Rotherham Council

[Pubey]

Merit, or lack thereof, cannot be based on any one thing or criteria. It's certainly not based on any political affiliation.

Whichever way you dress it up this decision is plainly wrong. And that's just my opinion based on the interview given by the woman who heads up the department that took it.

Basing a decision on 'merit' implies that 'merit' is your criteria. If that's the case then fine, but it nears a clear definition so that we can ensure it's being achieved, and also to avoid issues. I completely agree that it's multifaceted and so 'political affiliation' shouldn't be the only consideration. However weight should be given to it IF there are concerns for the safety and wellbeing of a child that can be clearly drawn from a particular political affiliation. I agree that it seems unlikely that it'll ever come up where the political affiliation is the deal-breaker and switches a yes to a no, or vice-versa. However Rotherham have made that decision. It seems like the spokesperson was wrong in saying it was the only factor, it was more likely the determining factor.

I agree that the decision was wrong as well.

 

[Bielzibubz]

I take your point Pubes. My comment about political affiliation not being a criteria was a bit of a generalization. You clearly can't put a colored child with adults with known affiliations to lets say the BNP party. No doubt the department and Ms Thacker did in some way have the children's best interest at heart. Unfortunately, I believe the children's best interests in this case are being clouded by well intentioned individuals that also have one eye permanently looking over their collective shoulders for someone to come along and blame them for some perceived wrongdoing.

 

[Pubey]

I take your point Pubes. My comment about political affiliation not being a criteria was a bit of a generalization. You clearly can't put a colored child with adults with known affiliations to lets say the BNP party. No doubt the department and Ms Thacker did in some way have the children's best interest at heart. Unfortunately, I believe the children's best interests in this case are being clouded by well intentioned individuals that also have one eye permanently looking over their collective shoulders for someone to come along and blame them for some perceived wrongdoing.

Absolutely, like the court's previous criticism that they weren't taking into account the ethnic needs of the children in their care. It sounds like the kind of job or situation where you can't really win.

 

[hockleyeast1964]

Just a thought,when fostering can you ask for a white child of british parents?Or would you classed as rascist?If not that's the problem solved.All this criteria that has to be reached is stopping decent people foster kids who want a good home.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Just a thought,when fostering can you ask for a white child of british parents?Or would you classed as rascist?If not that's the problem solved.All this criteria that has to be reached is stopping decent people foster kids who want a good home.

I certainly know of a white couple, who turned down the chance to foster a black child, on the basis that in the rural area where they lived, there were no other black children living there.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I must say I was surprised to find out the kids are of Eastern European parents, I would have thought that members of UKIP would have issues themselves with that. I always hope that people who vote for UKIP do so for economic reasons but a certain Mr Cameron refered to the party as racist and has always refused to take that comment back.

 

[A Century United]

I must say I was surprised to find out the kids are of Eastern European parents, I would have thought that members of UKIP would have issues themselves with that. I always hope that people who vote for UKIP do so for economic reasons but a certain Mr Cameron refered to the party as racist and has always refused to take that comment back.

Why? On the radio today they made the point that they have an opinion on immigration as it currently stands, not on the the individual immigrants, and they saw the kids as kids needing stability and a home, nothing more.

 

[Crawliano]

35000 foster parents 80000 kids in need of placing. So what do you do? Studio 54 style selection processes. Next up, no placing because you own Primark jeans or something.

*****

 

[londonblue]

35000 foster parents 80000 kids in need of placing. So what do you do? Studio 54 style selection processes. Next up, no placing because you own Primark jeans or something.
*****

That would do it for me!

Being serious, this isn't about PC gone mad as most "PC" type people would also think this is ridiculous (as proved on this thread). This was about political point scoring and covering the council's arses. Nothing more, and they have got it spectacularly wrong.

 

[Jedi Shrimper]

Last Week: UKIP outraged by UKIP supporting foster parents being refused permission to foster some kids due to their politics.

This Week: UKIP state gay adoption is child abuse.

They're hypocrites. Discussion over.

 

[TrueBlue]

Last Week: UKIP outraged by UKIP supporting foster parents being refused permission to foster some kids due to their politics.

This Week: UKIP state gay adoption is child abuse.

They're hypocrites. Discussion over.

Gays are wrong though!!!!!

 

[Bielzibubz]

Homophobia is wrong though!!!!!!

 

[hockleyeast1964]

I have to agree with Scott ,gay adoption is just wrong,if you are a hetrosexual child you should be brought up in a normal family enviroment.They may be nice people but i believe the child will have serious issues as they grow up. That's just my opinion,when a council stops a loving couple fostering because of who they vote for something is very wrong.

 

[Pubey]

I have to agree with Scott ,gay adoption is just wrong,if you are a hetrosexual child you should be brought up in a normal family enviroment.They may be nice people but i believe the child will have serious issues as they grow up. That's just my opinion,when a council stops a loving couple fostering because of who they vote for something is very wrong.

And what is a normal family environment? You can foster when single, divorced, widowed etc. Why is being brought up in a safe and loving environment by a gay couple wrong, or 'not normal'?

 

[hockleyeast1964]

I define normal as being statistically the vast majority of couples ,how would you define normal?

 

[Pubey]

I define normal as being statistically the vast majority of couples ,how would you define normal?

If you're purely basing it on sexual orientation then you're right, however being a loving and caring and appropriate foster home is more than just sexual orientation. Also, foster familes aren't 'normal' - they have to be suitably equipped with the difficulties that come with fostering, the constant attachment and then dis-attachment to children as they move in and out of care, the challenges of bring up other children alongside, as well as the time and effort and forgone wages etc etc. I'd argue that most families wouldn't be able to be foster families, and so why are we looking for these 'normal' people.

Also, I don't believe gay people choose to be gay, and so why should they be discriminated against if they can show that they'll be a good foster home? Gay people, of all people, will know that you can't force 'gayness/straightness' down someone's throat (ooh er) but instead it's about supporting people as they grow up and learn about themselves. Gay people are a minority in society, and so will inevitably be a minority in terms of foster homes. However many children are brought up by gay parents, and shouldn't they be allowed to bring up foster children?

 

[MK Shrimper]

I define normal as being statistically the vast majority of couples ,how would you define normal?

A kid needs love to thrive, does it matter if he/she gets it from a hetereosexual or homosexual couple? Maybe if the kid grows up with gay parents they'll see that as the norm, as stop going all knee-jerk outraged Daily Mail when they see a gay couple with a child.

And stats lie....the population of the UK has 1.999999 legs. Do you know anyone with .999999 of a leg?

 

[Bielzibubz]

I have to agree with Scott ,gay adoption is just wrong,if you are a hetrosexual child you should be brought up in a normal family enviroment.They may be nice people but i believe the child will have serious issues as they grow up. That's just my opinion,when a council stops a loving couple fostering because of who they vote for something is very wrong.

Scott didn't mention gay adoption, the previous poster did. Scott meant gay's in general and I meant homophobia in general.

 

[hockleyeast1964]

A kid needs love to thrive, does it matter if he/she gets it from a hetereosexual or homosexual couple? Maybe if the kid grows up with gay parents they'll see that as the norm, as stop going all knee-jerk outraged Daily Mail when they see a gay couple with a child.

And stats lie....the population of the UK has 1.999999 legs. Do you know anyone with .999999 of a leg?

It's fine to say you were wrong re normal:winking: Anyway COME ON YOU BLUES!

 

[londonblue]

A kid needs love to thrive, does it matter if he/she gets it from a hetereosexual or homosexual couple? Maybe if the kid grows up with gay parents they'll see that as the norm, as stop going all knee-jerk outraged Daily Mail when they see a gay couple with a child.

And stats lie....the population of the UK has 1.999999 legs. Do you know anyone with .999999 of a leg?

Ryan Leonard by all accounts. Haven't they just found out he has one leg longer than the other?