British couple have foster children removed from their care due to their political party affiliation
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 18:00
VIEWED: 4924
PAGE 1 of 4
Quote:
A couple have had three foster children removed from their care because they belong to the UK Independence Party.
Rotherham Borough Council said the children were "not indigenous white British" and that it had concerns about UKIP's stance on immigration.
It said it had to consider the "needs of the children longer term".
The unnamed couple told the Daily Telegraph social workers had accused them of belonging to a "racist party". UKIP said it was an appalling decision.
Rotherham Borough Council's Strategic Director of Children and Young People's Services, Joyce Thacker, told the BBC that her decision was influenced by UKIP's immigration policy, which she said calls for the end of the "active promotion of multiculturalism".
UKIP's immigration policy states the party wants an "end [to] the active promotion of the doctrine of multiculturalism by local and national government", and urges Britain to leave the European Union (EU).
The Labour Party has called for an investigation into the Labour-run council's decision, after claims from UKIP it could have been politically motivated.
'Dumbfounded'
The couple, who have been approved foster parents for seven years, were eight weeks into the placement when they were approached by social workers about their membership of the party.
The wife told the Daily Telegraph: "I was dumbfounded. Then my question to both of them was, 'What has UKIP got to do with having the children removed?'
"Then one of them said, 'Well, UKIP have got racist policies.' The implication was that we were racist. [The social worker] said UKIP does not like European people and wants them all out of the country to be returned to their own countries."
The paper says the woman denied she was racist but the children were taken away by the end of the week.
She said the social worker told her: "We would not have placed these children with you had we known you were members of UKIP because it wouldn't have been the right cultural match."
The couple said they had been "stigmatised and slandered".
Ms Thacker said she did not regret the decision, which was reached after "a lot of soul searching".
"These children are not UK children and we were not aware of the foster parents having strong political views. There are some strong views in the UKIP party and we have to think of the future of the children."
She added during an interview with BBC Radio 4's Today: "I have to look at the children's cultural and ethnic needs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20474120
Most of the comments following the BBC article think this is wrong, and I tend to agree.
Would anyone here feel comfortable denying Tea Party Republicans or Socialist Party USA members the right to foster children? If so, why?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How revolting!
In Amerika, we treat 3rd parties right...we arrest them!
http://rt.com/usa/news/police-jill-stein-debate-589/
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9700387/Council-poised-f
or-U-turn-after-taking-foster-children-away-from-UKIP-members.html
Commies don't like investigative reporting on their pedophile slave rackets, so they usually just kill them.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Would anyone here feel comfortable denying Tea Party Republicans or Socialist Party USA members the right to foster children? If so, why?
I honestly think many here would applaud denying TEA party parents the right to foster children.
However, if they were GAY TEA party parents, they might have to think for second on that one.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Would anyone here feel comfortable denying Tea Party Republicans or Socialist Party USA members the right to foster children?
You're missing some of the point here. It's not treating some political views as unacceptable, it's saying those with certain strong political views should not be matched with certain children. An extreme example would be disallowing a card-carrying KKK family to foster black kids. UKIP is quite a right-wing, nationalistic, anti-immigration party. And the children were 'non-indigenous white British'. I still think the calculation was wrong, especially if there were no reasons to think that after 8 weeks the placement was encountering difficulties, but I can understand the reasoning.
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I honestly think many here would applaud denying TEA party parents the right to foster children.
That's a very hysterical statement.
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
In response to your question Geezer I would say no, if the parents haven't done anything that would endanger the kids then they shouldn't be denied. In this situation I might be able to understand what happened though, I can't say blatently that I support the decision without more info, but I think I understand it.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:Quote:
I honestly think many here would applaud denying TEA party parents the right to foster children.
That's a very hysterical statement.
It's not personal. It's just war.
Hello,
It's values projection.
--Anthony
Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:Quote:
I honestly think many here would applaud denying TEA party parents the right to foster children.
That's a very hysterical statement.
It's not personal. It's just war.
It's a sober statement, based on the hysterical views of some have, against the TEA party supporters, displayed here, and by some hardened, radical socialists political figures in this country.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Obviously the Tea Party is plenty disliked, here and elsewhere. But the question is whether or not people would welcome authoritarian penalties against Tea Party members, such as banning them from fostering children.
Can you provide quotes of people here promoting this or similar measures against the Tea Party?
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME