underthewillows (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
underthewillows) wrote2013-11-10 02:18 pm
underthewillows) wrote2013-11-10 02:18 pm
Entry tags:
This story just gets better and better
Remember the storm in a teacup over the two Roma children removed from their families because they "didn't look like them" - in other words, there were suspicions that "Gypsies are stealing our White kids"?
Well, the more information that comes out, the better the story gets. And by "better", I mean "worse".
According to this brief news report, in at least one of the cases, the police didn't even contact local social services.
A breakdown in communication. Yeah, that's one way to describe it. No checking about was this family clients of social services, were there problems identified, was there any report of abuse, nothing - just run in the door and grab the kid because somebody rang up and said "I think that child doesn't look like the alleged parents".
But we can trust Big Brother not to abuse the powers they were given with the 2012 amendment to the Constitution!
Well - as long as you're White, Western, and middle-class, that is. Foreign, native-born but 'underclass' or simply a darker shade of skin than the average - sorry, rights, what rights?
Well, the more information that comes out, the better the story gets. And by "better", I mean "worse".
According to this brief news report, in at least one of the cases, the police didn't even contact local social services.
It has emerged that Gardaí did not contact local social workers when they removed a two-year-old Roma boy from his family in Co Westmeath.
A report carried out by the HSE into the case, and the removal of a Roma girl from her family in Dublin, has been handed to the Children's Minister Frances Fitzgerald.
The report has found a breakdown in communication between the Gardaí and the HSE was a contributing factor in the wrongful removal of the toddler.
According to the Sunday Times, officers involved used an emergency helpline to arrange accommodation for the young boy and the HSE was not made aware of his removal until the following morning.
The report, along with a Garda report, will be handed to the Children's Ombudsman who will now carry out her own investigation into both cases.
A breakdown in communication. Yeah, that's one way to describe it. No checking about was this family clients of social services, were there problems identified, was there any report of abuse, nothing - just run in the door and grab the kid because somebody rang up and said "I think that child doesn't look like the alleged parents".
But we can trust Big Brother not to abuse the powers they were given with the 2012 amendment to the Constitution!
Well - as long as you're White, Western, and middle-class, that is. Foreign, native-born but 'underclass' or simply a darker shade of skin than the average - sorry, rights, what rights?
no subject
no subject
The hysteria over the Greek case (again, the child there turns out to be - surprise, surprise! - genetically Roma; they've identified the mother), the Madeline McCann case, and the whipping up of prejudice against immigrants and 'dole spongers, welfare cheats, criminals and fraudsters' by politicians all contributed to this disaster.
I wish the media would take responsibility for what they did, but of course they won't - the case of the girl in Dublin was obviously done in response to fears that a tabloid journalist who hosts a 'true crime stoppers grass on your neighbours' show on our national downmarket TV station was going to run a "Shock, horror, Gypsies stealing our kids and the cops do nothing" story.
That's probably a very legitimate fear (because yes, the newspapers, TV, radio and talking heads would have loved a juicy scandal like that for ratings), and it should not be what's driving policy when it comes to the State taking children into care.
no subject
no subject
I'm also feeling perversely vindicated - when the Children's Rights Amendment was being pushed in 2012, we got all the trendy lefties (I'm politically and socially conservative, so bias warning in advance: I respect real old-school Labour but not the 'champagne socialists' wing currently in power) like this guy bloviating about how it was "Will nobody think of the children?"
I voted "No" not because I want children to suffer at the hands of abusive parents, but because it was so vague and so broad-reaching and I didn't see anyone giving any firm definitions of when or the limits of being able to remove children from the family home, amongst other things. But of course, any objections meant you were a bad person who wanted to drag us all back to the bad old days of the Church ruling the country. This taking children away from their parents because of suspected moral turpitude didn't happen back in the hungry 50s at the behest of the parish priest beating the courting couples out of the bushes with a blackthorn stick, it happened under the progressive government that is pluming itself on its bravery and forward-looking vision, and who threw its weight behind this amendment to the Constitution on the grounds of "it's for the children".
Well, to quote that article: " By voting yes on Nov10 we can put a hand on the shoulder of every child we know. And they’ll know what it means."
Yes, they'll know: they'll know it doesn't matter a damn if they say 'I don't want to go with you'. They'll know it means anyone for the flimsiest excuse can just ring the cops, who won't even bother to check with social services, they'll take you into care. They'll know the hand on their shoulder is the police dragging them away from their families.