[Davie M]

Headline in the press today.
Rapist given access to see his child by local authority.
Seems reasonable if he is paying the cost towards upbringing.
But,read on and find this character is in prison for 35yrs on 23 child sex offences.
So once again someone gets caught and we give them three meals a day and a warm bed and we foot the bill. And to add insult to injury in this case give them access to the result of their raping a female.
The Rotherham council should be ashamed of their actions.
Davie

 

[Varley]

The essential criterion is the wellbeing of the child.

Without being an expert how can giving access to a rapist father be anything but contrary to its interests? Even in the unlikely event that he has or is contributing to 'maintenance'.

To be controversial whether things run in families because of nurture or nature the father should be prevented from breeding and the child encouraged not to (recent changes to our abortion laws, which personally I oppose, give licence to killing the foetus resulting from a rape. Eugenics, however, is about supporting survival of the fittest and not about killing the unfit).

 

[Satanic Mechanic]

Read a few of the articles and firstly , not unusually, the headlines don't seem to match the story. Secondly the story is extremely vague to say the least and full of the usual weasel qualifications of allegations so beloved of the press trying to hype a story, so I'm not really sure what it's about.

But as a discussion point - what if the child wanted to meet his father, odd one

 

[Varley]

As an adult there would be nothing to prevent him from so doing should he wish. Until then, like any other minor, he should be protected (in more ways than one!).

 

[Pat Kennedy]

How can the rapist access the child if he is banged up for 35 years?

 

[JustWin]

How can the rapist access the child if he is banged up for 35 years?

I think he can ask/demand to have organised accompanied visits. Something to do with his human rights concerning families.

 

[Davie M]

I think he can ask/demand to have organised accompanied visits. Something to do with his human rights concerning families.

No doubt at the public’s expense.

 

[JustWin]

No doubt at the public’s expense.

More than likely. If DNA says he's Daddy, then he is family. They will have to change the law to try and stop him. I think it was a social service person who put it in his head.

 

[Satanic Mechanic]

Ok looked into this a bit more and it seems that it's a glitch in the law rather than anything else.

It involved the family court and as such the council was legally obliged to inform the father, so they did. What happened after that is hearsay but on the face of it no one seems to have done anything actually wrong and despite the headlines the mother is actually highlighting the loophole in the law , and probably rightly so.

In other words, nothing to see here

 

[Samsette]

Rotherham does manage to make the headlines, don't it!

 

[Pat Kennedy]

Nazir Afzal, who was North West chief crown prosecutor until recently, and who was responsible for successfully prosecuting the Rochdale grooming gang, was interviewed on BBC regional news this evening concerning this case.

He said that Rotherham Social services dept had no choice but to inform the child's father of his rights to have some input into his child's upbringing, but there was no suggestion that he was about to take advantage of this right.
He said that there was a loophole in the law that needed addressing, and it was right that the child's mother had raised the issue.
He is also on record as saying that too often white professionals' over-sensitivity to political correctness and fear of appearing racist could be blamed for situations such as this, and that common sense should always be applied.

So basically, most of the hoopla is, as usual, media generated hype designed to cause anger and alarm.

 

[barry john macauley]

Dammit! there's that racist word again.

 

[Engine Serang]

" He said that there was a loophole in the law that needed addressing,"

Bloody Brexit again,. When we are free of the ECJ our own hallowed Supreme Court will make short work of tightening up these loopholes. Bloody Bulgarians frigging about in Brussels.

 

[Ron Stringer]

English law is made, and may be amended as found necessary, by Parliament, in Westminster. Under English law, children have right of access to their parents. Parents have no such right of access to their children - parental access can be granted - or refused - by the child. Please note.

You cannot believe all that is printed by the UK Press. Please note.

 

[Duncan112]

English law is made, and may be amended as found necessary, by Parliament, in Westminster. Under English law, children have right of access to their parents. Parents have no such right of access to their children - parental access can be granted - or refused - by the child. Please note.

You cannot believe all that is printed by the UK Press. Please note.

And, if as seems likely in this case, the child is not old enough to give informed consent, who decides, the remaining parent or the social worker?

To be sure we have something of a mess here, it will be interesting to find (although I doubt we will) the contents of the conversation between the rapist and the person who advised that he may have a right to access.

 

[Davie M]

It will be interesting to see if Fathers for justice get involved
Davie

 

[Satanic Mechanic]

And, if as seems likely in this case, the child is not old enough to give informed consent, who decides, the remaining parent or the social worker?

To be sure we have something of a mess here, it will be interesting to find (although I doubt we will) the contents of the conversation between the rapist and the person who advised that he may have a right to access.

Not really its just a legal loophole that requires filling - pretty confident that the father was advised of his rights as per the law and that was it. The problem only became apparent when the child was taken into care and legally the father had to be informed. Let’s be honest its a pretty unfortunate and very sad Set of cir***stances, would probably be better all round if people just said “oh there’s a problem that needs solving’ rather than ‘all aboard the rage train’

 

[kevjacko]

No one has mentioned the bravery of the young mother who has waived her right to anonymity to highlight the issue. I saw her interviewed on TV yesterday, she came across as an extremely well balanced young woman, despite the ordeal life threw at her, and the resulting consequences. I have no doubt the actions, and approaches she is making are in the best interests of her young child. For that she should be commended.

 

[Davie M]

No one has mentioned the bravery of the young mother who has waived her right to anonymity to highlight the issue. I saw her interviewed on TV yesterday, she came across as an extremely well balanced young woman, despite the ordeal life threw at her, and the resulting consequences. I have no doubt the actions, and approaches she is making are in the best interests of her young child. For that she should be commended.

Could not agree more.

 

[Ken Wood]

Rotherham Council leader admitted that no on actually made a decision. They just went through a tick box exercise. If he had thought about it, the matter would have been dropped. Another prime example of managers not fit to manage.