underground networks which help families flee from social services in the UK

[Sheila Struthers]

http://www.channel4.com/news/reveale...ocial-services

The families say they are forced to flee because they will not get a fair hearing in the UK in the family courts. They turn to shadowy networks, often based online, and run by other parents, many of whom have already lost their children to the care system.

The scale and sophistication of the networks is extraordinary. We were told of safe houses across the UK where parents and their children could lie low before heading overseas, of fake birth certificates and of keys for rented homes in foreign countries that are exchanged in the middle of the night by strangers connected only by the networks.

As to the numbers involved it is impossible to verify, but we were told by one woman central to several groups that help parents get out of the country, that there has been "anything [from] 300 to 600 families in the past year that have left [the UK] from the involvement of social care".

The most popular destination is the Republic of Ireland, but the networks extend across Europe, Mediterranean countries being the other main destinations for families on the run.

From UK foster care to Cavan

We went to Cavan, a small town in the Republic of Ireland and one of the hubs for the network. There we met a mother who described a meticulously-planned snatch operation to steal her four-year-old son from foster care in the UK. At an organised contact session, she arranged an untraceable car, fake ID papers and even had a wig waiting in the car. "I knew I had to get him and get to the boat straight away. I knew that if I got caught, I would be done for kidnap," she says.

Her son had originally been put into voluntary care after she had a breakdown. She insists she got better but they refused to return him - leaving her, she says, with no choice but to run.

Having made it to Ireland she turned herself in to the authorities in the belief – shared by many in these networks – that she would get a fairer hearing from Irish social services. "They are not idiots over here but it's the way they act [and] work completely differently," she says. "They took him, completed the assessment and decided what was in my son's best interests."

For this mother that decision turned out to be that she could keep her son. Having been helped by the network herself, she in turn began to help others. This is how the networks regenerate themselves and grow.

[LovingHomeEd]

I read about this on John Hemming's Facebook page. I didn't like the way they described them as "shadowy" networks, I thought that made it sound a bit sinister. I think it was very brave of those involved to speak to the media about it, I think I'd be too worried about it becoming too well known (and therefore shut down).

[Sheila Struthers]

There's something about this story that worries me too - just not quite sure what...

[Elaine Kirk]

Originally Posted by Sheila Struthers

There's something about this story that worries me too - just not quite sure what...

Maybe it's that Niggly knowledge that sleeping dogs can awaken at any moment, that whilst it is fact that ss can get it wrong there is no escaping the fact that so can the escape facilitators and that is the niggle.
Are we going to see a dramatic case highlighted by the authorities to counter the program? The Spain case springs to mind , there is no chance of innocence being proved as the accused died before trial I believe.
Is it possible that the program is a 'set up' and plans for the follow- up giving the 'other side' are already in the can.
Is it possible that an element of society will see the potential to turn this into a pocket lining enterprise?
.
I fully support the network but I do believe that it's strength depends on remaining an unknown entity, injustice should be highlighted , no section of society should live in fear but for the well-being of the families involved and future families this program should be shelved, the fostering industry is growing and the risk of care orders being used as a first resort in the future is too real "future emotional harm" will be joined by " risk of abduction" as the favourite 'grab that child order'

[Earthtracer]

This all reads like a thriller or an account of the wartime underground resistance networks.

The woman on the video who said there was something wrong with our social work system has the right of it. They are far too quick to grab kids and far too slow to take into account the parents' pov. (How many posts on here have highlighted that problem!)

The worry, of course, is that the 'escape system' could be abused by people who do not have the children's best interests at heart. Howver the question is 'How desperate do you have to be to do this?' and to my mind the answer is 'frantically so.' I can't see many child abusers doing this - far too uncertain and uncomfortable for that sort.

It really is a dreadful indictment of social services that people feel so desperate and so deprived of a fair hearing that they believe that this is their only option. The only way to stop it would be for a reformation of sociual services to make it unnecessary - in anyone's view.

[Diane]

Yes, you'd have to be pretty desperate to run from the SS. It's a deep shame that people feel that they have no choice but to turn their backs on their lives in order to keep their children safe.

I agree with you, Earthtracer, about child abusers. They wouldn't bother, just as they wouldn't bother about home educating their children. They know it draws attention to their families, and the last thing they want is to do that.

Diane

[Elaine Kirk]

Sorry I wasn't suggesting the escape system was being abused , just saying that as with badman and balls the media are happy to print unsubstantiated claims made by the authorities and I think the authorities will be in full blown invent mode to counteract this .

[Mayfly]

This report is disturbing from all aspects. It's a pity that the story broke too late for the Education Committee to take account of in their inquiry into child protection. A quick flick through the written evidence

Education Committee - Written Evidence
http://www.publications.parliament.u...4/contents.htm

shows that some concerns have been raised about the problems low thresholds cause. Albeit most of the evidence is concerned with problems not being picked up.

The Committee's report will, presumably, be a key indicator as to whether Government associates false allegations with low thresholds etc.

A good quote from the Channel 4 feature is:

The families say they are forced to flee because they will not get a fair hearing in the UK in the family courts.

The vital issue, in my view, is that the state should not be allowed to make an allegation against a parent that the parent cannot refute with evidence. How can you remove a child on the say so of someone that there is a probability that in the future a child may be at risk of emotional abuse?

[Loubeeloo]

Ok... from a personal perspective (as someone rather close to this subject)can I just say that i think the TV program using the term 'network' highly inflates what is a very loose solidarity between those who have been affected by the UK system & that there is no 'Network' in any kind of organised sense... I think that channel 4 have just put a few buzz words into their dialogue about it to add artistic faff to the program... & the term 'shadowy' is part of that too!

Those who are forced to flee HAVE to be careful about how they execute that escape based upon each personal circumstance... & who helps them will often be down to a mixed bag of pot luck, their own creativity & support 'networks' that will consist of a variety of people... sometimes their friends & families, sometimes others who have been thru this & sometimes 'experts' such as John Hemming & Ian Josephs... Some of the people who have been thru this themselves & now help others do so quite openly, their names & contact details are available online & thru the media... others prefer to remain more secretive either for their own safety or that of the ppl they help, again it all depends upon their own personal circumstances.

I do know that John Hemming is encouraging those who feel brave enough to speak out to 'network' a little, I think because he maybe believes that strength in numbers is the only way that this issue will ever gain any credence in the public psyche... but from my own brief conversations with him I have not gotten the sense that he is trying to do so to further his own career 'agenda'... (& trust me my 'rent-seeker' radar is set to high thanks to seeing it as a disturbing & stomach churning element often displayed by members of the HE network)... I believe that he is actually a kind man who has put the welfare of these families before his own reputation & has taken alot of stick because of it & he ensures that any who come to him for help are aware of the risks they may be taking in going public with their stories.