Children Will Not be Reunited With Their Parents

Tecnos · 02-11-2009, 09:52 AM

In todays UK newspapers:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...f-justice.html

By Caroline Gammell
Last Updated: 2:54PM GMT 11 Feb 2009

Couple cannot be reunited with children despite 'possible miscarriage of justice'.

A couple whose three children were taken for adoption amid claims of abuse may well have been the victims of a miscarriage of justice but they still cannot be reunited with their offspring, a court ruled.

Nicky and Mark Webster were forced to give up their children in 2004 after a court decided they had intentionally hurt one of them.

Three years later, new scientific evidence came to light which suggested that the boy – who had several fractures – could have suffered from a rare case of scurvy.

The Websters, who now have a two-year-old son Brandon, immediately fought to regain custody of their remaining two sons and daughter, who are now aged eight, seven and six.

But despite an admission that the parents may have been wronged, the Court of Appeal ruled it was too late to turn back the clock because adoption was final.

Outfuckingrageous!

Truthed · 02-11-2009, 09:55 AM

ya i just read about this. I actually submitted a blog about it, i was going to submit it on the forums but totally got lost in other articles haha. I think it is absolutely terrible!

Mingus · 02-11-2009, 02:43 PM

I would like to cite the situation African-Americans faced not too long after the Civil War, when General Sherman was telling slaves that the land was theirs, only to have to come back and tell them about ten years later that the original owners wanted the land back and was granted their wish, as the politicians agreed that the plantation owners' right to private property was infringed at the time.

How does the case we're discussing now not have the same applicable standard?

kidflash2008 · 02-12-2009, 09:17 AM

The plantations in were taken as part of the war. It was considered normal to take the loser's property and loot the places back then. After the Spanish-American War, the United States took Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines away from Spain.

The article does not state they were cleared, just that there could of been a rare case that caused the multiple fractures. Also, the children would be quite settled into their new homes, and it is always the best interest of the children. (I guess I am going to be the Devil's Advocate on this case.)

Truthed · 02-12-2009, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kidflash2008

The plantations in were taken as part of the war. It was considered normal to take the loser's property and loot the places back then. After the Spanish-American War, the United States took Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines away from Spain.

The article does not state they were cleared, just that there could of been a rare case that caused the multiple fractures. Also, the children would be quite settled into their new homes, and it is always the best interest of the children. (I guess I am going to be the Devil's Advocate on this case.)

Well at first i went back and forth on this article, but the thing is they were already kind of old when they were first taken. So they will most likely remember their parents and how they were taken away (the older one anyway) And with the internet they will eventually read how their parents were wrongly accused and tried to get them back but their foster parents refused and took them and ran away. It is almost like a movie

kidflash2008 · 02-12-2009, 09:31 AM

When the children reach the age of 12, they can petition to go back and live with their parents. That is the age most are allowed to decide what they want to do.

I really feel for the parents, but as an adoptive parent to a formerly abused child, I can definitely see the other side of the argument. Abusive parents will lie and deny what they did. I have met people who abuse their children, and they put on the best act possible. They do not realize, I have seen the bruises and other injuries, so I know better.

02-11-2009, 09:52 AM	#1
Tecnos Investigator Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: UK Posts: 419	Children Will Not be Reunited With Their Parents In todays UK newspapers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...f-justice.html By Caroline Gammell Last Updated: 2:54PM GMT 11 Feb 2009 Couple cannot be reunited with children despite 'possible miscarriage of justice'. A couple whose three children were taken for adoption amid claims of abuse may well have been the victims of a miscarriage of justice but they still cannot be reunited with their offspring, a court ruled. Nicky and Mark Webster were forced to give up their children in 2004 after a court decided they had intentionally hurt one of them. Three years later, new scientific evidence came to light which suggested that the boy – who had several fractures – could have suffered from a rare case of scurvy. The Websters, who now have a two-year-old son Brandon, immediately fought to regain custody of their remaining two sons and daughter, who are now aged eight, seven and six. But despite an admission that the parents may have been wronged, the Court of Appeal ruled it was too late to turn back the clock because adoption was final. Outfuckingrageous! __________________

02-11-2009, 09:55 AM	#2
Truthed Administrator Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,079	ya i just read about this. I actually submitted a blog about it, i was going to submit it on the forums but totally got lost in other articles haha. I think it is absolutely terrible! __________________ "You Want To Believe" http://www.truthed.com truthed@truthed.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-11-2009, 02:43 PM	#3
Mingus Investigator Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 325	I would like to cite the situation African-Americans faced not too long after the Civil War, when General Sherman was telling slaves that the land was theirs, only to have to come back and tell them about ten years later that the original owners wanted the land back and was granted their wish, as the politicians agreed that the plantation owners' right to private property was infringed at the time. How does the case we're discussing now not have the same applicable standard?

02-12-2009, 09:17 AM	#4
kidflash2008 Senior Investigator Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,699	The plantations in were taken as part of the war. It was considered normal to take the loser's property and loot the places back then. After the Spanish-American War, the United States took Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines away from Spain. The article does not state they were cleared, just that there could of been a rare case that caused the multiple fractures. Also, the children would be quite settled into their new homes, and it is always the best interest of the children. (I guess I am going to be the Devil's Advocate on this case.)

02-12-2009, 09:31 AM	#6
kidflash2008 Senior Investigator Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,699	When the children reach the age of 12, they can petition to go back and live with their parents. That is the age most are allowed to decide what they want to do. I really feel for the parents, but as an adoptive parent to a formerly abused child, I can definitely see the other side of the argument. Abusive parents will lie and deny what they did. I have met people who abuse their children, and they put on the best act possible. They do not realize, I have seen the bruises and other injuries, so I know better.