Page 2 of 3
Re: Baby P's delightful family
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 5:59 pm
by JonnyHungwell
Aaagh! it was stolen by the ........................

Re: Baby P's delightful family
Posted: Mon May 04, 2009 8:24 am
by Robches
One trouble with social workers is that they are often well meaning women who try and empathise with their "clients", who take the piss out of them with impunity. We need social workers who are more in the Gene Hunt mould: "touch that kid and I'll break your fingers". Scum like this are really not frightened about yet another case conference are they?
Of course, this will never happen, which is why children like Baby P will continue to be killed. Reports will be written. lessons will be learned, but defenceless children will still be killed by scum who need a damnded good kicking.
Re: Baby P's delightful family
Posted: Mon May 04, 2009 9:03 am
by spider
What you've got to remember is that they're not really bothered if, or when, a kid is taken off them.
They can just replace it again with another within about nine months.
The taxpayer ends up paying the care bill for the child that's been removed from them and the circle begins all over again.
I'd put money on the fact that within months of Baby P's mother getting out of clink she'll be up the duff again.
This will go on and on until the state is allowed to sterilise these people, or better still they aren't allowed release from jail until they have been sterilised.
Re: Baby P's delightful family
Posted: Mon May 04, 2009 10:06 am
by spider
Point I'm trying to make is that it's not the social workers fault.
How can they, or anyone else say "this must never be allowed to happen again", when we still allow these people to breed ?
Re: Baby P's delightful family
Posted: Mon May 04, 2009 12:16 pm
by Jonone
What about sterilisation for people who work in investment banking ?