Mary McKelvey is nominated for Community Pride Award

York Press: Public Sector Hero nominee Mary McKelvey Public Sector Hero nominee Mary McKelvey

IN a three decade-long career in social work, one dedicated worker York woman has helped scores of families.

Now adoption manager Mary McKelvey is getting public recognition for her remarkable work to bring families together, with a nomination as Community Pride's Public Sector Hero.

Mary, 59, who moved to York in 1991, has worked in social work for more than 34 years. She is now manager of City of York Council's adoption service, and plays a key role in bringing loving parents together with children who need a family.

She has been put forward by boss Howard Lovelady, who describes Mary as the “model of trustworthiness” who combines her professionalism with exceptional personal integrity.

Mary’s job sees her finding adoptive families for children who are being looked after by the council, and she leads the way in recruiting and assessing potential new adopters.

Howard has praised Mary for her empathy and kind attitude.

He said: “Mary is continually aware that the nature of what we do directly affects other people's lives. She always puts the thoughts, wishes and feelings of both the children and the adoptive families first. This is shown by the extra hours and weekends she will sacrifice for these people.

“York council is committed to increasing the number of adopters being approved and Mary leads this recruitment drive with determination and enthusiasm.”

Mary said she was flattered and surprised by the nomination, and praised the dedicated staff she works alongside.

She said: “There are so many people who work incredibly hard. We have fantastic social workers and managers in York. I’m just one person. It’s the whole team that really deserve recognition.”

The most rewarding aspect of her job is persuading people that adoptive parents don't have to fit a particular mould, Mary added.

“I really do try to stress that you don’t have to be a particular kind of family to adopt. Some people will rule themselves out early on because they feel they are not good enough – when they’d in fact be very suitable. Adoptive parents should be healthy, financially secure and if they are in a relationship, this should be stable. You just have to be willing to understand the child’s individual needs and take them as who they are rather than attempt to mould them into something they are not.”

The Community Pride awards are run by The Press with City of York Council, and sponsored by Benenden Health.

To make a nomination write to Paula Homer, PA to the editor, The Press, 76-86 Walmgate, York YO1 9YN before Friday, July 18, with details including a supporting statement of no more than two sides of A4 with each nomination. Nominations can be made at thepress.co.uk/pride

Nominees must live in the City of York Council area, or make a significant contribution to the city.

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:11pm Sat 21 Jun 14

andyjon12 says...

On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them.

The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award.

.
On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them. The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award. . andyjon12
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Sat 21 Jun 14

level-headed says...

andyjon12 wrote:
On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them.

The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award.

.
Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!!

I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that.
Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?!
If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it.
I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.
[quote][p][bold]andyjon12[/bold] wrote: On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them. The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award. .[/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!! I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that. Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?! If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it. I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision. level-headed
  • Score: 6

3:39pm Sat 21 Jun 14

Digeorge says...

Well said andyiron12 and level-headed well OK that York 'stars' highly in the adoptive range but it is a nationwide scandal of false allegations, falsely accused parents.

Oh and my learning disabilities! Joke that is, don't have a 'syndrome', don't have anything rare, don't go to a certain hospital as they are all part of the racket that are making millions out of this out of family court/criminal cases.

So we have a 'farewell' for every single person that leaves children's services, York Hospital!

Don't forget all these people will be into shaken baby syndrome and everything else that goes with it. Have you studied 'genetics' any of you yet or come across it or just fed non-sense by the local pads and believe everything you hear!

One thing you can't really have is a seriously sick child in York without mother being able to cope (most people wouldn't anyway) - what exactly did you provide for us?

What exactly did you learn from the death of a child that should have been operated on in hospital, constantly denied the medical care they need.

Or 14 years later with the shaken baby syndrome case which is a rare genetic syndrome by the way? Is by chance a date in December a child abuse training week in York over the years or targeting seriously ill children and their parents? Just a coincidence and strange how they missed 'infection' as part of this in both cases.

And talking of vulnerable adults, I see a rise in the number of young teenage people who have support workers, you just have to look around probably don't even need them.

As for factious ruddy illness there's no such thing as that all invented by Professor Meadow and Leeds and their crony doctors who can't diagnose infection or anything else for that matter correctly. What a change Newcastle is, a breath of fresh air!

They then 'train' these people, she's been around for 30 years and so has that support group, well actually most sensible thinking people will be Thank God the old is going.

I do believe that there is child abuse but I have never met a munchausen case ever!! York is one of the top places in the country! they are all rare syndromes which are of genetic origin.
Well said andyiron12 and level-headed well OK that York 'stars' highly in the adoptive range but it is a nationwide scandal of false allegations, falsely accused parents. Oh and my learning disabilities! Joke that is, don't have a 'syndrome', don't have anything rare, don't go to a certain hospital as they are all part of the racket that are making millions out of this out of family court/criminal cases. So we have a 'farewell' for every single person that leaves children's services, York Hospital! Don't forget all these people will be into shaken baby syndrome and everything else that goes with it. Have you studied 'genetics' any of you yet or come across it or just fed non-sense by the local pads and believe everything you hear! One thing you can't really have is a seriously sick child in York without mother being able to cope (most people wouldn't anyway) - what exactly did you provide for us? What exactly did you learn from the death of a child that should have been operated on in hospital, constantly denied the medical care they need. Or 14 years later with the shaken baby syndrome case which is a rare genetic syndrome by the way? Is by chance a date in December a child abuse training week in York over the years or targeting seriously ill children and their parents? Just a coincidence and strange how they missed 'infection' as part of this in both cases. And talking of vulnerable adults, I see a rise in the number of young teenage people who have support workers, you just have to look around probably don't even need them. As for factious ruddy illness there's no such thing as that all invented by Professor Meadow and Leeds and their crony doctors who can't diagnose infection or anything else for that matter correctly. What a change Newcastle is, a breath of fresh air! They then 'train' these people, she's been around for 30 years and so has that support group, well actually most sensible thinking people will be Thank God the old is going. I do believe that there is child abuse but I have never met a munchausen case ever!! York is one of the top places in the country! they are all rare syndromes which are of genetic origin. Digeorge
  • Score: -2

5:19pm Sat 21 Jun 14

andyjon12 says...

level-headed wrote:
andyjon12 wrote:
On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them.

The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award.

.
Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!!

I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that.
Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?!
If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it.
I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.
I am not "speaking rubbish". Family courts do operate under a veil of secrecy; parents are issued with gagging orders, effectively denying them justice whilst threatening them with imprisonment - if they dare to speak out or complain. Biological grandparents and other extended family members are not even allowed in to the court room during many adoption proceedings. Many examples of this can be found on the internet and I am sure this must be happening in York too. As a matter of fact, a former Senior Family court judge - Lord Justice Wall - has voiced his concerns about the system by saying, "there is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the real parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter." You ought to read up on these matters. However, when all said and done, you do indeed have a vested interest as a benefactor of the system - to the tune of £1,180.00 per week, I believe. I make that £61,360 per year - not bad "work" if you can get it. Not to mention the £250.00 given to social workers for each successful forced adoption.
[quote][p][bold]level-headed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andyjon12[/bold] wrote: On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them. The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award. .[/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!! I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that. Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?! If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it. I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.[/p][/quote]I am not "speaking rubbish". Family courts do operate under a veil of secrecy; parents are issued with gagging orders, effectively denying them justice whilst threatening them with imprisonment - if they dare to speak out or complain. Biological grandparents and other extended family members are not even allowed in to the court room during many adoption proceedings. Many examples of this can be found on the internet and I am sure this must be happening in York too. As a matter of fact, a former Senior Family court judge - Lord Justice Wall - has voiced his concerns about the system by saying, "there is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the real parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter." You ought to read up on these matters. However, when all said and done, you do indeed have a vested interest as a benefactor of the system - to the tune of £1,180.00 per week, I believe. I make that £61,360 per year - not bad "work" if you can get it. Not to mention the £250.00 given to social workers for each successful forced adoption. andyjon12
  • Score: -1

5:36pm Sat 21 Jun 14

Digeorge says...

Spot on their andyjon12, not speaking rubbish at all and you only have to have 'one' accuser to ruin your life by making that telephone call to Social Services. Once in that system they take every child that is born, there are no winners.

From City of York's own website, the rate for 2013-2104 of adoptions for 2013 and 40 were 20 note the steady increase.

Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that there were 5,206 adoptions in 2012 compared to 4,740 in 2011.

The number of children adopted in York has also increased in the same period, with 13 adoptions in 2011/12 and 14 in 2012/13. A total of 20 children are preparing to be placed for adoption during 2013/14, once arrangements with their new families and the courts have been finalised.

One day your adopted children might well be looking for their parents in many years to come and find the real answers.

22q11.2 deletion syndrome/Ehlers Danos syndrome/ Vitamin D deficiency and hypoparathyroidism/h
yperparathyroidism are behind a lot of these cases, congenital heart disease and operations, autism and asking for help through special educational needs of given the interest in the House of Parliament on the subject very few MPS turned up like a handful.

And it happens in the very unit most of Yorkshire want saved!
Spot on their andyjon12, not speaking rubbish at all and you only have to have 'one' accuser to ruin your life by making that telephone call to Social Services. Once in that system they take every child that is born, there are no winners. From City of York's own website, the rate for 2013-2104 of adoptions for 2013 and 40 were 20 note the steady increase. Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that there were 5,206 adoptions in 2012 compared to 4,740 in 2011. The number of children adopted in York has also increased in the same period, with 13 adoptions in 2011/12 and 14 in 2012/13. A total of 20 children are preparing to be placed for adoption during 2013/14, once arrangements with their new families and the courts have been finalised. One day your adopted children might well be looking for their parents in many years to come and find the real answers. 22q11.2 deletion syndrome/Ehlers Danos syndrome/ Vitamin D deficiency and hypoparathyroidism/h yperparathyroidism are behind a lot of these cases, congenital heart disease and operations, autism and asking for help through special educational needs of given the interest in the House of Parliament on the subject very few MPS turned up like a handful. And it happens in the very unit most of Yorkshire want saved! Digeorge
  • Score: -2

5:51pm Sat 21 Jun 14

level-headed says...

andyjon12 wrote:
level-headed wrote:
andyjon12 wrote:
On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them.

The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award.

.
Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!!

I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that.
Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?!
If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it.
I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.
I am not "speaking rubbish". Family courts do operate under a veil of secrecy; parents are issued with gagging orders, effectively denying them justice whilst threatening them with imprisonment - if they dare to speak out or complain. Biological grandparents and other extended family members are not even allowed in to the court room during many adoption proceedings. Many examples of this can be found on the internet and I am sure this must be happening in York too. As a matter of fact, a former Senior Family court judge - Lord Justice Wall - has voiced his concerns about the system by saying, "there is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the real parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter." You ought to read up on these matters. However, when all said and done, you do indeed have a vested interest as a benefactor of the system - to the tune of £1,180.00 per week, I believe. I make that £61,360 per year - not bad "work" if you can get it. Not to mention the £250.00 given to social workers for each successful forced adoption.
£1,180 per week??!!!! I have not, and will not ever receive a single penny in respect of either of my adopted children, which is over and above that received by other parent, such as 'family allowance'. I am not eligible for any child related benefits so that is the only payment. Just what exactly is this mysterious payment you're talking about?? Please let me know so I can hand my notice in at work, and still pay off my mortgage twice as fast.
In one single ridiculous comment, you have proven that you know nothing about the subject.
With regard to family members being excluded from court processes, in the case of both my children, birth parents were eligible to attend the adoption hearings but chose not to bother. Not exactly a 'veil of secrecy' is it?
[quote][p][bold]andyjon12[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]level-headed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andyjon12[/bold] wrote: On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them. The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award. .[/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!! I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that. Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?! If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it. I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.[/p][/quote]I am not "speaking rubbish". Family courts do operate under a veil of secrecy; parents are issued with gagging orders, effectively denying them justice whilst threatening them with imprisonment - if they dare to speak out or complain. Biological grandparents and other extended family members are not even allowed in to the court room during many adoption proceedings. Many examples of this can be found on the internet and I am sure this must be happening in York too. As a matter of fact, a former Senior Family court judge - Lord Justice Wall - has voiced his concerns about the system by saying, "there is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the real parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter." You ought to read up on these matters. However, when all said and done, you do indeed have a vested interest as a benefactor of the system - to the tune of £1,180.00 per week, I believe. I make that £61,360 per year - not bad "work" if you can get it. Not to mention the £250.00 given to social workers for each successful forced adoption.[/p][/quote]£1,180 per week??!!!! I have not, and will not ever receive a single penny in respect of either of my adopted children, which is over and above that received by other parent, such as 'family allowance'. I am not eligible for any child related benefits so that is the only payment. Just what exactly is this mysterious payment you're talking about?? Please let me know so I can hand my notice in at work, and still pay off my mortgage twice as fast. In one single ridiculous comment, you have proven that you know nothing about the subject. With regard to family members being excluded from court processes, in the case of both my children, birth parents were eligible to attend the adoption hearings but chose not to bother. Not exactly a 'veil of secrecy' is it? level-headed
  • Score: 1

6:28pm Sat 21 Jun 14

Digeorge says...

20 is a tiny fraction of the number in care. Ask them by FOI what their numbers are for people in care, it will be vast.

68,110 children were in the care of local authorities on 31st March 2013, compared to 67,080 in 2012.

They are all being paid substantial amounts to adopt children, the law needs changing as it is an arse,

It is a veil of secrecy that is how the Family Courts operate!! And how the system operates. There will be no judgment as such like naming parents, or local authorities.

But the one thing is York are quicker than average than their counterparts why because of money and how the system works.
20 is a tiny fraction of the number in care. Ask them by FOI what their numbers are for people in care, it will be vast. 68,110 children were in the care of local authorities on 31st March 2013, compared to 67,080 in 2012. They are all being paid substantial amounts to adopt children, the law needs changing as it is an arse, It is a veil of secrecy that is how the Family Courts operate!! And how the system operates. There will be no judgment as such like naming parents, or local authorities. But the one thing is York are quicker than average than their counterparts why because of money and how the system works. Digeorge
  • Score: 0

12:12am Sun 22 Jun 14

imassey says...

level-headed wrote:
andyjon12 wrote:
level-headed wrote:
andyjon12 wrote:
On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them.

The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award.

.
Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!!

I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that.
Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?!
If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it.
I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.
I am not "speaking rubbish". Family courts do operate under a veil of secrecy; parents are issued with gagging orders, effectively denying them justice whilst threatening them with imprisonment - if they dare to speak out or complain. Biological grandparents and other extended family members are not even allowed in to the court room during many adoption proceedings. Many examples of this can be found on the internet and I am sure this must be happening in York too. As a matter of fact, a former Senior Family court judge - Lord Justice Wall - has voiced his concerns about the system by saying, "there is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the real parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter." You ought to read up on these matters. However, when all said and done, you do indeed have a vested interest as a benefactor of the system - to the tune of £1,180.00 per week, I believe. I make that £61,360 per year - not bad "work" if you can get it. Not to mention the £250.00 given to social workers for each successful forced adoption.
£1,180 per week??!!!! I have not, and will not ever receive a single penny in respect of either of my adopted children, which is over and above that received by other parent, such as 'family allowance'. I am not eligible for any child related benefits so that is the only payment. Just what exactly is this mysterious payment you're talking about?? Please let me know so I can hand my notice in at work, and still pay off my mortgage twice as fast.
In one single ridiculous comment, you have proven that you know nothing about the subject.
With regard to family members being excluded from court processes, in the case of both my children, birth parents were eligible to attend the adoption hearings but chose not to bother. Not exactly a 'veil of secrecy' is it?
As another adoptive parent, I can also say that I haven't received a penny above standard "family allowance".

No idea where you are getting your information from.
[quote][p][bold]level-headed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andyjon12[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]level-headed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andyjon12[/bold] wrote: On the flip side - some would argue that Mary is part of a corrupt children's services system that is destroying family life for many vulnerable, decent and loving families in York. A seemingly unstoppable adoption policy that rewards local authorities with huge cash incentives, aided and abetted by secret courts must once and for all come under scrutiny. The media by en large choose not to report this dark side of UK child adoption, however, thanks to campaigners like MP John Hemming and TV agony ant Denise Robertson and others, these people are at last being exposed for what they really stand for - according to them. The number of York children brought in to the care system has more than doubled in the last three years, this has resulted in very lucrative rewards for the council and newly adoptive parents. I personally hear many reports of families having to deal with social workers, who come in to their homes and lie in their reports about what family life is really like. Evidence does suggest that this is happening in York. I would ask people to think about this when considering Mary for this community pride award. .[/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to re-stock your medication!! I am an adoptive parent, and have adopted two separate children via York Social Services. You are speaking absolute rubbish. The 'secret court' you speak of is a public hearing which anyone can attend. The 'lucrative rewards for adoptive parents' you've mentioned don't exist and I'm not even sure what you mean by that. Of course birth families find the whole thing unfair and feel that social services are lying about them - that is because their sense of what parenting is and where their moral compass should be pointing is completely skewed. In the case of one of my children, birth mother had written in her objections to adoption "Just because I've had three positive drug tests, it doesn't mean my life isn't 100% normal". You maybe need to think a bit more maturely about the 'many reports' you receive. Birth parents are not exactly going to say something like "Social services called round and quite rightly discovered that I prioritise my drugs / alcohol / criminal boyfriend over my kids" are they?! If the number of children brought into the care system has doubled then great! Whilst it is sad that their family unit has broken down, they are all potentially one less Baby P and I'm all for it. I have personally dealt with Mary, whereas you haven't. She operates with the utmost integrity and with the protection of children at the forefront of every decision.[/p][/quote]I am not "speaking rubbish". Family courts do operate under a veil of secrecy; parents are issued with gagging orders, effectively denying them justice whilst threatening them with imprisonment - if they dare to speak out or complain. Biological grandparents and other extended family members are not even allowed in to the court room during many adoption proceedings. Many examples of this can be found on the internet and I am sure this must be happening in York too. As a matter of fact, a former Senior Family court judge - Lord Justice Wall - has voiced his concerns about the system by saying, "there is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the real parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter." You ought to read up on these matters. However, when all said and done, you do indeed have a vested interest as a benefactor of the system - to the tune of £1,180.00 per week, I believe. I make that £61,360 per year - not bad "work" if you can get it. Not to mention the £250.00 given to social workers for each successful forced adoption.[/p][/quote]£1,180 per week??!!!! I have not, and will not ever receive a single penny in respect of either of my adopted children, which is over and above that received by other parent, such as 'family allowance'. I am not eligible for any child related benefits so that is the only payment. Just what exactly is this mysterious payment you're talking about?? Please let me know so I can hand my notice in at work, and still pay off my mortgage twice as fast. In one single ridiculous comment, you have proven that you know nothing about the subject. With regard to family members being excluded from court processes, in the case of both my children, birth parents were eligible to attend the adoption hearings but chose not to bother. Not exactly a 'veil of secrecy' is it?[/p][/quote]As another adoptive parent, I can also say that I haven't received a penny above standard "family allowance". No idea where you are getting your information from. imassey
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree