Never sign any documents or undertakings, and never agree that the "thresholds" of abuse or neglect have been reached. If your solicitor "agreed the thresholds" on your behalf this amounted to an admission that you abused or neglected your child or put it at risk. Make it clear on appeal that you did NOT agree to this at all but were prevented from saying so in court.
You are entitled to receive a judgement so that if you wish to appeal or ask for a discharge of an interim care order, a final care order, or an adoption placement, you have a valid excuse for the delay. You state that you are "out of time" simply because you have been refused a judgement and therefore cannot know the grounds against which you are appealing.
You do not suffer from a "personality disorder" just because you distrust social workers as many distinguished MPs, journalists, and broadcasters think the same as you but do not face the same accusation!
Emotional abuse= expecting too much of your child, or treating the child with contempt and without love. This can and should be disputed if you apply the legal definition specified later in this section. Usually the accusation of "risk of emotional abuse" is so vague that it cannot possibly be covered by the official definition given by the Department of Health.
Social Workers have a statutory duty to try and keep families together not split them up, so they should be asked in court just what attempts they made to keep YOUR family together before taking the baby or the children.
Article 8: Right to Respect for Private and Family Life
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
Article 8 guarantees respect for four things: a person’s private life, family life, home and correspondence.
This guarantee applies also to the rights of grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins to remain in contact with each other contrary to the forced adoption of a child by adopters whose names and locations are kept secret.
You MUST be allowed to speak in court, say all you want to say, call all witnesses you want and make all the points and arguments you want to make. Sack any solicitor or barrister that refuses you these very elementary legal rights OR worse still who advises you to surrender and go along with everything the social services demand. You do not need a lawyer to earn easy money by arranging your surrender.
QUOTE ARTICLE 6 of the HUMAN RIGHTS ACT.
ARTICLE 6 RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL
1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.
2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:
(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;
(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;
(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;
(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.
Ask this question of every social worker in the witness box.
The various Children Acts all say that every effort should be made to keep children with their birth families.
Could you please describe in detail any efforts you made to keep my child with me?
If you are represented INSIST that your representative promises to ask you the following question when you are in the witness box.
Do you have anything you would like to say to the court ?
This question makes sure that you have a chance to say everything you like and the opportunity to put across all the important points that would otherwise get left out!
Remember first of all that if children reach the age of 16 they cannot in practical terms be stopped if they leave care even though the order says "until 18".(This limit only refers to financial responsibility) Social workers have no power to PHYSICALLY force a return to care and no court has ever enforced a return to care until 18 in these circumstances.
If social workers call the police to say a young person of ANY age is missing and they believe there is a danger of significant harm they can go to court for a recovery order and the police can take that person back temporarily. They have no power however to stop an immediate return to the parent's home next day and after a few days of going backwards and forwards will nearly always give up ! Please note that police sometimes claim that they have a warrant or have authority but have no need to show any documents to support this!
BUT read section 50,subsection 8 of the children Act .They DO have to show you written authority.
8) Where a person is authorised as mentioned in subsection (7)(c)—
(a) the authorisation shall identify the recovery order; and
(b) any person claiming to be so authorised shall, if asked to do so, produce some duly authenticated document showing that he is so authorised
If children are under 16 and over 12 they are often classified as "young persons" and even when in care they cannot be prevented from visiting parents as social workers would risk charges of assault and false imprisonment if physical force was used to stop them.
Children of all ages even those under 12 aged 7 or 8 for example can go to any phone.
If there is no court order section 34 forbidding contact they can always meet you for an afternoon or so and it would be an assault for social workers to physically stop them.
The important thing is firstly to keep in touch with your children telling them you still love them and are fighting the wicked social workers who kidnapped them. (social workers have absolutely NO legal right to censor your conversation)
You should then take positive steps to recover them and welcome them back home.
Please note that if the social services take your baby or very young child for no very good reason other than for "risk of emotional abuse"
or some similar vague notion then they are probably just trying to meet their adoption targets and your human rights have certainly been infringed .
The decision by the European court of human rights (p,c,and s versus United Kingdom) was that the action of the UK in taking a baby at birth from a mother that had never been accused of harming it was "draconian" and merited a large fine and damages to the mother.
If the social services take your newborn baby QUOTE THIS CASE IN COURT as a reason for its return to your care. Make it clear that you will appeal on a point of law and if that fails go to the European Court of Human Rights if the judge ignores this case and rules against you.
Case (see paragraphs 133,137,and 138)
Quoting Para 133. The Court concludes that the draconian step of removing S. from her mother shortly after birth was not supported by relevant and sufficient reasons and that it cannot be regarded as having been necessary in a democratic society for the purpose of safeguarding S. There has therefore been, in that respect, a breach of the applicant parents' rights under Article 8 of the Convention.
*In the matter of unborn baby M; R (on the application of X and another) v Gloucestershire County Council.
Citation: BLD 160403280;  EWHC 850 (Admin).
Hearing Date: 15 April 2003
Court: Administrative Court.
Judge: Munby J.
"Per curiam. If the state, in the guise of a local authority, seeks to remove a baby from his parents at a time when its case against the parents has not yet even been established, then the very least the state can do is to make generous arrangements for contact, those arrangements being driven by the needs of the family and not stunted by lack of resources.
Typically, if this is what the parents want, one will be looking to contact most days of the week and for lengthy periods.
Local authorities also had to be sensitive to the wishes of a mother who wants to breast-feed, and should make suitable arrangements to enable her to do so, and not merely to bottle- feed expressed breast milk. Nothing less would meet the imperative demands of the European Convention on Human Rights."