a LIFE no excuses.

Littlenige



Joined: 24/12/2006
Posts: 3594

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 20:34

I must disagree , you should not execute pedos or killers ........just gir me a blunt razor and expose their nether regions....................... and no anesthtic

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 21:19

Or maybe too much anaesthetic Nige

mishmash


Joined: 05/05/2008
Posts: 336

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 21:39

Its easy to say that some children shouldn't be returned to their parents (I agree that sometimes they shouldn't) etc (little Nige's post) but its not as clear cut as that the social workers don't have enough power to make those decisions. The final decision of whether children are returned is the courts, all the social worker can do is put their view and evidence in front of the court but obviously (fair hearing and all that) so do the parents. Theres lots of cases where children shouldn't be with their parents but if the courts say they have to what then? No one wants children to be harmed (or worse) but theres so many processes and people involved its not as straight forward as some might think. as for Baby P I would point out that there were more professionals involved than just social workers so why is it that the finger is always pointed at them!

brandy sour


Joined: 09/04/2008
Posts: 310

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 22:11

The people who did the Visits in the in the first place should hold their head in shame i think they should allow body check on babys when they visit to stop these bad things from happing.

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
16/11/2008 22:42

I once recommended a psych examination for a client who was obessing about his neighbour who, although he lived in a modest ex-council house, parked a Rolls-royce outside..



Whilst I was with him he proceeded to axe his furniture to bits for burning on his fire... he only had one chair left.. no table, nothing.



He'd gone a bit off the rails when his own brother ran off with his wife...



Anyway... the visiting psychologist declared him perfectly sane... but when I read the end of his evaluation report it transpired that the "interview" was carried out through this chap's letter box!



I think the psychologist was as barmy as this chap was.



Next thing this chap applies for a shotgun licence... I was contacted and advised against. He probably got one....



God knows what he got up to since.... I hate to think. I did what I could but if those in the positions to make the decisions are still erring on the side personal freedom instead of caution it's not going to get better...

Bertie


Joined: 15/04/2008
Posts: 155

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 00:49

on the news tonight they have just published a picture of his child taken a short while

before he died not the blonde haired beautiful child but shaved head, sores hidden by chocolate and oh so desperately sad eyed I don't know how anyone who came into contact with that child in the last few days of his life can put their head on a pillow at night. Has common sense totally fled this country to be replaced by form filling.

God bless him having seen that picture my heart is so sad for him.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 01:28

BBC News have reported on the astronomical Court fees today.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7732310.stm



I too was shocked that anyone could not see the plight of this little boy beneath the chocolate smears. He looked so sad.

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 08:01

Kay



Are the astronomical court fees a result of the high charges levied by the legal profession?

Littlenige



Joined: 24/12/2006
Posts: 3594

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 09:27

if this case has touched you and you are on face book you may wish to join this group.



http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/group.php?gid=43395791947

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 09:38

I find this kind of "victimhood by proxy" very unsavoury....

brian24001


Joined: 23/03/2008
Posts: 606

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 09:41

Msg 33: Groucho,

Costs are not due to legal proffession, see text below from a similar thread on 'villaowners'



b_t24001 wrote:

So Kay,

To sum up the economics:

It costs 4k of 'tax payers' money, paid from an account that is essentially owned by the tax payer, to an account/system that the tax payers also own, to fund salaries that are all paid by the tax payer, in order to follow up something that virtually 100% of tax payers would want followed up and investigated to the fullest extent, or am I missing something?

This should be free, provided sufficiently qulified.

What the UK needs is 2 things, accountablity, and consequences. and get rid of all this hiding and imunity.

Brian



Absolutely spot on Brian. Sadly it's ludicrous isn't it?

You are knocking at an open door here.

brian24001


Joined: 23/03/2008
Posts: 606

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 09:43

From the BBC site:

The government has provided local authorities with an extra £40m to help cope with the increase, but critics say this is not enough.

Peter Garsden, of the Association Of Child Abuse Lawyers, said: "If councils are going to have to think whether they should spend £4,000 before starting care proceedings and taking a child off the parents, then it beggars belief how many children are going to remain with abusive parents."





SO, To elabourate further on my previous posting of inter government money shuffling, simply costing more in admin.

One gov body (court system) increases the cost to another gov (council) body, so yet another gov (request/auditors) body get a further gov body (treasury) to advance more tax payers cash, costing a fortune in admin and inter dept costs no doubt, to attempt to acheive the very thing they have prevented by increasing the cost in the first place.



Wrong people in the wrong jobs at the wrong time

Littlenige



Joined: 24/12/2006
Posts: 3594

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 09:44

sorry grouch I am lost



Defining Victimhood

Montville defines victimhood as



...a state of individual and collective ethnic mind that occurs when the traditional structures that provide an individual sense of security and self-worth through membership in a group are shattered by aggressive, violent political outsiders. Victimhood can be characterized by either an extreme or persistent sense of mortal vulnerability.[2]

Following and expanding on the above, one can say that the main components of "victimhood" include:



A history of violent traumatic aggression and loss.

A belief that the aggression and violence suffered at the hands of the enemy is not justifiable by any standard.

A constant fear that the aggressor could strike again at any time.

A perception that the world is indifferent to the victim group's plight.[3]

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 11:21

Nothing to do with the legal profession Groucho. You may wish to have a look at the whole thread on TRNC VO to gain an insight into the way this Government deals with child protection issues.

brian24001


Joined: 23/03/2008
Posts: 606

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 11:56

link to same discussion on VO

http://trncvillaowners.phpbb3now.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5007

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 12:31

I think It is important that child abuse and neglect are placed in the context of what is more typical for children to experience as they grow up. Family life is one of the least studied areas of our society. The few studies which have examined family life in general population samples reveal very great differences within the range of ‘normal’ family life and childrearing patterns, with social class being one of the strongest influences. I might be wrong here but I feel that it is the breakdown of the traditional family that results in child abuse, especially when a ‘new’ father figure is brought in to the family. I’d be interested to see other’s responses.

Bertie


Joined: 15/04/2008
Posts: 155

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 16:33

I really think that is too simplistic an argument, as given the right social circumstances this can work perfectly well.

What we have in the UK currently is a growing underclass where 2 and 3 generations have never worked and see no need to, they do however drink and do drugs as a matter of course 'to relieve the boredom!'

Girls from 14 on are sexually promiscuous getting pregnant has more to do with being housed and getting benefits than actually wanting a child and having got a flat the mates come round to drink and do drugs and sadly babies are being brought up in this environment.

Parents seem to smother their children now until they get to about 12 or 13 then they seem to abdicate responsibility for them.The media encourages both parents and children to think its right and normal to have sex, drink and smoke cannabis from far too early an age and the well worn cry of what can you do is just plain laziness who ever said being a parent was easy.

bootneck



Joined: 23/06/2008
Posts: 242

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 17:04

I for one would have great pleasure in delivering personally the same torture and pain to the parents of baby p rather than lock them up!!!

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 17:28

I'm sure there are thousands of other people, including myself, who would gladly inflict an injury to the people who carried out these attacks on Baby P.

Unfortunately it doesn't sort the problem out. I still blame social services for their complete lack of care for this child.

mishmash


Joined: 05/05/2008
Posts: 336

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 17:50

the caseworker actually wanted the baby in foster care and was overruled by management probably due to the financial costing but also before you can place a child in care and go to court for the decision the social worker needs to show that the parents have been given an opportunity to change, hence the child protection registration process which Baby P was subject to. Everyone is quick to point the finger of blame at the social worker - but how many of those pointing the finger are social workers - willing to work 40 plus hours a week, take their work home all for a thankless task I ask????

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 18:08

mishmash. I understand where your'e coming from but the social worker is in the front line and therefore some of the blame must be appropriated to them. Consider this, if you get your car serviced and you have a serious accident afterwards through, say, brake failure, who gets the initial blame?-The Mechanic of course because he's in the front line. Obviously then you will blame the Service Manager and then the Garage Owner for not having the appropriate standards set in place. I know that's a poor analogy but surely you get my drift?

mishmash


Joined: 05/05/2008
Posts: 336

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 20:39

I get the analogy of course. But the thing is if the social worker wishes to remove the child they need to produce a care plan for that child to be submitted to the court. The care plan is not accepted unless it is approved and counter signed by senior management so despite what the social worker says no plan is progressed if senior management refuse to sign plans and authorise funding for placements etc. So not quite the same as having my car serviced I'm afraid.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 22:40

does anyone know how many days off sick,social worker have throught stress every year?

dalartokat


Joined: 14/04/2008
Posts: 734

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 23:44

In 1973 a 7 year old girl Maria Colwell of Brighton Sussex stayed in the safe hands of foster carers. Her natural parents wanted her back and after she was returned, the natural parents parted. The mother met a man William Kepple who had children of his own. Whilst Maria was in their care she suffered appauling injuries as well as being starved. She was made to push a pram full of coal and always left out from the rest of the step family. She was made to watch the rest of the family eat whilst she was being denied food and finally she was taken into hospital in Sussex in the very pram pushed by her step father where she later died of her injuries caused by the man Kepple. She was imanciated and her bones were broken and scars of cigarettte burns to her body.



What has changed in 30 years? From Maria Colwell to Caleb Ness to Victoria Clembie to baby "p" and all of those poor souls in between. As the QC said in the Victoria Clembie case there will be more. It is sickening.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 23:47

A considerable amount Firestarter. I know this for a fact. The reasons are the stress of dealing with emotive issues day in and day out, the unmanageable caseloads due to colleagues being off sick, unable to recruit, unable to keep staff (due to stress), and the ludicrous amount of time they have to spend in form filling (which is part of the Government's insistence that EVERYTHING has to be documented). If they are spending 75% of their valuable time on paperwork, how on earth does the Government expect them to do their job at ground level, actually investigating cases of children at risk? The Government have made it totally impossible and have meddled in most professions expecting people to conform to inane beaurocracy of form filling, Teachers (Sats), Police Officers (Less time for actual policing) Doctors and Nursing Staff (Less time for patient care), and from my point of view Legal Aid Lawyers.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 23:49

Do you know that if I see a Legal Aid client, I spend 45 minutes completing the ridiculous and lengthy forms required by the Legal Services Commission, and just 15/20 minutes advising the client.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
17/11/2008 23:53

A shocking statistic but it is estimated on average 1 child a week is killed in the UK because of injuries inflicted upon him or her by their "carers".

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
18/11/2008 09:39

That's the trouble nowadays - too much paperwork. How are these people expected to get results when they are inundated with paperwork. Too much red tape and not enough advice on the ground.

bootneck



Joined: 23/06/2008
Posts: 242

Message Posted:
18/11/2008 09:52

Starry i totally agree but that would be too quick for these sick baxxxxs

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
18/11/2008 10:13

It has now been announced that every area of England is to be covered by a Children's Trust Board. This new initiative follows the failure of social workers in Haringey to prevent the abuse and death of Baby P. Announcing the measures, Children's Secretary Ed Balls will acknowledge that protection agencies are failing to intervene early enough in some cases. Many English local authorities already have a CTB but some do not.

If the Government has now come out and stated that it was the Social Workers in Haringey that failed to prevent the death and abuse of Baby P – then heads must roll.

mishmash


Joined: 05/05/2008
Posts: 336

Message Posted:
18/11/2008 20:55

Heads always roll when this happens in departments but unfortunately nothing will change its the processes and procedures at the root of this w26kay is so right. Without the staff the service cannot be provided and experienced skills just disappear into other avenues and not where its needed. Most social workers are responsible for approx 30-40 children The Climbie enquiry stated 15 (or 20) was the max which would be manageable, most front line managers are responsible for approx 200 to 300 children with these workloads workers dont stay in the job and if they do corners are cut its by no means right but just a sad reality.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 00:43

kay

i don't disagree that paperwork is a problem as that was my mums job for social services, but many social workers claim stress and take time off.

in the real world anyone who has ever run a business knows about stress but you just take it in your stride. when you work for yourself you have to. nobody pays you sick pay, or any benefits.

out of all my mums social worker friends i have only ever met one guy, who was for real, and in touch with the kids of today.

also i think stress is kind of a new illness, well not new but years ago people didn't take time off for stress so to speak.

hattikins


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 2793

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 00:49

Stress, paperwork, regulations, all my eye, anyone with an ounce of common sense and any conviction would have kicked up one hell of a stink about this poor little soul and made sure he was safe no matter what, it can be done, I know because I,ve done it, shout loud enough and someone WILL listen

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 03:19

Firestarter don't get me wrong here, I am not supportive of the omissions of THIS particular team of social workers. I am just stating the reality of the situation that the majority of professionals have to deal with. If the beaurocracy was lifted perhaps they would be able to do the job in the way that most sound minded people would expect. Social Workers and my profession are at the opposite scale of the spectrum, but I can count on one hand (and recall all their names too) the number of inadequate social workers I have come across in the 25 years I have been dealing with cases involving children.

nancy08


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 20

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 03:53

it could only happen i uk.

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 06:54

Well Kay and Brian....



Where does the money end up... who get's to charge the fees as court costs?



OK the judges and court staff have to be paid for... but nearly everybody thinks that the only people to gain out of going to court are members of the legal profession... or do they do all this stuff pro bono?



If they did do it for free I'd be inclined to believe that they were not making money out of the misery of children...



Nige,



You are lost, why am I not surprised... I said "victimhood by proxy"... the "by proxy" bit is very important.. some people like to attach themselves to others who have suffered a loss or to involve themselves in matters that they are not necessarily involved in during the normal course of events in an effort to empathise maybe but also possibly to self aggrandise.



Some might see this adding your name and picture to the Facebook group as a good idea... I don't.. An old-fashioned petition is a much more selfless gesture... being not about you

magicart


Joined: 05/10/2008
Posts: 985

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 08:21

A very interesting and varid debate!



I just think the events we are debating now mirrors the same events the year before and the year before that etc.When will governing bodies learn from thier mistakes?



Perhaps the relevant members of the Council department should be prosecuted and if found guilty sent to prison.



This will generate some form of accountabilty and perhaps focus peoples minds

brian24001


Joined: 23/03/2008
Posts: 606

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 09:11

Groucho,

Council money comes from central gov (obviously)

money paid to the courts goes to court system coffers, which also receives money from treasury, but is effectively subsidised from someone else budget, it's all a money go round, paid from one dept to another and along the way picking up huge costs in admin.

Of course if you assume that the money to the court goes to the staff, who then pay NI, and PAYE, the govt gets about 30% back, they then spend say 70% of their wages, of which 17.5% is vat so the govt get another 12% back (more on fuel), so in govt operations, they actually get back about say 45% of all they lay out anyway. Of money spent, the recipient/business then pays tax etc etc, in reality govt spends 100mil, get back 50 mil, and still can't balance the books and need more taxes.

Legal aid, is one of the biggest bills the treasury picks up, anf it belongs to ... you guessed it, the tax payer. if you are a tax payer, you try getting LA, little or no chance

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 15:17

Groucho... "Where does the money end up... who get's to charge the fees as court costs?OK the judges and court staff have to be paid for... but nearly everybody thinks that the only people to gain out of going to court are members of the legal profession... or do they do all this stuff pro bono?



If they did do it for free I'd be inclined to believe that they were not making money out of the misery of children..."



I do wish people would not post on subjects they know little or nothing about as in this post. Let me explain to you Groucho so that you do have a little knowledge for future reference.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 15:22

1. "Where does the money end up... who get's to charge the fees as court costs?

Answer. The money ends up going around the civil service treasury system. No-one charges fees out as Court costs. Court costs are a disbursement that are unavoidable. The lawyers do not receive the Court costs. The civil service do.



2. OK the judges and court staff have to be paid for... but nearly everybody thinks that the only people to gain out of going to court are members of the legal profession... or do they do all this stuff pro bono?

Answer. You have the option to go to Court in person if you do not wish to instruct a lawyer. That is a matter of choice in the UK. If you do instruct a lawyer however and they go to Court for you, their time has to be paid for. Why should we, or anyone else for that matter work "all the time" for free? Did you?

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 15:30

3. If they did do it for free I'd be inclined to believe that they were not making money out of the misery of children..."



Answer. If "they" ... who are "they"?

When children are taken into care they have a voice - they are represented by their Guardian ad Litem who in turn instructs a lawyer to deal with the legal aspects of the case. Are you seriously suggesting that the children's best interests should not be represented in Court proceedings, and that lawyers who act for GAL's (children) are making money out of the misery of children? Quite contrary to your claim here, children need separate legal representation as without it, the parent's lawyers/Local Authorities lawyers would be able to decide on the fate of the child without any independent representation of that child's interests. That could meaning returning to an abusive environment, long term care or adoption. The GAL/lawyer presents the case for the child.

w26kay



Joined: 14/10/2007
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
19/11/2008 15:34

It really makes me quite cross when I read postings such as this, as it confirms a sad lack of knowledge on the subject matter itself.



If you don't know anything about the matter don't automatically make incorrect assumptions, and if you do post assumptions without any merit/incorrect/misleading/wrong information, expect to be corrected.