Rotherham Dad loses his kids

[El Cid]

Does "reasonable physical chastisement" result in red marks? Sounds more like assault.

 

""In 2010 the father appeared before the same court and was slammed by a judge for his ‘rigid and inflexible thinking’ in relation to an older child. The judge said the father ‘must feel in control’ and was capable of rude, uncompromising and hostile in his determination to get his own way.""

 

Is that all? I thought newspapers liked to print the worst detail possible, as the family has not been named.

[Harrystottle]

It sounds as though the father is over fond of clouting his kids.

 

But this is very true indeed.

 

I seem to remember that most of the sex abuse kids were in council care, I personally wouldn't trust RMBC to care a for a rat, let alone a child.

 

Sounds like the kids have been pulled out of the frying pad only to land in the fire.

[Guest sibon]

I seam to remember that most of the sex abuse kids were in council care, I personally wouldn't trust RMBC to care a for a rat, let alone a child.

 

The judge said the father ‘must feel in control’ and was capable of rude, uncompromising and hostile in his determination to get his own way.

 

A parent should be in control of their kids.

 

 

Most of the RMBC employees I ever met were rude, uncompromising and hostile to the opinions of others, and thought nothing of intimidating and bullying people to get their own way.

 

Sounds like the kids have been pulled out of the frying pad only to land in the fire.

 

If only the kids were being cared for by a "quiet, considered and thoughtful maternal uncle and his partner."

 

The little words under the big words give more detail about the story. That saves you the trouble of inventing stuff:suspect:

[El Cid]

It sounds as though the father is over fond of clouting his kids.

 

 

It sounds as though the couple involved both love their kids.

[loraward]

If only the kids were being cared for by a "quiet, considered and thoughtful maternal uncle and his partner."

 

The little words under the big words give more detail about the story. That saves you the trouble of inventing stuff:suspect:

 

Yes and I even quoted some of the little words which appeared under the big words, hence the reason I posted the response I posted. The little words tell us that he wasn't father of the year, but a long way short of being the worst father of the year and even at his worse he is very likley superior to any council social care the children will receive.

[Harrystottle]

It sounds as though the couple involved both love their kids.

 

The one doesn't necessarily exclude the other.

A slap on the bottom to reprimand bad behaviour, yes. But it sounds like hitting his children is occurring on a very regular basis, and that isn't OK.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2015 at 20:23 ----------

 

even at his worse he is very likley superior to any council social care the children will receive.

 

I think this is key. Working with the parents has got to be a better way than just dumping the kids into care.

[loraward]

The one doesn't necessarily exclude the other.

A slap on the bottom to reprimand bad behaviour, yes. But it sounds like hitting his children is occurring on a very regular basis, and that isn't OK.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2015 at 20:23 ----------

 

 

I think this is key. Working with the parents has got to be a better way than just dumping the kids into care.

 

The mother had 'aligned herself' with the father and said she was 'totally convinced' that he posed no risk to the children.

 

Whilst agreeing he could be 'slightly dogmatic', she said he had never been violent or aggressive.

 

The judges said

"Sadly, she has put him before her children. She refused to accept any view or opinion that is not his.

 

It would appears that the judges suffers from the same affliction. Her opinion contradicts the evidence which states that "Smacking does children no harm if they feel loved."

Edited March 29, 2015 by loraward

[ricgem2002]

 

Whilst agreeing he could be 'slightly dogmatic', she said he had never been violent or aggressive.

 

except to his kids:suspect:

[Harrystottle]

How safe do you think these children are going to be in care?

[newcomer01]

The thread was started due to a person having his children taken away from him due to administering a slap.Was there anything that suggested other than this was he negligent to their welfare,are they clothed ,fed,looked after generally well,have a roof over their head.

I read nothing to suggest that this was not the case. Does he drink excessively,take illegal substances,does he rob little old ladies,is he a perenial reprobate .No ,I can`t remember seeing this either.

 

So other than slapping his child to administer discipline , stop judging him by your standards and concluding he is a tyrant and a nutter. He may have got it badly wrong in trying to set a standard for his kids and who is to say how effective it is.

He may be intransigent to the point of not taking advice. But if not for recent events in Rotherham ,I bet this story would not have been in the Star never mind having children taken away from family.

A typical knee jerk reaction if you ask me.The bloody social services and judiciary acting in a way to be seen as being proactive.