Where do (Adopted) Babies Come From?

I am watching a video on Facebook of a mother who has lost her newborn to Forced Adoption. As heartbreaking as it is to watch, it is a story I have heard over and over again. In a few of the cases I have worked on in the UK, I have seen all of the documents, in fact, I have seen more of the evidence than the judges have seen in these cases. I have also seen cases where parents have fled the UK and Social Services in other countries, where Forced Adoption is not legal, they were allowed to keep their babies. In fact I have even met social workers involved in these cases and interviewed them for the book.

In the video I am watching, a young, first-time mother, as soon as she got pregnant, social services became involved because they had “concerns”.  Bear in mind that this was her first-born, her ability as a parent could not reasonably be determined since she didn’t have a child and there was no evidence that she had ever abused a child. I have to say in the interest of fairness, that I don’t know enough about the case to say whether the Forced Adoption is justified or not. I am listening to one side of the story, and I wouldn’t make a judgement based on hearing one side. I can say however, that in every other case I have seen or dealt with, in none of those cases was the Forced Adoption justified.

I wrote in great depth about other cases in the book, but there is a pattern that you get to see over and over again. When councils were being paid bonuses to adopt more children in the UK, only 6% of the children in “Care” were adopted, the majority of cases were like this one, social workers identify a baby for adoption and the parent is put on a treadmill with targets they have no hope of hitting.  The UK government set an impossible target of Fast-Tracking Forced Adoption within 2 months. They will tell the parent they need to do a course or training which will take several months, and then say no places are available for months, the Forced Adoption would be finalized probably 4 months before the parent finishes.

In a case I assisted on in the UK, the mother had been placed in a “Mother and Baby Unit”. By the time this mother and her team were finished with social services, Tadpole Cottage was shut down and Dr George Hibbert was facing a Fitness to Practice Committee at the GMC. Incredibly, he was cleared of professional misconduct. Among the psychological tests a mother faced was changing a flat tyre at the side of the road while caring for her baby.  In the end the highly controversial General Medical Council dropped the charges against him.

I have even seen a case in Ireland where an English mother and her husband relocated to Ireland even though he was serving in the British Army and had completed a tour in Afghanistan. Irish social services were notified by UK social services that this woman was such a risk to children that her previous children were forcibly adopted. When she was pregnant, 6 months before the due date, she became a legal resident of Ireland. She contacted us on arrival and we advised her to contact Irish social services, provide them with all her records and engage with them to see what concerns they had if any. Their response was not to engage with her until the day the baby was born. In fact, they even placed a Police surveillance car outside her home for weeks before the baby was born. She was monitored 24/7 even though she was not accused of any crime. If she had decided to flee the jurisdiction before the baby was born, Police would have been powerless to do anything.  I know of several cases where Police resources were wasted in this way.

When the baby was born, social workers attempted a kidnapping under the law. They had no court orders and attempted to illegally invoke Section 12 of the Child Care Act which allows Irish Police to remove any child in danger without court orders. In many cases babies or children are kidnapped misusing S12 and then social workers will lie to a judge and say the baby was in such danger that the Police had to remove the child and hand them over to social workers. However, S12 requires that the Police Officer is required to establish what danger the baby was in. Since it was highly improbable that a newborn could be in any danger in a hospital while surrounded by doctors and nurses, if Police had used S12 they would not have been able to justify their actions. Despite this, S12 is regularly misused, which in the legal sense would be kidnapping, fraud upon the court, perjury and perverting the course of justice.

Despite not engaging with the mother, an Emergency Care Order was granted based on the UK evidence. Despite fighting through the courts in Ireland, the baby was deported and forcibly adopted. Last year the same mother moved to another EU country, engaged with social services there before the birth, and they had no issues. Today she lives with her new baby and is pregnant again, social services there have no issues. If she was in Ireland or the UK she would be guaranteed to lose any child she gives birth to.

So my question is; Where do adopters think these babies come from?

It has been a long time since Orphanages have existed in most of Europe. The marketing of these children includes posting their images in advertisement online and paying advertising agencies to find “forever homes” for the less adoptable children who  are over aged three. Of course most adopters want babies, preferably if the baby never bonded with their mother. In a few cases in Ireland I have heard social workers trying to justify reasons why a newborn should not be breast-fed or bond. In one case we asked a High Court judge “who is the baby supposed to bond with?”. They have even stated outright that if the baby bonds and is breast-fed, that the baby will grieve for their mother and this can impact the bond with the adopters. Obviously this is child abuse to deny a newborn the opportunity to bond. It is well-known now that “Kangaroo Care” is tremendously important for newborns. Babies can die for apparent reason described as “Failure to Thrive” and human contact with their mother. It is also widely known that the bonding process begins long before the baby is born, and newborn know their mothers.

Adoption, which has long been a thriving business, believes that you can take a baby from “A” and place them with “B” and that there are no consequences to the child. Adopters believe they are saving children from a miserable existence and many have set themselves up as heroes in their own mind. Social workers have no issue with abusing a baby and as the evidence appears to show, the more financial incentives involved, the more adoptions that will take place. In the middle of all this is the baby who is being abused. But lets not forget the mother or the father of this baby who will spend the rest of their lives grieving for a living child. If these parents speak out they will be jailed. If they parents see their child on the street, they could be jailed for any form of acknowledging their own child.

In many cases children were adopted because their parents were wrongly accused of child abuse. By the time the case came to Criminal Court their children were already forcibly adopted. Supposedly, these adoptions are “Irreversible” even though they were not legally justified. This in itself is proof that Forced Adoptions are illegal. It also proves that a child can be adopted without the parents being guilty of any crime, a Human Rights abuse under “Punishment Without Crime”. A friend and colleague who has helped parents against social services since the 1960’s, Ian Josephs is the person who first coined  the term “Forced Adoption” and for years he has had a website entitled Forced Adoption – Punishment Without Crime.  Ian, although now in his 80’s, still works daily helping parents flee or fight their cases. Another colleague, a former British MP John Hemming has done amazing work in compiling statistics and raising the issue many times in the British Parliament. Despite all the sterling work over the years not a lot has changed.

What has changed is that far more people are now aware that children don’t come from orphanages or are voluntarily given up by bad parents. If you are going to adopt a child these days you need to do a lot of courses, spend a lot of money and a lot of time before you are given a child. With so much information these days about the controversies and the injustice of Forced Adoption, you would either have to stupid, brainwashed or so cruel that you don’t care where the baby or child came from. If an adoption can fail and an adopter hand the child back to social services, there is no good reason that adoptions can be reversed as easily as they were made.

We need to stop seeing Adoption as being a heroic act, there is nothing heroic about adopting a child who doesn’t want to be adopted or taking a child away from a parent who has not committed any crime. If the failure rates of adoption and the suicide rate of adopted children is higher than children in the general population, seeing Adoption as anything other than a form of Child Abuse is no longer acceptable. I wrote in great detail about this in the book.

Joe

Why is Child Abuse Sometimes Acceptable?

I have mentioned before how I am fascinated with Cognitive Dissonance and how facts and indisputable evidence wont change people’s minds. It is a topic that has been well-studied by scientific experiments over the years and the conclusion that could be drawn is that Humans are not yet at a stage of our development where our brains can differentiate between fact and fiction, and that Reasoning Power in humans is driven by our prejudice, fear and “Filtering”.

It has only been in the last century where many, but not all people on the planet have not needed our Instincts. We live in a reasonably free society and are protected by Police, Laws, Armies and we can go about raising our families and working our jobs, tending to our homes and land and most of us will not fall afoul of the law or be abused by governments. This is the entire point of having a society and working together to make a better world for our children and their children. We have a duty to advance as Humans and improve our intelligence, to make a fairer society and work towards the day when there are no more wars or dictators, where Human Rights Courts and Lawyers will no longer be necessary because nobody would abuse our rights. I also discussed this in the book.

The reality is that there are wars and humans suffering from environmental disasters, we still have famines, droughts, dictators and millions dying. I wrote extensively about the failure of the United Nations, especially UNICEF and why these organizations sometimes do more harm than good. I have been taken to task for speaking on these issues by otherwise good people with the best intentions and the “Best Interest of the Child” at heart, but I have gained their respect in many cases by pointing out that good people can easily be led to do bad things. We try and try but still fail. We don’t give up on these failures, we try harder but the reason we fail ultimately is because we fulfill Albert Einsteins prophesy when he defined Insanity;

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

We keep trying, failure is not an option, but without listening to others and changing our methods, we are doomed to failure, which is Insanity.

Arab Child Abuse

I may lose a few friends with this next paragraph, but I urge people to think logically and constructively about this and not allow your prejudices or biases to accept new information.

I am going to discuss what I see as Child Abuse, mainly by Arabs in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict which has raged on since 1948. Case in Point is a 16-year-old girl by the name of Ahed Tamimi. She was arrested and detained without bail for assaulting 2 soldiers outside her house in the West Bank. She is also known as Shirley Temper and there are many videos of her shouting and striking IDF Soldiers. Her family background is that her family have a history of “rebellion” and terrorism, this is the environment she and many Arab children were raised in. Throughout history we have seen children indoctrinated into regimes and ideologies, as children we are not autonomous and believe our parents to be Gods, to be infallible and always be right about everything. It’s no surprise that children become their parents in many ways and that conflicts go from one generation to another. Some fact I have seen on Ahed Tamimi;

• For years she has attacked Police and Soldiers, always with Media present to record the event. This is the first time she has been arrested and charged.
• At the age of 13 she received 2 awards for her “Activism” by the Presidents of Turkey and “Palestine”. (in 2012 she was reported as being aged 13 by the Turkish and International Media, which if my math is correct makes her an adult, but if the Media insists she is only 16 let’s go with that)
•  Her aunt Ahlam Ahmad Al-Tamimi  a Jordanian citizen, was jailed for her part in the infamous Sbaro Restaurant suicide bombing in Israel which killed 15 Israelis, half of whom were children. She remains unrepentant to this day.
• Ahed’s mother Nariman Tamimi regularly incites violence against Jews, and usually appears with her daughter at events where Ahed slaps soldiers and the mother videos the event, not to mention the heavy media presence usually seen at these “protests”, which are organized by her father.
• Ahed’s Father Bassim Tamimi, also a Jordanian, was jailed for incitement, particularly for instructing children to throw stones at Jews and Israelis.
• It would appear that the Tamimi Family are not in fact “Palestinians” but emigrated from Jordan.

The arguments of the Anti-Israelis in the Ahed Tamimi case show and incredible bias. Some peoples views are so fixed against Israel that they try to justify the abuse of Ahed by her family and community. Here is a sampling;

• Ahed was angry because her cousin had been shot in the eye by an IDF soldier. If this is true, what motivation did she have for attacking soldiers hundreds of times for at least the last 5 years?
• “She is only a child, the soldiers are fully armed”. Can I ask, what mother or father would allow a child to attack a fully armed soldier and film it rather than try to protect their child?
• “The soldiers were entering her house”. The video shows the soldiers outside her property on the street and making no attempt to enter her house. Ahed threw the blows and kicks, the soldiers did not defend themselves. Can I ask if a child in any Western country did the same to a Police Officer, would they not be tazered or shot or beaten with batons? Would the Police not arrest the child and mother and place the child in Foster “Care” and charge the mother with Reckless Endangerment of a Child?
• “Throwing stones is harmless compared to a fully armed and trained soldier”. I would say, have you never heard of Death by Stoning?

You have to laugh sometimes at the hypocrisy of people like George Galloway who points out that Jews are not indigenous to Israel or the area because some are blue-eyed/blonds, just like Jordanian Ahed Tamimi. I don’t want to be drawn into a debate about who’s right or wrong in this conflict, the point I am making is that Ahed Tamimi is an abused child, but many people try to excuse this form as child abuse as they try to excuse terrorism. I often hear people say that “One man’s Terrorist is another man’s Freedom Fighter”, no folks, if you attack civilians as Ahed’s aunt did, you are either a Psychopath or a Terrorist. If you subscribe to the “Freedom Fighter” concept, you have lost your Moral Compass and need a heavy dose of Critical Thinking.

We have indeed lost our Moral Compass if we celebrate sending a 12-year-old out to attack soldiers, throw stones or Petrol Bombs, roll burning Tyres filled with petrol at troops, or more serious, teaching hate to toddlers on TV or in UNRWA Schools. I am in disbelief that people allow their bias and hate against Israel and Jews to affect the logical part of their brain and not see blatant Child Abuse, especially in the case of Ahed?

Israeli Prime Minister Golda Maier (also spelled Meir), understood the mentality when she said;

Peace will come to the Arabs when they learn to love their children more than they hate ours (Jews)

Please don’t bother responding with comments drawing me into a debate over right or wrong in this conflict, the topic is Child Abuse and how people allow themselves to justify and celebrate the abuse of a child. I have not seen any evidence of Israelis or Jews similarly abusing or brainwashing their children. Please share any evidence you have to the contrary.

The question this child abuse raises for me is “Where are the Social Workers”? Where is the outrage and condemnation or scholarly articles? why do UNICEF and UNRWA not speak out against children being used by adults as “Martyrs” when the PLO sent out child suicide bombers? If there was ever an opportunity for Social Work and Sociology, who claim to have the power to control and influence Society, why are UNICEF not sending armies of Social Workers to Arab countries to prevent Child Abuse? But I’m sure if you have read the Secret Courts Book, you already know the answer.

Joe

The Psychics Hotline Method of “Protecting” Children

I’ve said, and many others have said many times, that to repeat the same experiment over and over again is “Insanity”. It is one of the great gifts that Albert Einstein gave us. So when Social Workers try to find new methods, this is to be encouraged and applauded. I wish them luck, but I believe it will fail.

History teaches us about Child Protection that social workers are no better than anyone else at determining which children should be removed. A stunning example is the Baby P Case. Baby Peter was visited by “Professionals” 60 times in his short life, 18 of those visits by social workers. What was the principle learning from this case by social workers, is that you should take every child on the least suspicion, because you will be “damned if you do and damned if you don’t”.  The reality is that nobody but parents are damned, usually by social workers, but social workers are damned only when they make mistakes, as they did in Baby P.

The conclusion that I arrived at in the Baby P case is that social workers are no more capable of determining which children should be removed than anyone. I put this down to many factors, all detailed in the book. The bottom line as I see it, is that Sociology is not Evidence Based and has no Scientific Validity. In many countries only specially trained Police can determine if children should be removed, in the case of Police, their work is Evidence Based and their decisions are based on fact. Compare that to what social workers are being asked to do; predict Future Outcomes for Children. I made it clear in the book that I believe that we are asking social workers to do a job they will never be capable of doing. By the very nature of their work, social workers don’t do investigations, they do assessments, and they are not very good at it.

So the latest Flavor-of-the-Month Pop-Psychology is to use computer algorithms to screen calls to social services. A system now being trialed is called Predictive-Analytics Algorithm.  When Social Services receive a call about a child who may need to be “protected”, it is hoped that a computer program will be able to determine which calls should be dismissed and which cases require a visit to the child.

Predictive analytics are something we use every day without knowing it. When you type in part of a search into a search engine it will pop up suggestions, and finish your sentence for you, giving you a selection based on popularity of questions. As a computer geek myself, who has worked not just on PC’s, but on highly complex Automation Systems, I will make my own prediction on why this will fail. Any geek will tell you that a computer program is only as good as the data you put into the program. Any computer technician will also tell you that the computer and program is only as good as its user. “False data in, false data out”. Here’s why it wont work;

• The algorithm will not be science or evidence based but rely on faulty guidelines that social workers use on a daily basis.
• The user is not qualified to conduct investigations, or to determine “Risk” based on a phone call or email.
• Social Work has no history of success in determining which children are in actual need of protection.
• Based on Baby P, social workers wouldn’t recognise abuse or risk is they visited the house 18 times and sat on the couch and watched it happen.
• Existing checklists used by social workers are extremely vague, they rely heavily on subjective opinion to such an extent that most signs or symptoms “may or may not” be present, such that any child could be removed, or not removed, based on subjective opinion.

But let me state clearly, there are systems that are “tried and true” that have been used for many years with great success. At a case conference I plopped my phone on the table at the start of the meeting and pushed a few buttons. I was asked by the team leader if I was using a voice recorder? I answered “no, this is a Lie Detector”, do you have any objection to my using it? There was uproar and I had to remove the battery from my phone before the meeting would continue. I actually use a dedicated Digital  Audio Recorder and not my phone, just as courts and many social workers use.

With a DAR, if you have sufficiently good quality and levels, you can run the recording through a Voice Stress Analyzer, while this is not a Lie Detector as such,  in skilled hands it gives a very accurate reading of stress in a persons voice. While stress may or not be lying, it can encourage people to tell the truth.

In another case a parent recorded a social worker and clearly caught her lying. The parent wanted to use the recording in court so the judge could hear the lies. Social services strongly objected as they claimed tapes could be altered afterwards. Rather than the judge listening, he put the onus on the mother to have the tape analyzed by an expert technician and have her pay for it, making it impossible for her to use the tape. I offered my services for free as a qualified Electronics Technician and a Musician but now the judge put another condition on analyzing the tape, I had to analyze it without actually listening to its content. I said this was entirely possible, but there was no way that they were ever going to allow the tape to be played for the judge. Unbelievable but true. If I had been allowed, I would have over-stepped my mandate by also providing the judge with a Voice Stress Analysis, and also a Voice Recognition program which would have matched the speaker on tape with the speaker under oath on the witness stand.

So yes folks, there is technology that can help you prove your innocence or someones guilt, but I doubt very much that social workers or family court judges would embrace the use of tried and true technology. No amount of money spent on social workers will ever produce a method where social workers could detect by scientific means which children need protection, ever.

Might I suggest that social services re-route all child abuse and neglect calls to Psychics Hotline?

Joe