The Department for Children, Schools and Families denied that there was a target for taking children from their birth parents to meet overall adoption targets.
I cannot believe them and I cannot forgive them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
'I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free'
About Me
Posts
Heroes
- Axel Leijonhufvud
- E.E.Evans-Pritchard
- Edmund Leach
- Francois Couperin
- Joan Robinson
- John Maynard Keynes
- Louis de Soissons
- Mario Draghi
- Noam Chomsky
- Pablo Picasso
- Paul Klee
- Pietro Porcinai
- The Earl of Onslow
- Umberto Boccioni
- Wassily Kandinski
- Wilhelm von Humboldt
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(254)
-
▼
August
(23)
- Basra
- Measles and Authoritarianism's Expression
- Wasting Children's Time
- The Lion Sun
- Can You Forgive Them?
- Without Arms
- Can't Bear to Watch
- Result !
- Market Faking
- Archipelago
- How To Cut Taxes
- Chord
- These Are Some We Printed Earlier
- The Last of England
- Let Them Drink Milk (except that's infected too)
- Primary Purposes
- Lidl for Onions
- No Such Thing As a Free Lunch
- Livingstone's Insults
- Apocalypse Now
- Cold Cuts
- Perhaps He's Keeping His Armies up His Sleevies?
- Alone
-
▼
August
(23)
Fallen Angels
- David Cameron (for risking the disorderly dissolution of the Euro)
- Giorgio Napolitano (for stance on Budapest 1956: Prague 1968: Italy 2013)
- Mervyn King (for bailing-out Northern Rock)
- Nicholas Kaldor (for inventing VAT)
13 comments:
Oh I know HG I saw this. I have some material for a grand assault on the adoption business which is , in total , a scandal.
Mrs. N and I at one time despaired of having a child and looked into it .It is a world of horror...turned out nice in the end
As indicated through the killing of Rhys Jones and others I don't care. It seems that many MANY parents are incapable of raising well adjusted children and ought to have them removed to decent households.
While where at it prise teenage mums from their subsidised council flats and get them into convents - whatever evils were perpetrated in the 'bad old days' can't have been as bad as the evils of today or the oblivion or our tomorrows.
Why on earth should there be a target for adoptions in the first place? But as every other govt dept has myriad targets, no doubt this lot do too.
Sometimes great authority is given by accident because the purposes of what is being handed over are so clearly good; the care of children at risk from their home environment is such an area of not clearly defined enough roles and not properly thought out redresses, after all everyone acts in the interests of the child. But of course they don't when the untrammelled ability to interfere emerges and the kind of social work agenda that has done such damage in its pursuit of a blameless, non-punitive, non-judgmental ideal is pursued. The people acting in the roles handed out to protect are beginning to look quite sinister, as are their actions in this adoption targets for financial rewards horror. Unintended consequences are making their usual appearancetoo.
If the military can run battles through computers and play wargame alternative scenarios, it must be possible in social work to at least identify some of the unintended consequences from certain interventions; social work is very prone, just because of the ill-defined powers available, to them.
Probably mathematical modelling is too hard for grade c GCSE maths (if they're even required to have that).
Perhaps, N, the 'grand assault' could be broadened to social work in all its dealings with the vulnerable.
You're in despair aren't you E-K? It's impossible to pull all this incompetence and deliberate destructiveness apart into separate problems and start solving some of them because it's rotting from the head down: no dominant culture, no proper setting up of institutions, no redress when they work badly, no proper jobs any more, together with no training and scarce education offered to most, arrangements once made in good faith to alleviate want being manipulated to provide lifestyles for the hopeless or the wholly alienated, decent politics hi-jacked by organised bands on their way to achieving power elite status by secretive and authoritarian tactics....
And in the middle of it all our children to be protected from systems once built to give them a chance in life. And it's so exhausting, all the getting and keeping informed, and avoiding confrontations, and trying to look innocent while driving a coach and horses throught their ideologies and agendas and attempts to operate inside our families' social space..
Why ever can't we see the doctor if we're unwell, get our teeth looked at and our eyes tested, have our babies in clean conditions and some TLC for a week or two after, and send the children to the local school where reasonable people will teach them reasonable curriculums, and help them plan for the qualifications they'll need for a job...
There was a photo in one of the papers of a five-year-old having their fingerprints taken so they could go into the school library and have lunch; and no permission sought or required from the parents.
And, finally, convents do not good girls make.
And, apropos of what HG writes, the culture of "It's not our fault" is endemic in government now. Whetevre goes wrong, no-one is ever responsible for it any more. Even that loathsome snake Blunkett resigned (or was forced to); now one imagines Brown could be caught buggering a 5 year old at 10 Downing Street, and there's be an explanation aka excuse for it.
Government without responsibility. Makes me shudder
Nomad, financially incentivised adoption targets.
Fulfilling the Plan?
Thanks HG, yes I'm in despair.
I feel that the issues have become over-complicated and deliberately so; this enables clever-dicks to aquire power, salaries and pensions for the price of the lifeless bodies of the Rhys Jones of this world.
I hate them.
Regarding my comment about conventing girls, the idea has two purposes:
- to remove incentives from those seeking to procure housing through pregnancy
- to offer the children of unmarried mothers an environment free from feckless stepfathers and serial 'lovers', these happen to be the greatest source of child cruelty and murder. Also the absence of the father figure appears to be the most important feature in the explosion of juvenile violence.
I agree, the rehabilitation of these girls is not at the forefront of my consideration. Part of my remedy has to be the acceptance that a sizeable part of this generation is lost.
We must put top of our priorities the preservation of those that are good in our society.
On a lighter note I hope that you are enjoying your weekend, HG. I'm off out to the beach now.
:-)
"financially incentivised adoption targets. Fulfilling the Plan?"
This is very familiar from the old Soviet-style system of economic planning. Managers were given output targets fixed in physical terms. They were investigated and penalised and possibly demoted, and even could face criminal charges for under-fulfilment. Plan fulfilment was taken as a minimum standard of performance; over-fulfilment was praised and rewarded with promotions and material incentives progressively increasing with the extent of over-fulfilment.
The system of course was immensely inefficient. The physical units in which targets were expressed (weight, length, number of units, etc) distorted resource allocation. Productive capacity was concealed so as to obtain targets easier to overfulfil; equally, unnecessary inputs and capacity expansion were demanded by managers for the same reason. Managers refrained from over-fulfilment in order to avoid the "ratchet effect", that is the subsequent assignment of higher targets with respect to "the achieved level".
In the economic sphere this kind of targeting is just inefficient; darwinian factors eventually lead to its end. In the field of compulsory adoption, targeting is frightening, repulsive and execrable. There is not an equivalent automatic tendency for it to end. Just the kind of immoral and inhuman practice that one associates with the Nazis.
nomad said...
"Why on earth should there be a target for adoptions in the first place?"
Elementary, nomad. Adoption reduces the claim on government resources for looking after children at risk in their original family. Never mind what is the measure of risk.
HG: Financially incentivised (oh dear..!) targets. May well be so, but I still don't understand why public/government services should be so incentivised in the first place. Each dept has its own budget within which to operate and there should thus be no need for artificial sweeteners on top.
What worries me is that these so-called social workers arrogate to themselves enormous and far reaching decision making powers with which nobody seems to be able to argue with or challenge.
If your children are in their last year of primary then your main job this year is transferring them safely into decent secondary school; eye on the ball E-K , and enjoy learning the exciting things they'll get caught up in as they prepare. I enjoyed particularly the different kinds of composition that were learned, and the project that covered the history, geography, economy, and culture of a chosen part of Italy (each pupil got a different one) we got Venice and its region! Imagine! Because of course it was essential for the children's education that we had to do field work - Venice, other major cities, the countryside, the traditional industries (glass blowing had to have another special trip to Murano) the transport systems (all those waterways) the Palladian villas on the waterways. Oh it was hard, hard work.
They may be out there trying to wreck, but we're here too and you don't need a coach and horses, having a locomotive.
Thanks for the tip HG. My twins are very bright boys - we spend an hour a night with them teaching the three Rs. Their recent SATs showed them to be a year ahead of the rest of their class so we've enrolled them with local tutors at the price of £26 per week to coach them through their 11 plus for Torquay Grammar. We've been told they stand an 80% chance of getting in.
Sometimes we feel the establishment is against us for doing this - their school is certainly disapproving of our methods and we feel a definite push in many areas of life to de-culturalise our society.
On a different note I spotted a lesion on my wife's back and we went to the doctor's with it - the next available consultation on the NHS is three months away. Private consultation to be paid for.
Similarly I have to clear litter from our local streets because the council is so lousy at doing it. This despite forking out £120 council tax per month.
What on earth do they do with our money. Why can't I get what I've paid through the nose for ?
At every turn the authorities let us down and make us pay for things twice.
I am on Iain Dale's expressing that the Tories have it woefully wrong when they state that the behavioural decline is everyone's fault. Put simply if I stand up to the thugs as they suggest I stand little chance of being harmed but a high chance of being prosecuted by the very State that lets the thugs run amock. This inclusion of the obedient and law abiding as being complicit in these problems is an outright lie and we have got into this mess precisely because politicians and law enforcers have ignored our pleas.
Cheerful chappie aren't I, HG :-)
Nice talking with you, as ever.
Post a Comment