Identity of social workers may be published following fostering bungle

 Bristol City Council v C and others [2012] EWHC 3748 (Fam) – read judgment This was an application for a reporting restriction order arising out of care proceedings conducted before the Bris…



About towardchange

Your ‘Family Rights’ believing in the best interest of children. The issues which are important to me are, children and their families, the injustices to parents, which may occur, because of inadequate information, mistakes or corruption. This is happening every day. every minute and every second. For years I have campaigned for the rights of children and their voices to be heard.
This entry was posted in Care Proceedings, Child Welfare, Foster Care, Parental Rights, Public Law, and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Identity of social workers may be published following fostering bungle

  1. Pingback: Identity of social workers may be published fol...

  2. towardchange says:


    After family court proceedings decided that child A was at risk of violence from her father, an interim care order was implemented and A was moved to foster carers. However some time afterwards the local authority received information from the police suggesting that someone living at the address of A’s foster carers had had access to child pornography. A also told social workers that another member of the foster household (also respondent to this action) had grabbed her around the throat. As a consequence police and social services visited the foster carers, informed them of the concerns about pornography, removed all computers from the house and moved A to another foster home. On the following day the male foster carer was found dead, having apparently committed suicide.

    A’s father notified The Sun of the concerns about the social services’ handling of this situation. There followed a hearing in which HHJ Barclay made an order that no newspaper report or internet report of the proceedings should reveal the following:

    the name, address or school or any particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the child;
    the name, address or include [sic] particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the child’s foster carers or their families, past or present;

    the name, address or include [sic] particulars calculated to lead to the identification of any social work professional involved with the case,
    or the Local Authority or the children’s guardian;
    any information that could prejudice the upcoming inquest

  3. towardchange says:

    4-yr-old placed in foster care of suspected paedophile – Council tries to cover-up.
    They said she wasn’t safe at home but they put her where someone had been downloading child abuse images.’He added: ‘There is a danger that those who practise in the family justice system fail to give proper consideration to the Article 10 rights of the media. This must now cease.’Robert Oxley, Campaign Manager of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: ‘This was a shameful attempt to suppress the media from reporting council bungling.‘It’s a disgrace that Bristol City Council have spent taxpayers’ money trying to hide its involvement in a very serious and disturbing case.‘Questions must be asked not only of those responsible for the mistakes in the original fostering case but also of whoever authorised the use of taxpayers’ money for the legal action to cover it up.’

  4. Pingback: Barrister.Sharon Louise Gibbons | Parents Rights Blog

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s