Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sep 2014 - #67

[Travelling Wilbury]

If you google "foster child removed" you will see there are many reasons why a foster child may be removed.

A foster child was removed because they weren't of the same heritage as their foster parents, another was removed because the foster parents were moving away from the local area and away from the relative agency, another was removed because the child's conduct was unmanageable.

I believe it was stated in MSM that BS' kincare children were removed due to high publicity and pending charges against BS.

I imagine the child in question was removed for similar reasons, but who knows?

The child has rights that are outlined for them in a booklet (there are two booklets designed for foster children, according to age range and level of understanding, that explain to them their rights, their responsibilities, and who they can speak with).

I doubt we will ever know the ins and outs of the AVO - and speculation will run rife - because the child is (presumably) a foster child and therefore the child's privacy is protected by the law.

imo

IMO at the end of the day, stories will undoubtedly run rife after the fact the FFP’s have had 2 assault charges, an AVO and a child go missing presumed deceased under their care.

People will also be asking a lot of questions of FACS too, considering it’s a govt organisation, and governments have shown in history of trying to dodge issues involving govt departments shown in a negative light

 

[FromGermany1]

If you google "foster child removed" you will see there are many reasons why a foster child may be removed.

A foster child was removed because they weren't of the same heritage as their foster parents, another was removed because the foster parents were moving away from the local area and away from the relative agency, another was removed because the child's conduct was unmanageable.

I believe it was stated in MSM that BS' kincare children were removed due to high publicity and pending charges against BS.

I imagine the child in question was removed for similar reasons, but who knows?

The child has rights that are outlined for them in a booklet (there are two booklets designed for foster children, according to age range and level of understanding, that explain to them their rights, their responsibilities, and who they can speak with).

I doubt we will ever know the ins and outs of the AVO - and speculation will run rife - because the child is (presumably) a foster child and therefore the child's privacy is protected by the law.

imo

The foster children are protected, which is to agree with 100% of course! BUT that the foster carers are simultaneously protected also because of these laws, seems to be an undeserved advantage, when it comes to neglect/abuse or other "wrongdoing", I think. In the end it is again to the disadvantage of the foster children, as if they weren't punished enough already through their sad bio. IMO

O/T
May I proudly tell you:
My first (since birth) fostered, then adopted niece yesterday managed to get her exams as an official teacher!

 

[SouthAussie]

The foster children are protected, which is to agree with 100% of course! BUT that the foster carers are simultaneously protected also because of these laws, seems to be an undeserved advantage, when it comes to neglect/abuse or other "wrongdoing", I think. In the end it is again to the disadvantage of the foster children, as if they weren't punished enough already through their sad bio. IMO

O/T
May I proudly tell you:
My first (since birth) fostered, then adopted niece yesterday managed to get her exams as an official teacher!

I don't think that is true, though.
When Tiahleigh was murdered by her foster father in Qld, the foster family were named.
In the historical cases of abuse of foster children that have been successfully proven in court, the offenders and institutions have been named.

The point being that they cannot be named until it is proven in a court of law that the foster parents/foster family did something criminal.

Unfortunately, foster parents are more than twice as likely (over biological parents) to be accused of something by a child in their care. Whether it is true or not.

I am not saying that this is a false accusation (all children should be heard), but we know so little about the charges, and we have heard that there is acrimony between the families. Let's see how it gets through the court before we make assumptions. imo


These false accusations may stem from a variety of ways.

• First of all, those foster children who have come from environments of abuse and neglect may not recognize that the home and environment you are providing is a safe and stable one.
• The abuse and neglect they felt, themselves, may be all that they know, and simply make an allegation against you unknowingly, or unwillingly, due to past experiences.
• Other foster children, coming from the same type of environment, may make an allegation against a foster parent in the hope of leaving your home and being able to return to their own biological family.
• Other children may make an allegation as an attempt at distancing themselves emotionally from you, and setting up an emotional barrier or wall between themselves and foster families.
• Finally, some foster children may make an accusation of abuse or neglect in an attempt at gaining revenge on either the foster family or the biological family.

How Foster Parents Can Protect Themselves | Foster Focus

(Well done to your adopted niece! )

 

[iiiii's]

I don't think that is true, though.
When Tiahleigh was murdered by her foster father in Qld, the foster family were named.
In the historical cases of abuse of foster children that have been successfully proven in court, the offenders and institutions have been named.

The point being that they cannot be named until it is proven in a court of law that the foster parents/foster family did something criminal.

Unfortunately, foster parents are more than twice as likely (over biological parents) to be accused of something by a child in their care. Whether it is true or not.

I am not saying that this is a false accusation (all children should be heard), but we know so little about the charges, and we have heard that there is acrimony between the families. Let's see how it gets through the court before we make assumptions. imo


These false accusations may stem from a variety of ways.

• First of all, those foster children who have come from environments of abuse and neglect may not recognize that the home and environment you are providing is a safe and stable one.
• The abuse and neglect they felt, themselves, may be all that they know, and simply make an allegation against you unknowingly, or unwillingly, due to past experiences.
• Other foster children, coming from the same type of environment, may make an allegation against a foster parent in the hope of leaving your home and being able to return to their own biological family.
• Other children may make an allegation as an attempt at distancing themselves emotionally from you, and setting up an emotional barrier or wall between themselves and foster families.
• Finally, some foster children may make an accusation of abuse or neglect in an attempt at gaining revenge on either the foster family or the biological family.

How Foster Parents Can Protect Themselves | Foster Focus

(Well done to your adopted niece! )

Interesting link, especially the part about supervision.

 

[iiiii's]

I don't think that is true, though.
When Tiahleigh was murdered by her foster father in Qld, the foster family were named.
In the historical cases of abuse of foster children that have been successfully proven in court, the offenders and institutions have been named.

The point being that they cannot be named until it is proven in a court of law that the foster parents/foster family did something criminal.

Unfortunately, foster parents are more than twice as likely (over biological parents) to be accused of something by a child in their care. Whether it is true or not.

I am not saying that this is a false accusation (all children should be heard), but we know so little about the charges, and we have heard that there is acrimony between the families. Let's see how it gets through the court before we make assumptions. imo


These false accusations may stem from a variety of ways.

• First of all, those foster children who have come from environments of abuse and neglect may not recognize that the home and environment you are providing is a safe and stable one.
• The abuse and neglect they felt, themselves, may be all that they know, and simply make an allegation against you unknowingly, or unwillingly, due to past experiences.
• Other foster children, coming from the same type of environment, may make an allegation against a foster parent in the hope of leaving your home and being able to return to their own biological family.
• Other children may make an allegation as an attempt at distancing themselves emotionally from you, and setting up an emotional barrier or wall between themselves and foster families.
• Finally, some foster children may make an accusation of abuse or neglect in an attempt at gaining revenge on either the foster family or the biological family.

How Foster Parents Can Protect Themselves | Foster Focus

(Well done to your adopted niece! )

Also the 1st paragraph of the link, I find disturbing. Most claims are found to be untrue or unsubstantiated according to the link. By who? And yet, how many times have we heard adults, who were children in foster care, say their complaints of abuse and neglect were ignored or they were labelled liars. This forum is doing my head in. I have seen on this thread, huge debate about how children should be believed when it came to CSA, and now I am seeing arguments to back up why foster children might be a special breed who should not be believed. In the case of the FP's, the nsw police, over time have decided to press common assault charges. Something has occurred if FFC is wanting her charges heard under the mental health act and the MFC was considering his options about having his heard under the same act and then deciding not to. If the article about the FP's being estranged is to be believed, it is possible he did not want his heard under the act so that if he is found not guilty, he may be able to reconcile having care for the alleged child victim in this incident. This action by the police may mean the child victim has essentially lost her family. Did FACS help bring these complaints to the police attention? If not, why not? So many questions. MOO

 

[FromGermany1]

Something has occurred if FFC is wanting her charges heard under the mental health act and the MFC was considering his options about having his heard under the same act and then deciding not to.

I don't understand quite well probably. Either I have mental issues or I don't have any. Can I choose, if I have any, each for my own benefit? Kind of subtleties, that only lawyers know?

 

[SouthAussie]

Also the 1st paragraph of the link, I find disturbing. Most claims are found to be untrue or unsubstantiated according to the link. By who?

"According to the N.C. Division of Social Services (2002) ..... "
False Allegations: One Foster Parent's Story

It is a US study. You might find this ^^^ article more to your taste, as it cites references. I was unable to find an Aussie study.
We have read and discussed a lot on this forum about the foster care system, especially with the removal of BS' kincare children, and in determining what steps were taken before William was removed.

The article also cites that of all child abuse cases (in 1999), 1.5% were children in 'substitute care' - which includes foster care, residential care, and childcare.

Of course the children should be believed, and then their allegations investigated, taken to court, with the court giving a determination. I don't think anyone has said otherwise.

Some of us like to look at the entire picture, especially when there has been stated discord between the families.

imo
.

 

[iiiii's]

"According to the N.C. Division of Social Services (2002) ..... "
False Allegations: One Foster Parent's Story

It is a US study. You might find this ^^^ article more to your taste, as it cites references. I was unable to find an Aussie study.
We have read and discussed a lot on this forum about the foster care system, especially with the removal of BS' kincare children, and in determining what steps were taken before William was removed.

The article also cites that of all child abuse cases (in 1999), 1.5% were children in 'substitute care' - which includes foster care, residential care, and childcare.

Of course the children should be believed, and then their allegations investigated, taken to court, with the court giving a determination. I don't think anyone has said otherwise.

Some of us like to look at the entire picture, especially when there has been stated discord between the families.

imo
.

Yes, well in this instance, investigations were made by the police and possibly FACS and they determined that there is a case to be answered to in this situation. Obviously the investigation has been ongoing and a further charge is there to answer for. Therefore, the citing of these articles at present seems to me to be irrelevant to the current situation and could be perceived as prematurely casting doubt upon a potential child victim's claims, assuming that she is a foster child. Also, the 1.5 % stat could also be for the following reason, that there are far less children in care than a normal home setting and the complaints raised by these children may be heard with more discrimination due to their status than other children. Moo

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes, well in this instance, investigations were made by the police and possibly FACS and they determined that there is a case to be answered to in this situation. Obviously the investigation has been ongoing and a further charge is there to answer for. Therefore, the citing of these articles at present seems to me to be irrelevant to the current situation and could be perceived as prematurely casting doubt upon a potential child victim's claims, assuming that she is a foster child. Moo

Of course, we are all entitled to our opinions.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

So many questions, but also red flags.
There may be a variety of reasons foster children want to leave the foster family and having known some foster kids quite well from a friend who fosters them they come from very bad family upbringings and experiences. But to be charged by police and have an AVO is a considerable step further. If the kids were acting up to get out it would no doubt be investigated and found out pretty quick. But this is going to court and one of the defendants using the mental health card.
If it’s all a misunderstanding, say so, prove it and don’t stuff around with tactical legal BS. It’s a child’s life and they were supposed to be caring for them.
The longer this saga drags on and people insist on listing potential excuses, reasons, theories etc on why they’re not at fault is quite frankly frustrating and tiresome. Like I said in a previous post, these carers have lost children in their care due to an assault (no matter to what extent), and had another child go missing. The red flags continue to rack up - all IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

But this is going to court and one of the defendants using the mental health card.

Maybe take a look at what a Mental Health defence entails. I believe it means the person is ordered into treatment - if found liable.

I think (if this case isn't so severe, as seems to be stated by the magistrate) a fine is most likely the other outcome for the defendant - should the defendant be found liable - and isn't relying on the Mental Health Act.


Common Assault is an offence under section 61 of the Crimes Act 1900 which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years in prison and/or a fine of $5,500.
Common Assault | Section 61 Crimes Act 1900 NSW


Under the current law, people who are found 'not guilty by reason of mental illness' may be detained indefinitely, or until the court is satisfied that members of the public will not be harmed by their release
The potential for indefinite detention has arguably resulted in people being deterred from using the defence. In 2011/2012, for example, there were only 29 findings of ‘not guilty by reason of mental illness.’

The new recommendations are much more progressive, and propose a period of treatment of the mentally ill person, after which attempts would be made to reintegrate them into the community.
The Mental Illness Defence in Criminal Trials | NSW Courts.

 

[Jaded325594]

Also the 1st paragraph of the link, I find disturbing. Most claims are found to be untrue or unsubstantiated according to the link. By who? And yet, how many times have we heard adults, who were children in foster care, say their complaints of abuse and neglect were ignored or they were labelled liars. This forum is doing my head in. I have seen on this thread, huge debate about how children should be believed when it came to CSA, and now I am seeing arguments to back up why foster children might be a special breed who should not be believed. In the case of the FP's, the nsw police, over time have decided to press common assault charges. Something has occurred if FFC is wanting her charges heard under the mental health act and the MFC was considering his options about having his heard under the same act and then deciding not to. If the article about the FP's being estranged is to be believed, it is possible he did not want his heard under the act so that if he is found not guilty, he may be able to reconcile having care for the alleged child victim in this incident. This action by the police may mean the child victim has essentially lost her family. Did FACS help bring these complaints to the police attention? If not, why not? So many questions. MOO

Thank you! Yes! Seems we haven't learnt much from history, it's very sad.

 

[drsleuth]

So many questions, but also red flags.
There may be a variety of reasons foster children want to leave the foster family and having known some foster kids quite well from a friend who fosters them they come from very bad family upbringings and experiences. But to be charged by police and have an AVO is a considerable step further. If the kids were acting up to get out it would no doubt be investigated and found out pretty quick. But this is going to court and one of the defendants using the mental health card.
If it’s all a misunderstanding, say so, prove it and don’t stuff around with tactical legal BS. It’s a child’s life and they were supposed to be caring for them.
The longer this saga drags on and people insist on listing potential excuses, reasons, theories etc on why they’re not at fault is quite frankly frustrating and tiresome. Like I said in a previous post, these carers have lost children in their care due to an assault (no matter to what extent), and had another child go missing. The red flags continue to rack up - all IMO

Interesting when the Bio family could be seen as "playing the mental health card" that was OK by some , now it's on the other foot as the saying goes it's not OK it seems? IMO

And Btw I don't agree with people claiming that they ( or anyone ) are "playing the mental health card" no one knows the details , but the magistrate certainly will & will hear the case & make a ruling etc

People genuinely have mental health problems & for many many reasons, no wonder there is STILL a stigma around mental health & people wonder why people don't seek help ( which is not always available either until you are in crisis IMO )

All IMO

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

I’m open to all possibilities, but it’s getting very hard to. I’m getting fed up with repeating myself on the reasons why this whole saga is becoming more and more of a sideshow.
Whatever Mental health reason they have, these FFC’s have lost ALL kids in their care, and it poses so many questions. Why didn’t FAC do something sooner? Why are they going to such lengths to hide details? If an accident occurred why not explain it as such?

 

[SouthAussie]

.... these FFC’s have lost ALL kids in their care, and it poses so many questions.

Didn't the same thing happen to the BM? And yet she was treated with care on this forum.
Because, really, this whole thing stems back to when William (and his sister) was removed ... and it snowballed from there. imo

FACS is seriously overwhelmed, there are not enough carers who are willing to take in these neglected and/or abused children, drugs are rife and leading to more and more problems for the young children.
It is a very sad situation, and there doesn't seem to be a magical solution - for any of the children who are living in bad situations.

I don't think anyone wants to see the return of the days when hoards of children were placed in large institutions until they were of legal age.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

Didn't the same thing happen to the BM? And yet she was treated with care on this forum.
Because, really, this whole thing stems back to when William (and his sister) was removed ... and it snowballed from there. imo

Yes it did. And 2 siblings were supposed to go to a home where they would be in a safe place too.
The BM had her dramas (may still have?) but sought to improve her situation.
Not sure what to make of the living situation for WT’s sibling, it hasn’t got better

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes it did. And 2 siblings were supposed to go to a home where they would be in a safe place too.
The BM had her dramas (may still have?) but sought to improve her situation.
Not sure what to make of the living situation for WT’s sibling, it hasn’t got better

They are a few children of the tens of thousands of children who have inadequate living conditions in Australia. Who are removed.

It is a big problem. Parental choices. When the children are not placed first. I am not sure why people (anyone) procreate when they are not prepared to do everything in their power, all of the time, to nuture their children in an adequate manner.

I think all of the agencies are probably doing their burned out best. Making some mistakes along the way, due to the pressure and overwhelming needs.

 

[sleepinoz]

I’m open to all possibilities, but it’s getting very hard to. I’m getting fed up with repeating myself on the reasons why this whole saga is becoming more and more of a sideshow.
Whatever Mental health reason they have, these FFC’s have lost ALL kids in their care, and it poses so many questions. Why didn’t FAC do something sooner? Why are they going to such lengths to hide details? If an accident occurred why not explain it as such?

Just a question, do we know (via link) that all Kids in their care have been lost to them? I would understand if they were, but I haven't seen any link to substantiate that statement.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

They are a few children of the tens of thousands of children who have inadequate living conditions in Australia. Who are removed.

It is a big problem. Parental choices. When the children are not placed first. I am not sure why people (anyone) procreate when they are not prepared to do everything in their power, all of the time, to nuture their children in an adequate manner.

I think all of the agencies are probably doing their burned out best. Making some mistakes along the way, due to the pressure and overwhelming needs.

yes, it’s funny how you need a license or ticket for everything these days but not for the massive responsibility of raising a child.

I was reading about the possibility that the govt department involved in fostering could be playing some part in the dead ends thus far- because the negative publicity involved in a govt department can be very detrimental towards the government party in power. I’m not saying I believe this- but it could be like the similar problems associated with the government run lab which totally dunced all the swabs in the Shandee Blackburn case.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

Just a question, do we know (via link) that all Kids in their care have been lost to them? I would understand if they were, but I haven't seen any link to substantiate that statement.

Only going off a media article mentioning they no longer fostered any children. Who knows which one- there’s been 100’s of them!