Ireland to adopt “the best interest of the child” Dogma
Interesting article from Ireland.
At issue is a referendum that would redefine the role of government in helping children the government determines may be in need of assistance.
While it sounds to some like a praiseworthy goal, the analysts have doubts.
“The threshold of intervention “¦ reveals this new approach: “when the safety or welfare’ of children “is likely to be prejudicially affected’, the state can intervene,” they write, “and take various kinds of measures, from family support to compulsory adoption.”
The current standard allows government to intervene “when the parents fail.”
The Government can intervene when the parents fail. Who intervenes when Government (or familycaught$) fail?
MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 9:37 pm
Ah yes, this dogma is practised here in little old NZ. Although we’ve now seen through it and it is now referred to under it’s real name … State Sanctioned Child Abduction. Good Luck Ireland !
Comment by golfa — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 10:35 pm
Murray, if we look at the findings of the pike river enquiry, problems we see in the family court and IRD are systemic. There is No accountability in govt. We have total inefficiency – as is the norm in govt offices. We give them huge amounts of money and resources and still they cant get it right, Staff changes on a regular basis often transfers down to systems never being upgraded or improved until something DRASTIC happens – like pike river, the best of the best always gravitate to the Private sector, leaving the fleas to run amuck …. I have said before, I have read recommendation reports to govt dating back to 2000, which indicate all the failings and yet here we are 12 fking years later and still these problems persist. We have a govt minister in Dunn who is either totally ignorant of the way his department is running or he is deliberately supporting it, while lying to the public – which is it?
I think its time the realities of the Child Support scam, and the family court destruction of our children was exposed. It is by comparison, the same as what was allowed to occur at pike river…… difference being, Children and parents are being destroyed on a long term basis.
Comment by hornet — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 6:42 am
ireland going to start a child support scam are they?
Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 7:45 am
Roma in the UK
Comment by Down Under — Sat 22nd December 2012 @ 6:47 am
The Best Interests of the Child.
It’s like a magic solution to everything.
You can do anything with it.
You can destroy an innocent persons life, with it.
But I have been thinking as to it’s validity.
Why is the parents best interests, not counted.
Usurped with rights given to another person, the child.
If they ask to be a parent, but are denied.
Has a basic human right been taken away.
The right to be a parent.
What is it compared to.
The mother may be better than the father.
The court, excludes the father from equality.
In the child’s best interests.
What then if they have new children.
The mother, now a worse parent than the next father.
The mother now not getting equality.
In the child’s best interests.
And the father with a new mother.
The father, now a better parent than the next mother.
The father now getting equality, or better.
In the child’s best interests.
What then was the original case.
The father good enough, but judged not.
And the mother not good enough, but judged good.
Was it not a corrupt argument, all along.
What of who can provide, for the child.
And who cannot provide, for the child.
Without dependency.
An old standard, lost to common sense.
A person who has done nothing wrong.
Should not lose a basic human right.
One persons rights, is not more than another’s.
The interests of one, is not more than another’s.
The Best Interests of the Child.
Is a false argument.
To allow one persons right to be removed.
Is to also remove that right, from the child.
It to will one day be an adult.
With no rights, to be a parent.
…………….
Obviously a parent may not be able to provide necessary things.
Like a home.
Or being the full time earner, vs the full time parent.
Things at relationship breakdown, men experience disproportionately.
And best interests of the child becomes relevant.
That should be temporary, until the parent is set up again.
A new home, and more parenting friendly job.
Equality, variation by consent, then automatic.
Lawyers of course.
Love there feel good law.
They can make fortunes with it.
And do anything with it.
It looks like a very clever thing.
A Scam.
Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 16th September 2021 @ 10:17 pm