My letter to Jack Straw

JACK STRAW MP

House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA or
Constituency Office
Richmond Chambers
Richmond Terrace
Blackburn, BB1 7AS


Monday, Feb 23 2009 VIA EMAIL AND LETTER


Dear Mr.Straw

thanks for reading and viewing some items some friends and I have brought to your attention recently.

Thank you for allowing the media into Family Courts from April. However you've made it impossible for the media to report cases in family law proceedings properly- for example what about parents under house arrest for 7 + years, told they will go to prison if their child should walk past the door and accidentally look at them? Or families in prison without trial for having sent a greeting card to a grandchild?

You assert it is in the best interests of the child, the core tenet of the Childrens' Act, not to name parents or children and yet we read children in government care are 3- times more likely to become unemployable either due to being in trouble with the law- with especially drug and violence related offences and subsequent recidivism- isn't it profitable mainly for family lawyers and social workers and not the children to take them into care?

Aren't they ignoring urgent cases as they aren't profitable for the legal departments, and taking children whom are of little or no risk? Parents likely to argue pad the pockets of the legal teams, don't they sir?

Cutting a long story short, when social workers are concerned initially, the children may survive with parenting orders, and if necessary, supervised contact with mediation for all non-violent parents -Violence here must translate to actual harm having been proven by courts of law naturally.

Parents have read about potential and alleged conflict of interests, financial and perhaps otherwise of some judiciary and also, unsettling is CAFCASS - described as-*expert independent advice to Courts on the interests of children* when often they do not have the experience they claim, also Cafcass' own financial and perhaps other interests are worrying parents, they have interests in Jama Umoja and Coram, as do some judges - this interest-especially interests in care homes- and having had offices within the courts- surely this makes CAFCASS far from independent?

One Cafcass officer informed me that no judge would ever disagree with anything she requested. Another social worker repeated this. Their reports reflected some extreme carelessness and lack of attention.

When parents can find no logical reason behind being denied access to children, we look for other causes, and appear to have found some rather unsavoury contaminated thoughts that do not sit well with anyone that cares for children.

We're worried about our children being abused and exploited and sadly have lost all faith in the word of any social workers anywhere.


Mr.Straw, please end all secrecy, child abuse is child abuse, if it's malicious it's criminal, so lets have criminal proceedings if parents are charged with abuse please, and please rescind the outrage not just to gag parents, worse to stop children complaining of abuse?



Yours sincerely

Elizabeth Robillard,xxxxxxxxx
Family Law Campaigner

CC SIR RIFKIND MP RBKC