Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #28

[sosocurious]

I do feel there may be a lot to Karlies story that has not yet been told.
Before and during her 2009 relationship commenced with BC.
imo

 

[Bohemian]

Child safety campaigner Hetty Johnston has raised the idea of drug-addicted parents having their kids put up for adoption.
Shocking new statistics show half of all reports of abuse or neglect in the state leave the child waiting a whole month for officials to even investigate.
Barely a third of urgent cases are dealt with within the recommended 10 days, with one in three children taken into care in the past year having a parent using methamphetamine or "ice".
Ms Johnston said kids are getting harmed by the partying parents “time and time again”.


She said in some cases, children would be better off with adoptive families.
“If you’re high or stoned you’re not going to be the best parent you can be,” Ms Johnston said.
Ms Johnston added that the ice crisis is being made even worse by the welfare system, which she said encourages addicts to have more children.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/aust...parents/ar-AAv3lYv?li=AAavLaF&ocid=spartandhp

It’s illuminating to read the different media ‘takes’ on Hetty’s comments. The article in the Herald-Sun is particularly interesting (maybe soso can provide a link and précis as I don’t have a sub).

I don’t have an agenda . . .

 

[Bohemian]

I do feel there may be a lot to Karlies story that has not yet been told.
Before and during her 2009 relationship commenced with BC.
imo

I suspect that is true of the in-laws and their associates as well. People in glass houses . . .

 

[SouthAussie]

I do feel there may be a lot to Karlies story that has not yet been told.
Before and during her 2009 relationship commenced with BC.
imo

I don't believe that we will hear too much of her back story. She is somewhat protected by this foster thing, as well. And she sure as heck is not going to disappoint her supporters by relating her part in the story.

But we do know that William and "Sarah" were removed from both biological parents. And that says a lot.

As I have said countless times to the unhearing ones, children do not get removed from both parents when only one parent is at fault of continued abuse/neglect.

 

[sosocurious]

At the end of the day the best interests of the child have to be more important than those of the parent,' Ms Johnston said.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ted-parents-children-taken.html#ixzz553LZmniK

 

[sosocurious]

An old article

August 27, 2012

The Child Protection Inquiry last week seriously discussed "parendectomy" - denying parents rights over their own child.
Corelle Davies, Brisbane-based Child Safety director, Queensland Health, said the idea of "stably placing and potentially adopting out younger children" appeared to be the most compassionate way of treating babies of teenage youths with no hope of being responsible parents.
"It sounds terrible, but for the long-term viability of that child into the future it's possibly a hard decision but a good decision," she said.............

Ms Johnston, who herself gave up a child for adoption when she was 15 but later reconciled, said no one should underestimate the emotional and practical complexities of adoption.
But when kids were born into environments dominated by drugs and alcohol and the potential for physical and sexual abuse was real, removal was the best option, she said.
"You go in and you get them out of there," she said. "It's a complex situation but the interests of the child come first."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...8026b3eb1?sv=3ef76987e0249a996b5bb34237ea164d
Forced adoption an option for bad mothers

 

[Bohemian]

At the end of the day the best interests of the child have to be more important than those of the parent,' Ms Johnston said.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ted-parents-children-taken.html#ixzz553LZmniK

From my own lived experience, I agree.

 

[Bohemian]

On Children:

 

[Bohemian]

I don't believe that we will hear too much of her back story. She is somewhat protected by this foster thing, as well. And she sure as heck is not going to disappoint her supporters by relating her part in the story.

But we do know that William and "Sarah" were removed from both biological parents. And that says a lot.

As I have said countless times to the unhearing ones, children do not get removed from both parents when only one parent is at fault of continued abuse/neglect.

And neither should we, unless she herself decides to tell it. This is the problem I have with the consequences of the publicising of the Supreme Court decision is that it was essentially a decision on an individual’s private interests and the public interest in freedom of expression, ie; the disclosure and discussion of William’s in-care status, and not about disclosing the identities of Karlie and her ‘surviving’ children (whether they be in her care or that of the Minister), Brendan and/or William’s carers.

Apparently, Karlie was aware of the risk:

The private and public interest in freedom of expression

• The obvious and important competing interests are (1) the private interest of Ms Smith in being able to do what she is otherwise entitled to do in a free society, namely to speak of, discuss and disclose truthful non-defamatory matters known to her, in respect of which she is bound by no obligation of confidentiality, and (2) the public interest in freedom of expression and discussion, in particular in connection with the out-of-home-care system. Ms Smith’s interest in this respect is also echoed, at least to some extent, by Julian’s mother: although at the interlocutory hearing the court was given by the plaintiff to understand that Julian's mother agreed that Julian's in-care status should not be disclosed, the mother’s evidence at the final hearing (such as it was – it was adduced as hearsay of a conversation between a FACS officer and her) was to the effect that it has always been her view that it should be known that Julian was in care. Although she had concerns for the safety of herself, Julian, Sarah, their two siblings in her care, and the foster carers, if that information became public, she said that she believed that the information “needs to come out”.

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/58853ecfe4b058596cba36a9

I wonder if this was Karlie’s sole decision or if someone convinced her that it was worth the ‘risk’? And what was their agenda, conscious or otherwise? Who ‘profits’? So far, not William IMO.

 

[sosocurious]

From my own lived experience, I agree.

Yes a lived experience.
I am mindful of the fact that there are many facets and emotions related to the lived experience;

The children that were removed.
The parents of children that were removed.
The parents of the parent, that were afforded chance after chance to step up for their own child, and do all that what was required.
The grandparents and family that have taken over the role of parenting when all else failed. Often avoiding the need for the minister to be appointed guardian. ( wonder what those stats are)
The foster carers that take troubled, confused, abused and displaced children into their homes.

I do not believe facs want to take children from their parents.

In the case of KT she still has two of her children in her care. Which suggests just because you have had one, two or three children removed it is not automatic when you choose to bring another child into the world that they will be taken automatically. The process is just repeated when and if necessary.

However, I guess when there is a history you have to suck it up seek all the support that is available out there, to you, and do it much, much better then you did before.

jmo

 

[CaptainPeacock]

Lurking on WS again, I have a few questions I'd like to ask folks to weigh in on. Do we know whether KT ever worked with (or otherwise knew) Rachael, childcare worker at Killara Beehive? Secondly, I am seeking information on a minor traffic accident or loss of control of a stolen car that involved the Tyrrell boys (presumably Ashley, Tom, Tricky Ricky and co) some years ago. It occurred in Sydney (likely north shore area) and one joyrider managed to run away from the police attending the scene. The intel is vague, sorry. If anyone can help with this, I'd appreciate it.

 

[Bohemian]

Yes a lived experience.
I am mindful of the fact that there are many facets and emotions related to the lived experience;

The children that were removed.
The parents of children that were removed.
The parents of the parent, that were afforded chance after chance to step up for their own child, and do all that what was required.
The grandparents and family that have taken over the role of parenting when all else failed. Often avoiding the need for the minister to be appointed guardian. ( wonder what those stats are)
The foster carers that take troubled, confused, abused and displaced children into their homes.

I do not believe facs want to take children from their parents.

In the case of KT she still has two of her children in her care. Which suggests just because you have had one, two or three children removed it is not automatic when you choose to bring another child into the world they will be taken automatically. The process is just repeated when and if necessary.

However, I guess when there is a history you have to have the balls to suck it up seek all the support that is available out there, to you, and do it much, much better then you did before.

jmo

Please see my reply to your reply (above). Even if you have to swim through ****, keep swimming. Better than the alternative, for all concerned.

 

[Bohemian]

On blame:

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/blameBadBehavior.htm

 

[Whàngarei]

Maybe someone is considering a crimestoppers call. Hopefully 100% certain of what has been noticed. Sharp eyes retentive minds get the scum in the end.

 

[Karinna]

Child safety campaigner Hetty Johnston has raised the idea of drug-addicted parents having their kids put up for adoption.
Shocking new statistics show half of all reports of abuse or neglect in the state leave the child waiting a whole month for officials to even investigate.
Barely a third of urgent cases are dealt with within the recommended 10 days, with one in three children taken into care in the past year having a parent using methamphetamine or "ice".
Ms Johnston said kids are getting harmed by the partying parents “time and time again”.


She said in some cases, children would be better off with adoptive families.
“If you’re high or stoned you’re not going to be the best parent you can be,” Ms Johnston said.
Ms Johnston added that the ice crisis is being made even worse by the welfare system, which she said encourages addicts to have more children.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/aust...parents/ar-AAv3lYv?li=AAavLaF&ocid=spartandhp

That's a political slippery slope to go down IMO.

 

[they'll get you]

I don't believe that we will hear too much of her back story. She is somewhat protected by this foster thing, as well. And she sure as heck is not going to disappoint her supporters by relating her part in the story.

But we do know that William and "Sarah" were removed from both biological parents. And that says a lot.

As I have said countless times to the unhearing ones, children do not get removed from both parents when only one parent is at fault of continued abuse/neglect.

Where were the GRANDPARENTS?
Were they incapable or not willing.

I know 5 sets of grandparents who have full custody of their own grandchildren.
They unselfishly acknowledge any retirement dreams are on the back burner.
Of course they’re sad as their children are either too busy or too drug effected to do the decent thing.

Three are too drug effected, 1 up and left overseas and the other says the children effect her career and rarely sees them from interstate.

My parents attitude was ‘they’re your children, you go look after them’ and I did, I raised them best I could.

Different generations, different society.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Josh Knight]

From someone that has just joined. I notice you guys focus a lot on WTs bio parents. Is that because you suspect they have something to do with WT missing? What is the general consensus on here about what actually happened to WT? I would of thought it was more the dodgy behaviour of the foster parents and grandparent.

 

[they'll get you]

Maybe someone is considering a crimestoppers call. Hopefully 100% certain of what has been noticed. Sharp eyes retentive minds get the scum in the end.

Could you explain the Crimestoppers Call please and what has been noticed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Hbayne]

From someone that has just joined. I notice you guys focus a lot on WTs bio parents. Is that because you suspect they have something to do with WT missing? What is the general consensus on here about what actually happened to WT? I would of thought it was more the dodgy behaviour of the foster parents and grandparent.

Welcome !
What behaviour would you consider dodgy ?

 

[Hbayne]

Could you explain the Crimestoppers Call please and what has been noticed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Was wondering the same thing ?