Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
html
For more than two years the couple have been fighting through 74 hearings in the courts to win their daughter back. From a mass of evidence, including psychiatric reports and tape recordings made at meetings with her parents (only allowed in the presence of social workers), it is clear she has been desperate to return home. The family believe that considerable pressure has been brought on the child to turn her against her parents. One particularly bizarre psychiatric report was compiled after only an hour-long interview with the little girl. When she said she had once choked on a lollipop, this was interpreted as signifying that she could possibly have been forced to have oral sex with her father. After the parents had been subjected to four different psychiatric investigations, which came up with mixed findings, they refused to submit to a fifth, and this apparently weighed heavily with the judge who last December ordered that Jenny should be put out to adoption. In the Appeal Court 11 days ago, Mr Justice Bodey ruled that, because the father had refused that fifth test, indicating that the parents put their own emotional wellbeing in front of that of their child, the adoption order must stand. When this judgment was reported, an independent social worker, who had earlier been an expert witness in the case, wrote to Mr and Mrs Smith to say he was horrified to learn that Jenny was not back in their care, having assumed for over a year that she must have been returned home. Their equally horrified GP, saying that he had never encountered such a case of appalling injustice, wrote the destruction of this once happy family is in my opinion evil. So shocked was their MP, Mr Hendry, that he last Wednesday took the highly unusual course of raising the case at Prime Ministers Questions. Numerous others who know the family well have expressed similar dismay. One neighbour, herself a former social worker, whose own daughter often played with Jenny, said: I worked with children in social services for 25 years and I have never seen anything like this. It is disgusting. What is clear in this case, as in so many others, is that a system involving social workers, police and courts in what is an obviously very close alliance should yet again have left a happy, loving family destroyed for no very obvious reason. Almost equally alarming is the way that system manages to shield itself from the world, through reporting restrictions which it claims are designed to protect the children but which too often end up by protecting only the system itself.