Forced Adoption
Home Page

 Baby snatching - Forced Adoption in Secret Courts by the Social Services - Secret Courts and Forced Adoption Issues
 Resist British Social Workers and Forced Adoption by Social Services
 Forced - Reforms, How to Get Your Children Back - 
 Secret Courts, Family Courts, Social Workers. Social Services
 Baby snatching - Forced Adoption in Secret Courts by the Social Services



Here at last is PROOF that many of those concerned in "child protection" are receiving vast sums of money.

1: Fosterers typically £400/ week per child!
2: Special children's homes typically £7,000/ week per child!
3: Lawyers and court costs typically £500,000 per case!
4: Experts typically £28,000 for a simple report!
5: Adoption and fostering agencies make £millions (£27,000/placement)
6: Local authority agencies get £13,000 per placement


The following statement/advertisment is typical !

Specialist fostering in Essex - St Christopher's Fellowship

What is specialist fostering?

Specialist foster carers provide a stable and supportive environment for a young person with more complex and challenging emotional needs. This could be on a short term, respite, emergency or long term basis.

Our specialist foster carers work with the young person, and others involved with the young person, to an agreed plan in order to turn their lives around. Due to the demanding nature of the role, only one young person will be placed with you at any one time.

Being a specialist foster carer is a tough job – but one with huge rewards. With your help, each young person has the real potential to make positive changes in their lives.

What is the support package like?

We believe that the better we support you in your new career, the better you’re able to help a child to have a brighter future.

We offer an attractive financial package of up to £35,000 a year to our self-employed specialist foster carers:

  • When you have a young person placed with you, you will be paid £750 a week, which includes an allowance for the child to cover their costs and your household expenses.
  • When you are in between placements, we will pay you a retainer of £350 per week for up to 12 weeks at any one time.

As part of our specialist team of foster carers, you will also be given extensive training and support from a range of professionals, including:

  • 24 hours a day social worker support and frequent face to face meetings
  • Support from other specialist foster carers
  • A comprehensive professional development programme.
  • Access to a child psychiatrist, psychologist and a qualified education adviser.
  • In addition, every specialist foster carer is entitled to 21 days respite per year

What do I need to become a specialist foster carer?

All specialist foster carers are talented people who have worked with children and young people in the past - perhaps in social work, foster care, youth work, residential childcare or teaching. As well as enthusiasm, patience and energy – and a belief that with the right support and environment, everyone has the potential to make positive changes in their lives - you will have a sound knowledge of child development stages and attachment issues.

There are also a number of practical considerations to bear in mind:

  • You must live in an area we are currently looking for specialist foster carers – currently this is in Essex.
  • You must have a spare bedroom
  • You must also be able to make specialist foster caring your main activity
    • If you are part of a couple, one partner must be at home and not be in employment
    • If you’re single, you should be at home and not be in employment
  • As the young people placed with you will demand all your care and attention, you should not have any other dependent children under 14 living with you.

Where can I become a specialist foster carer?

St Christopher’s are urgently looking for specialist foster carers in Essex, particularly in Colchester, Basildon, Clacton and Harlow.

If you have experience of working with challenging young people - perhaps in social work, housing support, youth work, foster care or teaching – then we want to hear from you!


Despite all these wonderful descriptions of overpaid foster carers, 10,000 children disappeared from care, as you will see from the article below:

Joint Inquiry into Children Who Go Missing from Care

Extract (point 9):

In June 2012, the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Runaway and Missing Children and Adults and the APPG for Looked-after Children and Care Leavers published the report of their joint inquiry into children who go missing from care.

The report argued that the Government was under-reporting the number of children going missing from care. While the official figure for 2011 was 930, the report argues that, according to police data, an estimated 10,000 individual children went missing. The report cited that this high number was symptomatic of a care system which was far from being fit for purpose and in need of an urgent rethink.

For the full report click here 

The number of children in care in England has increased slightly from 64,400 last year to 65,520 this year.

Department for Education data shows 27,310 children were taken into care during the year ending 31 March 2011, down from 28,090 the previous year.

 .What is really needed?
1:- Family Courts subject to the same procedure rules as criminal courts.
2:- No more gagging of parents whose children have been taken by the SS
3:- No more gagging or censoring of children or parents at “contact”
4:- No more “FORCED ADOPTION” of children against opposition from parents;
5:- No more “PUNISHMENT WITHOUT CRIME” of parents or children.
6:- No more children removed for emotional abuse or risk of it.



May 2012

Pressure on the fostering system is ‘alarming’ , says the Fostering Network

Foster Care Fortnight begins on Monday, 14th May.

A child comes into care and needs a foster family every 22 minutes across the UK, the Fostering Network has revealed.

The charity says that this alarming figure highlights the growing pressure on the care system and the scale of the challenge facing fostering services already struggling with a shortage of foster carers.

It points out that last year more than 24,000 children came into care and needed fostering, an increase of 17 per cent compared to 2008. The total number of children who are fostered has risen for five years in a row.

Figures from Cafcass have shown a record number of applications for care orders in recent months in England, suggesting the pressure on foster care is set to continue unless more people come forward to foster.

The Fostering Network says that an estimated 8,750 new foster families are needed across the UK in 2012 alone, and ahead of this year's Foster Care Fortnight (starts Monday 14 May) it is urging more people to become foster carers.

Robert Tapsfield, chief executive of the Fostering Network, said:

"More than 24,000 children who came into care last year were fostered. That means a foster home has to be found every 22 minutes.

"This figure highlights the overwhelming need for more people to come forward to foster. With more foster families, children in care will have a better chance of finding the stability and security they need to go on and achieve their potential."

Home › Resources › Statistics › England
Statistics: England

Children in public care
67,050 children were in the care of local authorities on 31st March 2012


75% (50,260) of children looked after on 31st March 2012 were living with foster carers
9% (5,930) were living in secure units, children’s homes or hostels
5% (3,600) were living with their parents
4% (2,680) were placed for adoption
3% (2,340) were with another placement in the community
3% (1,980) were placed in residential schools or other residential settings

Where are the placements with kinship carers???


The foster barons cash in on misery

Agencies charge councils up to £1,500 a week to supply families

by Stuart Millar The Observer, Sunday 16 July 2000

They are some of the most vulnerable children in society. But to a growing number of entrepreneurs, youngsters forced by their traumatic family lives into the foster system are something else: a profit opportunity.

Britain's chronic shortage of foster places has spawned a multi-million pound boom industry in which a rapidly expanding band of private companies is raking in massive amounts of money by renting foster families to local authorities desperate to find enough places.

Critics are now demanding urgent government action, accusing the independent agencies of exploiting both the taxpayers and the children. Demand for foster places is at an all-time high and growing, with just 28,000 families caring for about 95,000 children a year.

With more and more youngsters being forced into residential homes by the lack of appropriate family places, the National Foster Carers Association and the Department of Health last week launched a £2 million campaign to recruit 7,000 more foster carers.

Meanwhile, the agencies are enjoying a golden period, charging councils up to £1,500 a week for each child placed with families on their books.

Of that money, the agencies will pass about £350 per child to the carers - almost double what they would get if working directly for the council - and the rest goes to the company. Critics claim that some of the higher-charging agencies may be making 50-60 per cent profit every week for every child placed with them.

Keith Ferrin, Kent County Council's social services chairmen, said: 'I don't think there is any way to justify these sorts of charges.

'Charging £1,500 a week equates to £78,000 a year per child. Even if the child was completely disabled and required round-the-clock care in a residential home, it wouldn't cost that much, and the children we are talking about require nothing like that level of care. It is a racket.'

Of the 1,500 children Kent has in foster care, just 1 per cent are with agency families. But those placements account for more than 5 per cent of the council's fostering budget.

In the last five years, the foster care market has exploded and there are now at least 80 companies nationwide. More than 20 of them are in Kent, supplying foster places to councils across the South-east, mainly the inner London boroughs.

The highest-charging agency is Integrated Services Programme, set up in 1987 by a group of dis-illusioned council carers led by Bridgin Gorman. It charges councils £1,575 a week per child for a service which includes specialist education and therapy. For children who do not require these additional services, the weekly charge is just over £1,000.



Following the recent Panorama programme on adoptions ......

See below the link to an adoption and fostering agency for sale valued at a tidy £135 million !
LA agencies get around £13,000 per placement,but private adoption and fostering agencies get around £27,000 each time they place some unfortunate with fosterers or with an adoptive family ! I wonder why none of these figures were mentioned in the programme. The foster families on average get £400 per week per child, and it is not unheard of for certain social workers to get “generous kickbacks” from both agencies and fosterers ….
10 LAWYERS in various family court sessions spread over a year or more,(both solicitor and barrister for each of ,mother,father, children,local authority,and guardian !)Most contested cases cost £500,000 or more…..With 100,000 children in the UK, each one costs the taxpayer £150/day = over £5billion/year!
With so many snouts in the trough can anyone be surprised that a blanket of secrecy is necessary to protect this money orientated child protection and family court system?
When “Panorama makes a “commercial” for the fostering and adoption industry suddenly “privacy” is no longer an issue .CHILDREN IN CARE ARE NAMED AND INTERVIEWED for millions to watch,but if parents got together to make a film exposing the cruelty and corruption of the system they would all end up in jail for breaching their own children’s privacy !Double standards

National Fostering Agency up for sale › NewsCached
14 Nov 2011 – Sovereign Capital has put the National Fostering Agency (NFA) on the market, causing a flurry of interest from private equity buyers.

 Slough Borough Council


Thanks in some small measure to this site and all the others who have campaigned adoption targets will be abandoned on April 1st 2008.

Marriages: 1974-2003, Adoptions, Numbers of adoption orders by date of entry in the Adopted Children Register, by sex and whether the adopted child born inside/outside marriage

ONS update on adoption statistics, March 2005

It is a sad but undisputed fact that every year,thousands of children are forcibly collected from their parents and put into "care" (usually in foster care or in a "special school"),and at the same time hundreds of children are callously snatched from despairing parents by the secret family courts to be first put into care and then hastily adopted by strangers, even though .... NO CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED !!!

It is often claimed that a large proportion of these children are placed in care under "voluntary" arrangements. No mention is made of the fact that in the majority of such cases parents only agree to care because they are told by social workers (and often their own lawyers!) that if they do not agree they will lose their children for good but that if they do agree then the children will be returned in 2 or 3 months once things have been "sorted out". Needless to say these promises are inevitably and callously broken "for the good of the children"......  


Hundreds of trafficked children are disappearing from the care system

Government and social services departments are accused of failing to protect victims
Mark Townsend, The Guardian, Saturday 28 May 2011

Hundreds of children who have been trafficked into the UK are disappearing each year from the care system, amid allegations that government and local authorities are failing to protect them.

The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, a government agency, estimates that at least 300 juveniles identified as trafficked have disappeared from local authority care over the past three years.

Collated figures from the NSPCC yesterday showed they had dealt with 549 trafficked children in the past three-and-a-half years, although there was no indication of how many had since disappeared after being delivered into care.

Charities have urged the government to adopt a scheme successfully piloted in Scotland, in which guardians are appointed to act as advocates and points of contact for all children believed to have been trafficked. The government has so far rejected proposals to extend the scheme to England. "Guardianship is an essential cost-effective way to prevent children from going missing from care," said Christine Beddoe, director of charity Ecpat UK.

"It would ensure that victims of child trafficking now in care have access to the safe housing, education and legal support which would prevent them slipping back into the hands of their exploiters."

A policy document by the Conservatives in 2008 estimated that "over half of trafficked children disappear from social services". The document also criticised the absence of "safe accommodation" providing 24-hour care for trafficked children. But concern is growing that the party has little appetite to tackle the issue now it is in power.

Home Office sources have suggested that a forthcoming strategy paper on human trafficking is unlikely to include a specific section on child trafficking, an omission that will infuriate campaigners. "We have worked tirelessly with government officials over the past five years to develop a national action plan and a robust protection framework for child victims of trafficking," said Beddoe.

"To see this washed away almost overnight is a scandal. It's as if the Home Office have shredded all the facts and figures."

The government has a statutory duty to provide care to children regardless of nationality or immigration status.

New figures released by the children's charity NSPCC show that during the year to April its child trafficking helpline dealt with 146 cases alone, although experts say this is merely a fragment of the true picture.

Scotland Yard will launch a freephone trafficking hotline to encourage victims to come forward in response to concern that the scale of the crime remains largely unknown.

Detective Inspector Gordon Valentine, the former head of Operation Paladin, Scotland Yard's specialist anti child-trafficking team of police and UK Border Agency officials, said yesterday that the issue did not seem to be a priority for policymakers.

Valentine, who retired on Friday, said that although the Yard had made progress in identifying child victims, there was a concern that the team – which has just five officials – needed to be expanded if traffickers were to be dissuaded from targeting the UK. He added: "Paladin has been a real success and should be expanded, but one issue is that it sits between two stools, the UK Border Agency and the police, and there is an issue about who's going to drive it. The Met are fully committed to Paladin: it's just [a matter of] convincing the wider authorities. Logically, [tackling child trafficking] is cost-effective, but because you can't put costings to it, it's difficult to sell [to policymakers]."

Anne Marie Carrie, Barnardo's chief executive said: "It is imperative that we identify these children quickly and accurately. Failure to do so means they are left without the help and support they so urgently need."

Anthony Steen, former Conservative MP and head of the UK's Human Trafficking Foundation, said: "Child trafficking remains unseen and children don't complain or answer back."

The Home Office said it took the issue extremely seriously and that it remained "core" police business.

Immediate release – 8th February 2013

Care application levels continue increasing

January 2013 statistics from Cafcass

In January 2013, Cafcass received a total of 960 applications. This is a 4% increase on January 2012 levels and is the fourth highest level of applications recorded in a single month this financial year.

From April 2012 onwards:

  • Between April 2012 and January 2013 Cafcass received a total of 9,112 applications. This figure is 7.8% higher when compared to the same period last year.
  • The 991 applications received in July 2012 were the highest ever recorded for a single month.
  • Applications received during all months bar June this financial year have been the highest ever recorded by Cafcass for these individual months.
  • The comparatively lower demand in June 2012 is believed to be due to the lack of working days available due to the special bank holidays this year.

April 2011-March 2012:

  • During 2011-12, Cafcass received 10,244 new applications.
  • This figure is 11.2% higher when compared to previous financial year.
  • Applications received between May 2011 to February 2012 during this year have been the highest ever recorded by Cafcass for these individual months.

April 2010-March 2011:

  • During 2010-11 Cafcass experienced a 4.2% increase in care applications with 9,204 new applications up from 8,832 in 2009-10.
  • The 8,832 figure for 2009-10 itself saw a 36% increase in the number of applications received compared to 2008-2009.

Please click here to view the spreadsheet, which in addition to the monthly national stats, has a tab displaying a breakdown of application and children numbers by Local Authority for each complete quarter from April 2011.

Jan 2013 care stats graph


















































































Cafcass homepage:

  • [PDF] 

    Judicial and Court Statistics 2010
    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
    30 Jun 2011 – This report presents statistics on judicial and court activity in England and Wales in 2010. It was formally entitled Judicial Statistics for the 2005 ...
  • Adoption Facts and Figures

    This page gives some of the most recent available statistics and figures relating to adoption and the UK care system. Separate figures are provided for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.


    Looked after children

    There were 67,050 children in local authority care in England on 31 March 2012 – a 2% increase from 2011. Of these:

    • 55% were boys and 45% girls
    • Most (62%) came to social service’s attention due to abuse or neglect
    • 50,260 (75%) were in a foster placement
    • 3,450 were adopted during the year a 12% increase from 2011


    • The average age at adoption was 3 years and 8months
    • 2% were aged under 1 year
    • 74% were aged between 1 and 4
    • 51% were boys and 49% girls
    • 85% were of White origin, 10% of mixed origin,2% Asian or Asian British and 3% Black or Black British
    • 72% were placed for adoption due to abuse or neglect, 12% due to familydysfunction, 6% because the birth family was in 'acute stress'

    Quick links to adoption figures for other countries:

    • CAFCASS and government statistics reveal the situation in the following 10 ways .
    • 1:-Adoptions during the year ending 31st march 2010 (3200) have dropped by only 100 from the year ending 31 March 2009 (3300) (3%)
    • 2:-Only 2% of children adopted were babies under 1 year old ,probably because distraught parents with children removed for "risk " of emotional abuse and similar trivialities are now fighting back in the courts and causing delays of 2 years or more before declaring themselves beaten by the biased family courts;
    • 3:Children taken into care for the first 5 months of the year ending March 31st 2012 number 4105 , nearly DOUBLE the 2125 taken in the corresponding period for the year ending 31st March 2009 !!
    • 4:- When Tony Blair introduced huge rewards for Local Authorities for reaching yearly adoption targets(Kent got more than £2million when adoptions were double the target in one year !)naturally adoptions increased. When these scandalous rewards were scrapped ,enthusiasm for adoptions diminished a bit ,so the fostering industry prospered.
    • 5:- In fact adoptions of babies dropped from 70 to 60 this year; hardly earth shaking !,Nevertheless, enthusiastic social workers sanctioned by compliant judges are now taking more and more unfortunate children into a form of "care",so lax that 300 or more children have "disappeared"over the last 3 years, never to be seen again (NSPCC figures!).
    • 6:-Barnardos declare a yearly income of £175 million gained via adoptions;no wonder they want more!
    • 7:- We all have only ONE MOTHER in our lives and it is a gross abuse of any baby to deprive it of contact with a mother who loves that baby and wants to be there for it for as long as possible. 
    • 8:-Battered women (and men) are punished twice when they report an abusive partner to the police as they immediately inform the "SS" who then take away the children.Hence the battered often prefer to stay battered rather than lose the children to adoption by strangers;
    • 9:-Single girls who give birth outside marriage no longer rush to adoption agencies as they get priority housing,benefits,and no stigma ! Hence the adoption pool of newborn babies has shrunk since the days of shame and illegitimacy in the sixties and seventies.
    • 10:-The basic problem is that "forced adoption" now has a very bad name as it is viewed as "legal kidnapping" by parents and by most of Western Europe where it would be illegal.Parents who suffer this barbarity or even the lesser oppression of "long term fostering" are then threatened with jail if they complain publicly .Surely it is the normal right of all citizens living in a democracy, to protest against what they perceive as oppression by the State?

    I have been looking at the latest stats released
    which cover only 2008 - 2012.  Obviously if I had time to go further back, it would be much more interesting.  This is a very  short time frame; I give 2008 figures in brackets. 
    In the 4 years, NUMBER IN CARE is highest ever - 67,050 (was 59,380)
                            UNDER 1 yrs                                      4,190  (was  2,900) - has gone up from 5% to 6% of total
                            1 -4                                                   12,430  (was  9,010) - has gone up from 15% to 19%
    ADOPTIONS               Number freed for adoption         210 (was   580)   (freeing for adoption ended in Dec 2005)
                                       Placement orders granted      7,160  (was  4,450)(placement orders came in Dec 2005)
                                       (i.e. to be adopted)
                         Placement for Adoption with consent          320 (was 710)  This is a total of those placed with, and not with, current foster carer
                          Ditto without consent                           2,360 (was 2,150)         ditto
    PLACEMENT WITH PARENTS                                      3,600 (was 4,580)
    REASONS FOR LEAVING CARE   The commonest reason was returning to parents, but the percentage has declined from 39% to 37% - so kids who go into care have a much less than 50-50 chance of going back home.  Unfortunately we do not have this by age group in these stats, though doubtless could get it - and we know the % is much less for babies and very young.  
    And this table (D.1.) gives numbers for Adoptions "application unopposed" and adoptions "consent dispensed with".  Since adoptions "unopposed" amount to 1,890, this is clearly much larger than the 320 adopted "with consent", and  clearly means something different.  Had they given up? Or didn't they have lawyers or legal aid to fight? 
    AGE AT STARTING CARE IN 2012: Under 1            5,880 (was 4,370)  (21% of those starting care, was 19%)
                                                           1-4                   5,770 (was 4,320)   (20% of those starting care, was 119%)
    i.e. 65% of children who were adopted were taken before they were 12 months old
                                                         Under 1           - 2,230 children (was 1,950)
                                                          1 year                   430               (was 380)
    Children aged 4 and over were 11% of adoptions in 2008, had declined to 7% in of adoptions in 2012


    Lost 400 children may have been trafficked into sex or drugs trade

    · Rise in foreign youngsters missing from care in UK
    · Government action plan 'failing to protect victims'

    Robert Booth
    The Guardian, Wednesday 23 April 2008

    More than 400 foreign children, many suspected of being trafficked into the sex or drug trade in Britain, have gone missing from local authority care.

    Full article


     Nearly all the popular press condemn what has been happening in the family courts. I obviously cannot quote ALL the sensational stories they publish, so I ask you just to read for example what that ultra respectable newspaper "the Times" has to say !

    May 18, 2006

    How can this happen here?

    IMAGINE A COUNTRY where parents accused of child abuse are assumed guilty unless proven innocent. Where secret courts need no criminal conviction to remove their children, only the word of a medical expert, and rarely let parents call their own experts in defence. Where even parents who are vindicated on appeal cannot see their children again, because they have been adopted.And where the “welfare of the child” is used to gag them from discussing the case ever after.
     I live in that country.!!
    So says Camilla Cavendish in the Times!
    This Times article is 100% right!
    Most of our European partner countries take
    children from parents only if there is 
    clear evidence of physical or sexual abuse.
    In the UK a culture has grown up whereby social workers decide that parenting skills are inadequate so therefore a child is "at risk".  They back up this opinion with complex  assessments of 20 pages or more made by so called "experts" and "professionals"(therapists,psychiatrists, counsellors and the like)  which inevitably predict that the children are "at risk "of either physical or more often emotional abuse from their parents at some ill defined time in the future.
    When a mother has had one child taken there is rarely "a fresh start" or "second chance" allowed as any new baby born to that mother is usually taken at birth even when the mother has a new partner , circumstances have changed and several years have passed !The "experts" will claim that the"risk" is still there!
    Judges rely heavily on these assessments so that resistance by parents to their"crystal ball predictions" and their conclusions is usually futile and often seen as evidence of their lack of understanding of their child's needs.
    The result is that children who are often healthy and happy  are removed and taken into care simply because they are said to be "at risk" when all the statistics show the risks they run in care are far higher than any risk to them if they were to remain with their parents! One third the prison population in the UK  is composed of those unfortunates who were brought up "in care" of the state !Babies are taken at birth and are then adopted forcibly against the will of their parents . These unfortunates often spend their lives wondering why they were "abandoned"
    A veritable industry has grown up with adoption agencies,special schools,fosterers, experts,lawyers ,and social service departments all profiting from the misery of deprived parents. A unique industry where the commodity is children....
    It must be smashed and civilised standards must return ! 
    200 people were imprisoned
     secretly last year by our
    family courts with no public

    Photo of Sally Keeble Sally Keeble (Northampton North, Labour) | Hansard source

    Ms Sally Keeble (Northampton, North) (Lab): Further to the Government’s plans for the court system, will my right hon. and learned Friend say what plans she has for the family courts, especially in relation to ending their ability to send people to prison—for example, for contempt of court for breach of a contact order—without having a public hearing?

    Photo of Harriet Harman Harriet Harman (Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs) | Hansard source

    My hon. Friend raises an extremely important point, which she has put to me in a written question, so I know what the answer is. Last year something like 200 people were sent to prison by the family courts, which happens in complete privacy and secrecy. The idea that people are sent to prison without any reports of the proceedings makes even more important the work that we are undertaking with the family courts, and with the important intervention of the Constitutional Affairs Committee, to open them up so that they act in the public interest while maintaining personal privacy

    Only in the SECRET family courts are punishments(losing their children to long term fostercare or worse still adoption by strangers) imposed on persons(parents) who have neither committed a crime nor even been accused of committing any crime!  THERE IS NO OTHER CASE IN UK LAW WHERE THIS  CAN HAPPEN!

    Social workers themselves are sometimes convicted criminals as the Daily Mirror found out and exposed in the following article !!
    Hundreds of criminals apply for care jobs
    By Tom Pettifor
     Daily Mirror   May 20 2006

    HUNDREDS of would-be social workers have serious criminal convictions.

    Official figures list 375 fully qualified social workers being considered for official registration as having records for high or medium-risk offences.

    They include murder, robbery, sex crimes, theft, drug dealing, possessing hard drugs, grievous bodily harm, domestic violence, fraud and serious driving offences.

    I repeat THAT SOCIAL WORKERS (who may sometimes be criminals themselves) REMOVE CHILDREN for compulsory adoption FROM PARENTS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN ACCUSED OF ANY CRIME !!! What about the judges?Don't they have to agree? Yes they do and almost inevitably (as they have admitted publicly) they take the "safe route" and usually "go along with social services"


    They justify this with the help of so called "experts" and "professionals" who make complicated forecasts and who "predict"(gypsy fashion!) that something bad might happen in the future.This so called "risk" is enough to separate parents and children FOR LIFE !! Hard to believe that such things happen in Britain today isn't it ? Yet there are an average of 600 cases every year held in strictly secret family courts where the judge tells a distraught mother(or father) that she is being "unreasonable" in withholding her consent to the adoption of her new born baby or young child by complete and unknown strangers ! The unfortunate children are then "lost" for good.Yes this really does happen and it is a national disgrace !!

    Forced adoption is wicked ! Forced adoption is like capital punishment, it is irreversible!

    THESE FORCED ADOPTIONS ARE WICKED CRIMES !! All those odious persons involved in these crimes against humanity,the social workers,the SS lawyers,the hired "experts" and even the compliant judges should all serve prison sentences for their crimes just as their predecessors the Nazi judges were condemned at Nuremburg !   

    Abuse is a crime,and wilful neglect is a crime  but "putting a child  (or even more absurdly a new born baby) at risk of future emotional abuse" is not a crime yet it is still one of the most frequent reasons given by the family courts for taking children into care and eventually "forced adoptions" (Adoptions that are actively opposed by a parent or parents in person and in court).Parents cannot defend themselves against the dire predictions made "crystal ball fashion" by highly paid "experts". These so called "professional" judgements are made on an entirely subjective basis and no matter what the parents say the "experts" are nearly always believed in preference to mothers or fathers.Any expert who sides with the parents is usually quietly ignored and discarded soon to be replaced by an expert with views that accord with social services The result is that the unfortunate children and even more unfortunate babies are doomed to long term fostering or forced adoption despite the despairing but hopeless opposition of the distraught parents .

    I must repeat again that an average of more than 600 forced adoptions (with no step parents involved) take place every year. 600 bitterly contested court cases where weeping parents plead in vain to at least keep contact with their beloved children.There are double that number that take place "uncontested" because the parents are too distraught to do so or because their lawyers advise them to "go along with social services" and on no account to fight or resist them and then "everything will be all right!" These children are then condemned to spend the rest of their lives wondering who their real parents are and why they were so callously abandoned !.

     Forced adoption should be abolished NOW !! 

     In answer to a parliamentary question (March 21st 2005) the Minister for children admitted that 6643 children over a 10 year period had been adopted by force against the will of mothers pleading in court to keep their children.These figures do NOT include any cases where step-parents were involved and exact adoption statistics are available from the following tables .

    Contested Adoptions

    Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many contested adoptions have taken place in each of the last 10 years. [222035]

    Mr. Lammy: I have been asked to reply.
    21 Mar 2005 : Column 563W

    The number of contested adoptions that have taken place in each of the last 10 years are contained in the following table.

    Contested Uncontested Contested Uncontested Contested Uncontested
    1995 491 2,388 733 1,707 1,224 4,095
    1996 362 2,384 518 1,700 880 4,084
    1997 272 1,780 555 1,542 827 3,322
    1998 237 1,556 477 1,377 714 2,933
    1999 211 1,332 716 1,617 927 2,949
    2000 167 1,193 651 1,992 818 3,185
    2001 141 1,055 653 2,329 794 3,384
    2002 109 827 725 2,212 834 3,039
    2003 129 840 938 2,489 1,067 3,329
    2004 104 767 677 2,583 781 3,350

    More than 75% of care leavers have no academic qualifications of any kind


    More than 50% of young people leaving care after 16 years are unemployed


    17% of young women leaving care are pregnant or already mothers


    10% of 16-17 year old claimants of DSS severe hardship payments have been in care


    23% of adult prisoners and 38% of young prisoners have been in care


    30% of young single homeless people have been in care

    (9) Step-parent adoption occurs where the step-parent applies to formally adopt the child or children of their spouse and assumes parental responsibility to the exclusion of the other birth parent. Contested step-parent adoption cases arise where the non-resident birth parent does not consent to the adoption


    Between 1994 to 2004 there were steady decreases in the proportions of children who were aged 5 to 14 who were adopted, and a significant increase in the proportion adopted who were aged 1 to 4. In 2004, 49 per cent of children adopted were in this age group compared with 26 per cent in 1994, while 13 per cent of adopted children in 2004 were aged 10 to 14 compared with 23 per cent ten years earlier.

    The sad fact is that social workers rarely "target" the violent type of parent who tortures , burns, and breaks a child's bones. Too often a nervous social worker retreats hastily and sometimes leaves the child to die. . . . Such violent parents practically never come to court to reclaim their surviving children so the family courts hold no terrors for them. Parents in the family court nowadays are those whose poverty is only too often equated with neglect, or those judged on an entirely subjective basis to have emotionally neglected or abused their children. In my opinion children can far better bear emotional abuse (if this really exists as a serious factor ) than the trauma of being separated from the family they know, and being given for long term fostercare or worse still for adoption by complete strangers.

    .... 340 children were removed over a 3 year period simply because the parents had "a low income" and no other reason !

    bulletin 06 03 final [pdf]

    Statistics of Education: Children Looked After in England: 2002? 2003 Bulletin Issue No 06/03 November 20032 © Crown copyright 2003 Published with the permission ... see page 9


    Children in care cost the taxpayer an average of £2,500 per child, per week-more than four times what it would cost to send a child to Eton Massive costs that needlessly drain the resources of local authorities, central government and charities. Massive amounts of public money. In the interests of children? These are the best government figures we are aware of; clearly showing the tragic consequences for the majority of thousands of children leaving care each year:

    Social workers faced new accusations of “child snatching” Lose your children for being 'Too Poor'

    By James Chapman – Political Correspondent 

    Daily Mail 22 August 2005

    Contested Uncontested Contested Uncontested Contested Uncontested
    1995 491 2,388 733 1,707 1,224 4,095
    1996 362 2,384 518 1,700 880 4,084
    1997 272 1,780 555 1,542 827 3,322
    1998 237 1,556 477 1,377 714 2,933
    1999 211 1,332 716 1,617 927 2,949
    2000 167 1,193 651 1,992 818 3,185
    2001 141 1,055 653 2,329 794 3,384
    2002 109 827 725 2,212 834 3,039
    2003 129 840 938 2,489 1,067 3,329
    2004 104 767 677 2,583 781 3,350

    More than 75% of care leavers have no academic qualifications of any kind


    More than 50% of young people leaving care after 16 years are unemployed


    17% of young women leaving care are pregnant or already mothers


    10% of 16-17 year old claimants of DSS severe hardship payments have been in care


    23% of adult prisoners and 38% of young prisoners have been in care


    30% of young single homeless people have been in care


    My Lords,

    Taking a child away from her family is a momentous step, not only for her, but for her whole family, and for the local authority which does so. In a totalitarian society, uniformity and conformity are valued. Hence the totalitarian state tries to separate the child from her family and mould her to its own design. Families in all their subversive variety are the breeding ground of diversity and individuality. In a free and democratic society we value diversity and individuality. Hence the family is given special protection in all the modern human rights instruments including the European Convention on Human Rights (art 8), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art 23) and throughout the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. As Justice McReynolds famously said in Pierce v Society of Sisters 268 US 510 (1925), at 535, “The child is not the mere creature of the State”. 

    (Baroness Hale of Richmond in B (Children), Re [2008] UKHL 35 (11 June



    "LOVE" is not a term that is politically correct,so it is very rarely mentioned in the parental assessments and judicial pronouncements that decide the children's fate ."Bonding" is the preferred term employed by social workers for a "parent and child relationship,"and this portrayal can just as easily be applied to members of the Welsh rugby team !"  Bonding really is not at all the same thing as "love"(especially the love of a child for its mother) which should surely be the most determining factor of all when deciding the future of a newborn baby or young child.

    The LOVE of a child for a parent (or grandparent) and vice versa ought to (but rarely does ) outweigh the so called disadvantages of grandparents too old at 60 , or parents with learning disabilities,an ancient history of petty crime , extreme poverty, a dirty house ,or a long ago cured addiction. LOVE just does not count when weeping  and highly emotional mothers plead in court for the return of their children yet IT SHOULD !! It certainly SHOULD !! Instead  such parents frequently get accused in court of  an "emotional instability" that further demonstrates their unfitness as parents! Unfortunately the "professionals" (who by definition are those people who make money when parents have their children taken by social services) make decisive "parenting assessments"  and consider resistance to fostering or adoption "non co-operation",and failure to "confess " to allegedly bad parenting "a retreat into denial",and as for "hostility and distrust" of the social workers who take the children,that is either a "personality disorder" or "paranoia"!  This despite articles appearing regularly in the quality press expressing exceptionally strong criticism of social workers, Family Courts, hired experts and the adoption/fostering system as a whole.



    The former Minister for children admitted that local authorities were set "adoption targets" and it is a fact that many local authorities like Kent were awarded large monetary rewards (£21 million for hitting 10 out of 12 targets, adoption increase being target number one) via public service agreements. One result of all this has been to strongly motivate social workers to procure children suitable for adoption even if this means splitting up the very families they are meant to support and protect ! 

   PARAS 26-28

    More than half the adoptions "from care" in the UK are contested by parents vainly fighting  to keep the children they love, but government research papers admit that the courts very rarely decide in favour of the birth parents. The same papers also admit that only too often the needs of the children are forgotten in the struggle to meet "adoption targets".


    Courts At least half of current adoptions are contested although the contest seldom goes in favour of the birth parents. This inevitably causes delays and, indeed, delays may not necessarily be a bad thing if the issues are very complex. Court-based delays may also be caused by lack of available court time, or the courts requiring further re-unification attempts.

    Councils A lack of clear policies integrating adoption into the overall children's plan. Budgetary constraints limiting the availability of post adoption services and allowances. There was also concern paradoxically that the needs of children may be overlooked in the struggle to meet targets. The more rural councils will struggle to run regular preparation courses to meet the assessment targets, even when co-operating with other agencies.

    Once social services have decided a child should be taken into care or freed for adoption any resistance from the mother or father is considered as "non cooperation". Social workers then use just about any means, and often go to almost any lengths to win their case without regard to changing circumstances or anything else but achieving yet another court victory. Perhaps the worst effect of these changes has been to encourage social workers to perpetrate what I at any rate consider the appalling crime of taking new born babies away from mothers at birth!! Certanly adopters prefer to take babies rather than children making it much easier to hit adoption targets if enough babies are "collected" In practice any woman with a child already in care who dares to give birth again risks the arrival of a grim po-faced social worker who will callously take the baby away with a view to getting it adopted by strangers.A mother for example who lost a child to "care" because she failed to protect it from a violent father cannot make a fresh start with a new partner.Usually she becomes a baby making machine for "the adopters" as every baby she has subsequently is taken at birth and given to strangers for adoption! 

    The judge in the family court will inevitably sweep away the mother's objections to any projected adoption on the grounds that "Her consent to the adoption is being unreasonably withheld !! " How any judge can say a mother is being "unreasonable " because she does not want her baby adopted by strangers is beyond me but that is what they do ! This practice was roundly condemned as "draconian" by the European Court Of Human Rights but the decision came too late for the distraught mother whose child had already been adopted by strangers.This happens regularly even when the new birth happens several years later than the original order and when circumstances have often changed for the better but are rarely taken into consideration .This typically happened in the case of P  C and S v United Kingdom
    (see paragraphs 133,137,and 138)

    PARAGRAPH 133. " The Court concludes that the draconian step of removing S. from her mother shortly after birth was not supported by relevant and sufficient reasons and that it cannot be regarded as having been necessary in a democratic society for the purpose of safeguarding S. There has therefore been, in that respect, a breach of the applicant parents' rights under Article 8 of the Convention. "

    These unfortunate mothers are in effect turned into baby making machines to meet the "adoption targets" whilst older children often languish in "special childrens homes" where they are frequently subjected to the most horrific abuse by the paedophiles who so eagerly seek and obtain employment in such places. Typical recent examples of widespread abuse in "children's homes" or false accusations of mass parental abuse occurred in Leicestershire, Staffordshire, Wales, Cheshire, Merseyside, Hackney, Islington, Orkney, Cleveland, Rochdale, Bishop's Auckland, and Ayrshire., 6903, 1130638, 00.html

    1. Hedley J’s judgment in Re L (Threshold Conditions) [2007] 1 FLR 2050 (see below), they said:

    “Many parents are hypochondriacs, many parents are criminals or benefit cheats, many parents discriminate against ethnic or sexual minorities, many parents support vile political parties or belong to unusual or militant religions. All of these follies are visited upon their children, who may well adopt or ‘model’ them in their own lives but those children could not be removed for those reasons.”

  (see page12 tableB)  


    As I said at the beginning:
    1:-There really are SECRET COURTS in the UK.
    2:;-These courts take children from loving parents who have committed no crime. 
    3:-These parents lose their children for ever to adoption by strangers. 
    4:- Parents are GAGGED and regularly sent to prison in secret proceedings if they reveal what went on in court? 
    5:-Establishment judges make decisions to take thousands of babies for risk of possible future emotional abuse.  
    6:-No jury would take babies from mothers because some expert made predictions of their future behaviour.
    7:-Criminals facing 6+ months in prison can demand a jury;parents losing their children for life cannot.
    8:-Pregnant mothers with no criminal records or disabilities are told their babies will be taken at birth!
    9:-Local authorities are rewarded by central government for reaching "adoption targets" hence adoption is prioritised.
    10:- Fosterers get up to £400/week/ child,special schools up to £7000/week,adoption agencies,experts lawyers all cash in lavishly!
    SO :- What to do?
     - Stop the secrecy and the gagging of parents.
     - Stop adoptions of children for emotional abuse or for "risk".
     - Stop judges deciding cases of long term fostering or adoption,and give juries the final decision.
     - Stop excessive rewards for those who live off the misery caused by this wicked system!

    or to be really basic:-

    1 :- NO more gagging orders on children or parents .


    2 :-NO more “ Punishment without crime “


    3:-NO  more “Forced Adoption”


    4:-NO more censorship of conversations between children or parent(s).

    5:-NO more children taken for emotional abuse or for"risk".

    So what legislation (new laws) do we need to bring about the changes needed ?

    Well, one new law and the enforcement of existing laws would be enough……..

    1:- Family Courts should be subject to the same rules as criminal courts.(As was the case before the Children Act 1948).NO PUNISHMENT WITHOUT CRIME,innocent until proved guilty,the right to call friendly witnesses and cross examine those who are hostile, etc etc

    2:- Freedom of Speech,(already guaranteed by the United Nations Convention,and also the UK “Human Rights Act”)should be enforced by:-

    (a) The removal and abolition of all gagging orders that prevent parents from protesting publicly and to the media when their children are taken into care.

    (b)The removal and abolition of all censorship of conversations between children in care and parents at "contact" sessions.

    (c) The removal and abolition of all obstructions to legal communications by phone,email, post,or via internet between parent(s) and children in care.

    3:- The right to a family life undisturbed by public authority (Article 8 Human Rights Act) should be enforced to abolish once and for all the crime of “FORCED ADOPTION”.ie The adoption of children by unrelated third parties against the will of parent(s) expressed in Court.

    This would be a very very good start!

    Re K D [1998] 1 AC p. 812 letter B
    Lord Templeman stated;
    “The best person to bring up a child is the natural parent. It matters not whether the parent is wise or foolish, rich or poor, educated or illiterate, provided the child’s moral and physical health are not endangered. Public authorities cannot improve on nature.”

    My Lords,

    Taking a child away from her family is a momentous step, not only for her, but for her whole family, and for the local authority which does so. In a totalitarian society, uniformity and conformity are valued. Hence the totalitarian state tries to separate the child from her family and mould her to its own design. Families in all their subversive variety are the breeding ground of diversity and individuality. In a free and democratic society we value diversity and individuality. Hence the family is given special protection in all the modern human rights instruments including the European Convention on Human Rights (art 8), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (art 23) and throughout the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. As Justice McReynolds famously said in Pierce v Society of Sisters 268 US 510 (1925), at 535, “The child is not the mere creature of the State”. 

    (Baroness Hale of Richmond in B (Children), Re [2008] UKHL 35 (11 June

    And so say all of us!!

    Contact me for free legal advice and practical help by e-mail  or by phone 0033626875684

     If you phone me from a fixed line (ie not a mobile)   I will ring you back at my own expense.