My point is there has been a recent spate of postings on OTB about problems with social services in England.

There are problems with England's social services which shows that social services are bad so we shouldn't have them. (oops, Bithead, JohnG,and John Burgess beat me to it)

You might get legal protection for sex workers through here, only if they are a minority, lesbian or gay. All other sex workers would have to take their chances with the rest of the great unwashed.

Yea, just like in Nevada.

N.b. that while the UK has no real equivalent to our Bill of Rights, they're subject to European jurisdiction. I predict that unless this craziness is quickly corrected by embarrassed officials, that will be the avenue on which the mother finds any relief.

Really?

N.b. that while the UK has no real equivalent to our Bill of Rights, they're subject to European jurisdiction. I predict that unless this craziness is quickly corrected by embarrassed officials, that will be the avenue on which the mother finds any relief.

A few things--maybe like the Official Secrets Act--are worthy of emulation.

That's just about the most authoritarian, anti-liberty law we could possibly pass.

Your attitude well represents the current fear-centric mindset of the right.

You might get legal protection for sex workers through here, only if they are a minority, lesbian or gay. All other sex workers would have to take their chances with the rest of the great unwashed.

A few things--maybe like the Official Secrets Act--are worthy of emulation. And maybe legal protection of sex workers.

yes, by all means, let's avoid using England as an example of what not to do, particularly because the left is trying to push this in that direction.

So Bit, what is your plan for making social policy in America? See what the English do, then do the opposite?

I would think we are intelligent enough to look at the strengths and weaknesses of our own policies, and then act on that analysis, without worrying about what our friends across the Atlantic are up to. But why do that when we can engage in a little fear-mongering on the evils of socialized medicine? Yep, no child has ever been unjustly taken from it's parents here in tbe good-old USA! No sir.

The original post might have a bit more credibility if Steve had read the original story carefully enough to know that the 22 year in question actually was...

Is this what they mean by transparency?

I am not aware of a possible perversion of a policy here in the U.S. that advocates taking away babies to meet adoption goals. Of course if you have such evidence feel free to post a link to it.

Steve,

Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with my post. I did not mention adoption goals.

My point is there has been a recent spate of postings on OTB about problems with social services in England.

I suggest we let the Brits worry about their own problems and take a hard look at how we are doing right here at home. The right in this country is very good at pointing fingers overseas, an not very good at looking in the mirror.

Instead of resorting to misdirection, why not address the issue. If you think I am full of it, make your argument with a valid reply to my post...

It is apparently standard for there to be a "gag" order that does not allow the parents to speak about the proceedings -- standard and put into place a priori. That, frankly, is the most disturbing part -- how can the parents bring any pressure to bear in the case of a bad decision if they cannot take their case to the public?

From your link.

Similarly, however, the professionals involved – social workers, doctors and the police – should not be castigated for carrying out their statutory duties.

Yeah, after all they are just following orders right? And we all know that is a perfect defense against disgusting behavior.

Overall, I found your link somewhat helpful, but it still paints a rather disappointing picture. These kinds of things shoudn't be secret. Secrecy in these kind of things allows for abuse.

Anjin-san,

I am not aware of a possible perversion of a policy here in the U.S. that advocates taking away babies to meet adoption goals. Of course if you have such evidence feel free to post a link to it.

Still seems somewhat outrageous, mind you. But the recommendation does appear to come from doctors, rather than social workers.

Yes, but a doctor that hasn't met her, examined her, or even made it to the hearing. Stikes me as a bit more than a little disturbing.