Tuesday, November 18, 2008
THE father of tragic Baby P KIDNAPPED him in a desperate bid to protect the tot from his evil mum and boyfriend.
He refused to hand back the pale and bruised boy after a weekend visit because he feared for his safety.
But his ex-wife called in the police, who then ordered him to return screaming Baby P to the vile pair.
And now he has to live with the terrible knowledge that they TORTURED him to death.
“Baby P’s mum was a total slapper. She was really crude. I went to her house once and could see only filth and junk lying around. There was no carpet. It was dirty and smelly.
“But you could never criticise her in front of her husband. It was like he was the father figure and she was the spoiled little girl.
Which is probably a pretty accurate description.
I don't think there can be any real doubt that, at least in this instance, our "caring professions" society & its automatic assumption that children should always be held in the custody of the mother, directly caused P's torture & murder.
It is theoretically possible that, on balance, in some other cases, social workers overall do more good than harm & indeed it would be quite surprising if, in every field they were involved in they didn't. However, just as in real life, the default position should be that they have to prove their overall worth. The entire social work regime across the country should, now & in future, be subject to a fair cost benefit analysis & those who are useless, or worse, be removed.
Peter Hitchens has also written
Let us be plain. If one tenth part of the events that took place in Baby P’s mother’s house had happened in a middle-class home, the child would have been snatched away in minutes by haughty social workers.
In fact, if a middle-class Baby P had fallen off a swing and banged his head in a genuine accident, the selectively vigilant social-work squads would have been demanding his removal from the home.
That 2nd paragraph may be an exaggeration, but not by much.