Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #26

[SouthAussie]

I'm guessing the FP's had permanent guardianship as opposed to adoption based on the judge's comments that it was inexplicable why the carers were presented as parents to WT. KT knew of the arrangement. Did BC know? Did this happen while he was incarcerated? Did any other family members apply to have custody of WT? Also wondering about the 000 call if WT was known by the FP's surname? How much of it is even true? MOO

BBM

While William may have been known by his foster parents last name (to make things easier in their community, to help keep his foster care privacy intact), his legal name would still be Tyrrell .... until/if any adoption took place.
I can understand a report to police using his legal name, as it is an official entity.

I think the foster parents are intelligent people, and understand when to use his legal name and when to use their own surname for day to day practicality and privacy.


The 000 call recording ...
[video=youtube;augkwdaYOx8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=augkwdaYOx8[/video]

 

[SouthAussie]

From what I understand about FACs, is that nobody is expected to be permanent carers straight away. There are case managers to look over the adjustment period (of some time) and court then proceedings, before any "permanent" arrangement is made. I have a friend going through this for the past 5 years. It wasn't till about 2 years in - that any permanent arrangement was discussed and then initiated. I know it is different for each case, but the idea of a permanent arrangement straight off the bat, is just plain ludicrous

Many kudos to your friend for being one of the caring souls who take in these abused/neglected/needy children, helping to give them a stable, happy life ... while persevering with all the govt red tape, and working to overcome the psychological damage done to many of these children.

 

[matey]

fftopic:....For all you admirers of Det Gary Jubelin in charge of William's case...there's a story on Ch9 Sixty Minutes tonight with a breakthrough story on Matthew Leveson (there's a thread here on WS for Matthew)...but I don't know how to link it.

 

[sosocurious]

BBM

"Community Services Minister Pru Goward said the ice epidemic was partly to blame for the increase in children in out-of-home care, but hopes new early intervention programs could help bring the numbers down.

"If we could get on top of drug addiction in parents and the violence that comes with it then I think we could get that trajectory to change direction," she said.

However she pointed out that in the past 12 months NSW had seen a record number of out-of-home-care open adoptions — where foster carers adopt foster-placed children with the permission of their birth parents.

Finalised adoption orders have more than doubled to more than 127 cases compared to the previous year after the Government invested in additional case workers to speed up the adoption process."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-...for-older-children-in-new-south-wales/8671238
2 Jul 2017

NOVEMBER 22 2012
Children to get families, not foster care
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/children-to-get-families-not-foster-care-20121121-29qap.html


''What we're now recognising is that keeping a child safe is not enough, a child needs more than to be kept safe, a child needs a permanent home, people who love them, and understand them, that they trust and all that can only occur in a permanent arrangement, not a short-term one,'' she said.

Restoring children to their natural parents would remain the first priority for the department, with finding a carer in the same extended family the second course of action. But the Care Act would be amended so adoption was officially recognised as the third preferred option, ahead of handing parental responsibility to the minister. A court could only make an order for parental responsibility to be given to the minister if adoption or long-term guardianship had been ruled out.

The paper also proposes to legislate time frames of six months for babies and one year for older children for the department to determine the feasibility of restoration before other options are explored. At present there is no mandated time frame...................

Asked whether the move could disadvantage birth parents who may later develop the ability to care for their children, Ms Goward said such cases were very rare.

 

[gregjrichards]

fftopic:....For all you admirers of Det Gary Jubelin in charge of William's case...there's a story on Ch9 Sixty Minutes tonight with a breakthrough story on Matthew Leveson (there's a thread here on WS for Matthew)...but I don't know how to link it.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...w-Leveson-20-Cronulla-NSW-24-Sept-2007/page12

 

[Bohemian]

To throw the cat amongst the pigeons, as I am wont to do — in the Daily Mail (and I presume, The Daily Telegraph) article*, it was stated a number of times that 'William was taken into foster care when he eight months old', not specifically that he had been in the care of his foster parents at the time he disappeared since he was eight months old. There is a distinction.

This statement makes me wonder if William, and presumably his sister, had more than one foster placement before they were in the care of their foster parents at the time he disappeared.

With regard to William's case, I have always been haunted by the number of children who have been sexually exploited and/or murdered in recent years whilst ostensibly in the care of state ministers and their agents.

I am not accusing William's and his sister's foster parents at the time he disappeared of such crimes, more to the point I wonder if William had contact, or came to the attention of, someone within the 'foster care system' who believed they had some 'prior claim' to him and subsequently acted on that belief. After reading about the Families SA/Shannon McCoole debacle, to me this thought doesn't seem that far-fetched.

Could someone with intimate knowledge of 'foster care systems' tell me if it is a requirement to notify the department/agency if the child will not be present at their usual place of residence for a period of time, such as when they are planning a vacation, please?

*Source:

'Missing toddler William Tyrrell's biological father was a 'career criminal' in and out of jail - as it's revealed his foster placement was always intended to be permanent'
By Kirby Spencer and Daniel Piotrowski for Daily Mail Australia
09:29 +10:00 27 Aug 2017, updated 09:46 +10:00 27 Aug 2017
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4825764/William-Tyrrell-s-foster-placement-permanent.html

 

[sosocurious]

To throw the cat amongst the pigeons, as I am wont to do — in the Daily Mail (and I presume, The Daily Telegraph) article*, it was stated a number of times that 'William was taken into foster care when he eight months old', not specifically that he had been in the care of his foster parents at the time he disappeared since he was eight months old. There is a distinction.

This statement makes me wonder if William, and presumably his sister, had more than one foster placement before they were in the care of their foster parents at the time he disappeared.

With regard to William's case, I have always been haunted by the number of children who have been sexually exploited and/or murdered in recent years whilst ostensibly in the care of state ministers and their agents.

I am not accusing William's and his sister's foster parents at the time he disappeared of such crimes, more to the point I wonder if William had contact, or came to the attention of, someone within the 'foster care system' who believed they had some 'prior claim' to him and subsequently acted on that belief. After reading about the Families SA/Shannon McCoole debacle, to me this thought doesn't seem that far-fetched.

Could someone with intimate knowledge of 'foster care systems' tell me if it is a requirement to notify the department/agency if the child will not be present at their usual place of residence for a period of time, such as when they are on vacation, please?

*Source:

'Missing toddler William Tyrrell's biological father was a 'career criminal' in and out of jail - as it's revealed his foster placement was always intended to be permanent'
By Kirby Spencer and Daniel Piotrowski for Daily Mail Australia
09:29 +10:00 27 Aug 2017, updated 09:46 +10:00 27 Aug 2017
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4825764/William-Tyrrell-s-foster-placement-permanent.html

Who can make decisions.
(p5)
Holidays and travel – other than interstate (for more than one day) or
overseas, which need agency approval (please inform caseworker of
your plans so contact details can be recorded)..........................carer.

Your rights (p27)
apply for sole parental responsibility after two years of
continuous care with the consent of the parents/person who
had responsibility for the child prior to them coming into care.

http://www.community.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/321330/fostercare_guide.pdf

 

[Bohemian]

Who can make decisions.
(p5)
Holidays and travel – other than interstate (for more than one day) or
overseas, which need agency approval (please inform caseworker of
your plans so contact details can be recorded)..........................carer.

Your rights (p27)
apply for sole parental responsibility after two years of
continuous care with the consent of the parents/person who
had responsibility for the child prior to them coming into care.

http://www.community.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/321330/fostercare_guide.pdf

Thanks soso. Well, that blows that particular train of thought out of the water somewhat. It seems it wouldn't have been necessary for William's foster parents to advise the department/agency that he and his sister were going to be staying at their foster grandmother's residence on the day he disappeared.

 

[sosocurious]

Thanks soso. Well, that blows that particular train of thought out of the water somewhat. It seems it wouldn't have been necessary for William's foster parents to advise the department/agency that he and his sister were going to be staying at their foster grandmother's residence on the day he disappeared.

finding a carer in the same extended family the second course of action.

This seems imo to be the preferred choice if restoration not possible.
Which makes me wonder about there having been another carer arrangement prior?
Or??

 

[JLZ]

deleted

 

[Bohemian]

finding a carer in the same extended family the second course of action.

This seems imo to be the preferred choice if restoration not possible.
Which makes me wonder about there having been another carer arrangement prior?
Or??

That's what I was wondering, including the 'Or?'.

I also wonder if William's was a case of a 'kidnapping gone wrong' but that would have required knowledge of his whereabouts at the time, planning and reconnaissance. As difficult to envisage as William being randomly abducted, given the short amount of time he was out of everyone's sight and the isolation of his foster grandmother's former residence.

 

[richieswan]

That's what I was wondering, including the 'Or?'.

I also wonder if William's was a case of a 'kidnapping gone wrong' but that would have required knowledge of his whereabouts at the time, planning and reconnaissance. As difficult to envisage as William being randomly abducted, given the short amount of time he was out of everyone's sight and the isolation of his foster grandmother's former residence.

Welcome back Bo. Everything in this case is so improbable it makes them equally probable. I'm stumped, but i reckon the 2 cars and the type of business they were parked in front of is a clue. Dig dig.

 

[Gilley]

That's what I was wondering, including the 'Or?'.

I also wonder if William's was a case of a 'kidnapping gone wrong' but that would have required knowledge of his whereabouts at the time, planning and reconnaissance. As difficult to envisage as William being randomly abducted, given the short amount of time he was out of everyone's sight and the isolation of his foster grandmother's former residence.

Wondering if williams older sister was already placed with this foster family before Williams birth, hence placing him with this family in a "permanent" type situation? I believe the sister is somewhat older, she looks at least 8-9 now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bohemian]

Welcome back Bo. Everything in this case is so improbable it makes them equally probable. I'm stumped, but i reckon the 2 cars and the type of business they were parked in front of is a clue. Dig dig.

Thanks Rich. Nice to be back. Thank Goodness for the decision to allow publication of William's status as a foster child, although I have to agree with DI Jubelin's assessment that it is little more than a 'distraction' than anything else. Still, you never know if having William's disappearance in what passes for the news these days might allow more online discussion that may help rather than hinder their investigation.

i'm stumped too. I reckon it would difficult not to drive yourself potty thinking about all of the different scenarios and looking at all of the different relationships between the people connected to William. Your theory is as good as any. Let's pray that some digging was done, or is being done, in that direction.

 

[Bohemian]

Wondering if williams older sister was already placed with this foster family before Williams birth, hence placing him with this family in a "permanent" type situation? I believe the sister is somewhat older, she looks at least 8-9 now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would think that the department's aim would be to place siblings in the same foster family if at all possible. As William's sister is presumably still in the care of the department or indeed has been adopted, I doubt if any information about her history will ever be published — nor in all fairness should it be. That poor little girl has suffered a traumatic loss and has to be protected from the risk of further psychological harm. I can also understand the Sydney Morning Herald's decision not to publish her foster parents' names.

 

[ozazure]

I am not sure that, prior to now, the foster parents' views and wishes about keeping their names private were ever considered. This was all FACS. If FACS says they can't reveal that they were carers, they can't. If they do they are liable for hefty fines, even imprisonment, not to mention the likely removal of William's sister from their care and the cancellation of their approval as carers. I'm not kidding, confidentiality is a legal requirement for carers and lasts forever. So how would that help William's sister or other children they fostered? People who know William's sister will of course know now, if they didn't before. But a stranger in the street will not be able to recognise the foster parents, see William's sister, and think/say "that's William's sister and she is in care."

I'm glad it's come out that William was in care as this now allows his biological family to speak for him. I feel they have been the real victims in this FACS debacle. This may be an effective way to influence a key witness. However I can see how it is also going to be a distraction. For whatever reason, the police are adamant that neither family, nor his foster status, led to his abduction. But people do have a negative view of foster care and it is showing, and it will be distracting. It might even work against the police, if it makes any witnesses feel less guilty about coming forward (although as I said it hopefully will have the opposite effect).

Also, I do think it's a little harsh to blame FM for leaving William unsupervised. They were not in the street or at a park. They were at FGM's private home on private property. If any mothers here are honest, have you never left your kids alone in the yard to answer your phone, or go to the toilet, or grab something to drink? Or had to take one kid inside because they needed something and you didn't want to bring the other kid/s inside too? The only person at fault is the person who took William. I don't care if he was close to the road. Any normal person would have taken him by the hand and walked him back to the house. Saying otherwise is assuming that the average person is just an opportunity away from committing a deviant crime.

Great post.

I too think it is harsh to blame his foster mother. The details aren't 100% but it sounds like she perhaps thought granny had him in sight and maybe granny assumed William had followed her in (as it seems the sister needing the toilet was a detail at one point, along with the making of the cup of tea) ... I 100% believe that they didn't have him out of sights for long, children have come to harm in many similar circumstances with only a few minutes of accidental non-supervision. I have a few instances under my belt that could have gone a bad way and they make my blood run cold to recall them, and I would say I am a parent who is more anxious in this regard than normal.

 

[frogwell]

[82] the interests of the carers are relevant only to the extent that they may have implications for julian or his sister sarah.[/i] while the welfare of sarah is relevant – and while it is possible that an order might be made for her protection, prohibiting publication of information that might lead to her identification as julian’s sister – no such order is sought, and the indirect connection between the proposed disclosure of julian’s status and her is insufficient to support the injunction that is sought.
https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5996755ce4b074a7c6e17e4c

??? Bubm

 

[SouthAussie]

I did some googling on the subject of leaving a small child alone outside, and came across quite a few forums that discuss this. It seems that many people do it, and many people don't do it. The ones that do it justify their stance by saying that they live in a quiet cul-de-sac, they live in a rural area, they know all the neighbours and the neighbours know them, the children all look out for each other, etc. etc.

The people that leave their young ones outside to play would be shocked if their child went missing. They all say (as William's FPs say) that their child/ren know their boundaries, that they wouldn't just wander off. They don't live on a through road. They live in a safe area.

The ones that don't leave their child/ren outside to play say that their area may be safe, but you never know who could drive up and take your child.


A few of the forums:
http://www.freerangekids.com/leaving...ard-for-a-sec/
http://www.circleofmoms.com/question...-alone-1701589
http://www.scarymommy.com/leaving-ki...illegal-in-nj/


As well, I frequently see people who leave their child/ren in the car while they go inside to pay for petrol, sometimes I see children alone in a car outside the shops. I fairly frequently see a young boy on my own street who rides his bicycle around the crescent ... no adult visibly in sight.

 

[frogwell]

I did some googling on the subject of leaving a small child alone outside, and came across quite a few forums that discuss this. It seems that many people do it, and many people don't do it. The ones that do it justify their stance by saying that they live in a quiet cul-de-sac, they live in a rural area, they know all the neighbours and the neighbours know them, the children all look out for each other, etc. etc.

RSBM

The FP's would not have been able to claim any of those underlined justifications in this instance.They didn't live in the quiet cul-de-sac, WT went missing from, or live ruraly, they didn't know all the neighbors and vice versa and the only other kid to look out for him was his 4 year old sister.

 

[sosocurious]

THE biological grandmother of missing toddler William Tyrrell has hit out at the social workers who took him away from his parents as a baby and placed him in foster care.

Heartbroken Natalie Collins, 57, yesterday revealed her son Brendan Collins’ criminal past, drinking problems and rows with William’s mother Karlie Tyrrell. However, she said their behaviour was not enough to put the little boy who was “adored” by his family into care.

William Tyrrell: Missing toddler’s grandmother slams social workers
DANIELLE GUSMAROLI, The Daily Telegraph
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...s/news-story/2674faf90531f7b129d0212aa3153acf