[Judicial child snatching.]

See: Secrecy  Shaken Baby Syndrome  Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy

Charles Pragnell   Jack Frost

Camilla Cavendish

[2009 July 17] A moving response to our family justice campaign by Camilla Cavendish

[2009 July] Is the state guilty of child kidnap? One of the most disturbing features of life in modern Britain has been the extraordinary powers given to social workers to seize children from their parents, too often – when those powers are abused – supported by the police and family courts. What makes this still more alarming is the legal bar on reporting these episodes, supposedly to protect the children, which again too often works to protect the social workers themselves at the expense of the children. John Hemming MP said: "Don't protest about Children's Services or the state will section you and silence you. What I find particularly concerning about this article is the way in which the father concerned was silenced as a result of being wrongly sectioned."

[2008 July 22] Times wins ruling over secrecy of family court  The boy’s stepfather was sent to prison for 16 months for helping the mother to remove him from care and flee abroad. She has since had another baby, the couple’s first child. The stepfather has been released from prison but is forbidden to contact his wife.

[2008 July 9] Family justice: your word against theirs by Camilla Cavendish  Two years ago, a group of MPs with falsely accused constituents asked the Government how many people nationally were accused of having MSbP. The Government replied that it did not collect such data - even though Department of Health guidelines tell charity workers, nursery nurses, teachers and even pharmacists to look out for the condition.

[2008 July 7] Family courts: the hidden untouchables by Camilla Cavendish  It took a year for the police to interview Mason under caution, and another year for her to be tried. During that time her access to her children was tightly curtailed. At worst she was allowed only an hour and a half with them once a month. Eventually a jury unanimously found her not guilty of causing grevious bodily harm. But social workers stuck to their own “guilty” verdict. They pressed on and served adoption papers. It took another two years for her to get two of her children back, with the help of the doctor who had made the original diagnosis. But the middle child had been allowed to see so little of her that he is likely to be adopted rather than returned.

[2008 July 6 ] Family justice: the secret state that steals our children by Camilla Cavendish   She described a world where courts need no criminal conviction to remove your child, only the word of a psychiatrist or doctor, and can deny you the chance to call any expert in your defence. A world that uses the “welfare of the child” to gag you from discussing your case. Where even if you prove yourself innocent on appeal, your children may already have been adopted: in which case you will never be allowed to contact them again. A world which had treated her so badly, this rather pretty and utterly normal young woman, that she was sincerely thanking me just for listening. .........Some of these children were being told that they were in care because their parents no longer wanted them. As soon as a care order is made, the local authority controls all communications between parents and children. In many cases contact is gradually reduced, sometimes from a few hours a week to an hour or so a month, at which point social workers can return to court and claim that the child no longer has a strong bond with his family. Such tactics are unbearable.