Whilst it is clear to me, and no doubt all of you, that with the benefit of perfect hindsight, baby P should have been protected, what we have to remember is that we do not want a knee jerk reaction. Children brought up in care have very low life chances, (for a whole number of reasons) and we do not want to condemn children to that fate without good reason.
It does, however seem to me odd that alarm bells did not ring. If you read this from the Independent on Sunday, you will see what I mean. It is clear that there were plenty of warning signals.
I am a bit concerned about the involvement of Baby P's father and indeed the father of his three sisters.
Baby P spent a night with his father in late July according to the Independent report.
Did his father not notice? If not, why not? If so why did he not act?
Did the fact that you can no longer get legal aid in family matters on a routine basis mean that he could not afford to ask the courts to give him custody?
One thing I have learned in the British courts is that we have the best justice money can buy. Did that contribute to killing baby P?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment