I hope the protest went well today.
I wish to create a data-base of terms and phrases the CYFSterhood have trotted out in the past.
Such phrases as ‘Codependent’, ‘passive-aggressive abuser’, ‘potentially violent,’ ‘socio-path’, ‘pornofile’, ‘alcohol dependent’, ‘alcohol abuser’, ‘feotal alcohol syndrome,’ ’emotional dependence syndrome,’ ‘can’t accept he’s a scum-sucking male syndrome’, and so on.
It would be useful if you could also include the context in which the CYFSterhood used the phrase(s) to damn you in Court. It would be doubly useful if you could include any (or the probable lack of…) any evidence substantiating the claims of the CYFSterhood.
The object of the exercise is to gather sufficient profiles which I will keep on firing at various in authority, and the media, till the last straw arrives to break the camel’s back.
And with each ‘firing’ I will be including my one simple request. Ergo, that the Family Court operates at a level of proof at least in accord with the Civil Court (about 80% of the tests used by the Criminal Court).
Thus an accusative spouse must have ‘an amount’ of proof before he/she can assert danger to a child in a way which will be acceptable to the Court, can not have a spouse removed from a home by Police until satisfactory proof is offered, and can have the FC indulge him/her with primary care-giver status until he/she has proven the other party is demonstrably unfit.
Our judicial system has worked well since the 13th Century and the institution of the Magna Carter. I see no reason why the FC should be free to operate outside the law of proof which has proven so effective for the previous 700 years.
Innocent till PROVEN guilty must be the test returned to the FC.
For these vile people to assert that it is better to hurt/destroy ten men and dozens of children, sundry grand-parents and care-givers, just in case the system misses one child who is actually in danger, is an affront to civilisation.
This is ducking-stool justice and simply must be stopped.
Only we can stop it. But we have to have the will and courage to be counted.
Please, send the data to firstname.lastname@example.org
Lastly, one correspondent asserted that ‘many’ ex-CFYS workers are ‘ex’ because of the vileness they witnessed.
Anyone got any ideas about how we can contact a few of these abviously decent folk and get them to state what they know about the CYFSterhood?