Rotherham Foster Carers

@terry wrote:

@wordsworth60 wrote:

We still don’t quite know if the complaint was restricted to support for UKIP, or whether it included more harmful allegations.

Yes we do. The only ‘crime’ committed by the foster parents was that they are members of UKIP. If you bothered to read the thread, the news and the links provided you might actually have a more informed opinion.

Terry is right, the thread, the news and the links provided tell 100% of the story and haven’t missed a single detail. Although I have read the thread and the links provided, I haven’t seen anything of this story in any news media that I have been watching, if I had I would have known that there was definitely absolutely nothing more to the story than is presented here.

@mrs_teapot wrote:

I dont understand this damned if you do damned if you dont attitude.

These foster carers haven’t suddenly become different people overnight… the people they are today are the people they were yesterday or the day before when the children were placed with them.

So it takes an anonymous phone call for them to suddenly be unsuitable? Im sorry I dont get it… truly if today they are not suitable but yesterday they were… who is selecting child placements? …. and shouldn’t we be focusing on their ineptitude?…OK these carers are members of a political party… but that’s because of their beliefs and values…. surely that’s what is focused on in the selection process when recruiting people to do the job?

You’re right, Mrs Teapot. The foster parents haven’t suddenly transmogrified into terrible child-eating ogres overnight, and I know it’s a difficult gig looking after other people’s kids, both from legal and social aspects, but if their is the possibility that their beliefs have may have a direct impact on the wellbeing of the children then we really should take this into consideration – even belatedly.

In an ideal world we would always be able to name and identify those who accuse us, but sometimes there are good reasons why they remain anonymous. And even when this is not the case, surely recent circumstances such as the Saville farrago have taught us that we ignore accusations and indications at our peril, regardless of however slight they may be.

As someone else has pointed out, I don’t believe that the selection process can be completely infallible, and I think these circumstances are not typical. Despite how well-meaning the caregivers are, I can’t ignore the possibility that their beliefs regarding non-indigenous cultures could have a detrimental impact on the wellbeing of the children. This may not be true, and they can be supporters of UKIP without supporting the policies which are now being questioned, but it is right for those with a duty of care to the children to be mindful of this. Furthermore, I know it is enshrined in some UN Nations doctrine of social rights that we have an inalienable right to cultural freedom, which shouldn’t be shackled or curbed.

Had the foster parents indoctrinated the children into believing things that made them confused about their ethnicity and/or culture or they made You’re right, Mrs Teapot. The foster parents haven’t suddenly transmogrified into terrible child-eating ogres overnight, and I know it’s a difficult gig looking after other people’s kids both from legal and social aspects, but if their beliefs can have a direct impact on the wellbeing of the children then we really should take this into consideration – even belatedly.

In ideal world we would always be able to name and identify those who accuse us, but sometimes there are good reasons why they remain anonymous. And even when this is not the case, surely recent circumstances such as the Saville farrago have taught valuable lessons about the risk of ignoring indications or accusations however slight they may be.

As someone has pointed out, I don’t believe that the selection process can be completely infallible, and I think these circumstances are not typical. Despite how well-meaning the caregivers are, I can’t ignore the possibility that their beliefs regarding non-indigenous cultures could have a detrimental impact on the wellbeing of the children. This may not be true, and they can be supporters of UKIP without supporting the policies which are now being questioned, but it is right for those with a duty of care to the children to be mindful of this. Furthermore, I know it is enshrined some UN Nations doctrine of social rights that we have an inalienable right to cultural freedom, which shouldn’t be shackled or curbed.

None of this is to say that the foster parents are ‘bad’ people or that Rotherham’s council’s reaction was not severe.

@terry wrote:

The crime committed by the foster parents was that they are members of UKIP.

I agree with you there Terry, 100%.

Good post. Glad you’re starting to see some sense at last. =D>

I see a pattern here….Me, Panda and Wordsy…….
We all live in the South!!! :lol:

@panda12 wrote:

It’s regionalism by the “delightful” Terence! :P

I feel so violated..I have never been regionalised before