Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #41

[Thebottomline]

As Craddock said, William wasn’t taken because he was a foster child.

 

[frogwell]

I think you will find that the Childrens Court changed the care order and the FP wouldn't have applied. Once William was put into care there would be a hearing and the Judge would make that decision. It's not something that people that foster can apply for, it's up to a Judge based on FACS reports. Even though that is what they wanted, they don't get to make the decision.

According to the podcast the FCer's made an 'informal inquiry' about adoption, well why not, they were to have the children until they were 18 according to all reports.

An 'Open Adoption" as it is in NSW is -

"Open adoption recognises there is often a benefit for children when both their families (birth and adoptive) remain in contact with each other after an adoption order has been made."

What are the benefits of open adoption
Major benefits of openness in adoption for the child is that it provides them with opportunities to:

• understand their background
• develop relationships with their birth parents, siblings and other people who are important to the child
• assist them in their understanding of their identity i.e. who they are and where they came from
• remove the ‘unknown’ about who their birth parents and siblings are, and why they have some of the physical characteristics, interests and talents they have.

This can give the child a sense of wholeness and help the child grow up with added security about themselves and their background.

What is open adoption

They weren't trying to replace the Bio's, IMO they were trying to take on the responsibility and care of the children that would be in their care for many years to come.

I never said the FP's changed the order, I agree recommendations would be made by FaCs regarding changing orders. The BM states at the inquest that she read files outlining care plans around adoption for the children prior to WT's disappearance, hardly informal. Who said it was an open adoption they were applying for and why had visitation decreased when BM had applied and been given more visitation when things were going well.

 

[frogwell]

As Craddock said, William wasn’t taken because he was a foster child.

I thought that was a strange statement that he made. How would he know why WT was taken when he doesn't know who took him and relatives and associates have not been cleared? Why are the FP's who are so private giving an account around WT's history if it isn't relevant?

 

[purpleandgreen]

I thought that was a strange statement that he made. How would he know why WT was taken when he doesn't know who took him and relatives and associates have not been cleared?

Maybe Craddock does know. Wouldn’t he have seen the LE brief?

 

[sosocurious]

I never said the FP's changed the order, I agree recommendations would be made by FaCs regarding changing orders. The BM states at the inquest that she read files outlining care plans around adoption for the children prior to WT's disappearance, hardly informal. Who said it was an open adoption they were applying for and why had visitation decreased when BM had applied and been given more visitation when things were going well.

"I didn't agree [with adoption plans]. I had heard about that ... they [the case workers] said it wasn't happening; we were still trying to get the children back, we were at court," she told Ms Grahame.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...-william-tyrrell-mystery-20190424-p51grg.html
Someone knows more': police seek clues in William Tyrrell mystery

 

[sosocurious]

I thought that was a strange statement that he made. How would he know why WT was taken when he doesn't know who took him and relatives and associates have not been cleared? Why are the FP's who are so private giving an account around WT's history if it isn't relevant?

They are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Outside the courtroom, anti-fostering activist Allanna Smith said with the hearing winding up, she didn’t believe much light had been thrown on young William.

“It seems they don’t want to paint a picture about his life in foster care,” she said,

Inside the divided inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance

 

[Thebottomline]

Maybe Craddock does know. Wouldn’t he have seen the LE brief?

That’s right . All this talk of when William and his sister were placed etc doesn’t really help with solving his abduction. That’s why I made the point that the coroner has stated this

 

[SouthAussie]

I never said the FP's changed the order, I agree recommendations would be made by FaCs regarding changing orders. The BM states at the inquest that she read files outlining care plans around adoption for the children prior to WT's disappearance, hardly informal. Who said it was an open adoption they were applying for and why had visitation decreased when BM had applied and been given more visitation when things were going well.

BBM I think your statement may speak for itself.

Perhaps things weren't going so well before/during/after visitation for the two children? Maybe they didn't want to go there.
The podcast said that BM saw the children once a month. This then changed to once every two months.
BM did say that the children were not really calling her mum or anything, that sometimes they used her first name.
BM also said that William's sister didn't have much to do with her, at the visitation prior to William's disappearance. She mostly ran around and played.

FACS will do whatever is best for the children. Not whatever is best for the BP or FP.

 

[sleepinoz]

Some points of interest for me in the podcast were
- The FP's changed from short term carers to wanting to be long term carers, which indicates to me that they wanted to make more permanent bonds with children coming into their care. That they desired a family. I imagine that when you become a short term carer, you would have a certain mind set about how to connect with a child in your care.

RSBM

I never said the FP's changed the order, I agree recommendations would be made by FaCs regarding changing orders. The BM states at the inquest that she read files outlining care plans around adoption for the children prior to WT's disappearance, hardly informal. Who said it was an open adoption they were applying for and why had visitation decreased when BM had applied and been given more visitation when things were going well.

No you didn't say they changed the order but you did say that they changed from short term to long term. They didn't change anything, they had only been FCer's for a few months and had done emergency care, as stated in the Podcast. When applying to be a FCer you state what you would prefer to do, but I think the short terms would be how you start off to see if you can handle it. IMO you were insinuating that they decided that they wanted this particular family. If I interpreted that incorrectly I apologise.

In NSW it is only Open Adoptions.

Adoption that occurs today is called ‘open’ adoption.

Want to adopt?

 

[purpleandgreen]

They are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Outside the courtroom, anti-fostering activist Allanna Smith said with the hearing winding up, she didn’t believe much light had been thrown on young William.

“It seems they don’t want to paint a picture about his life in foster care,” she said,

Inside the divided inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance

BBM. And that right there is the bias, so anything she says or has others say or do reflects her bias. IMO.

 

[sleepinoz]

BBM I think your statement may speak for itself.

Perhaps things weren't going so well before/during/after visitation for the two children?
The podcast said that BM saw the children once a month. This then changed to once every two months.
BM did say that the children were not really calling her mum or anything, that sometimes they used her first name.
BM also said that William's sister didn't have much to do with her, at the visitation prior to William's disappearance. She mostly ran around and played.

FACS will do whatever is best for the children. Not whatever is best for the BP or FP.

Just to add to your post SA, the podcast also stated that the June visitation was missed due to the Bio parents unavailability for 'various reasons'. Which means that they hadn't seen the kids for 4 months. A 3yo child and a 5yo child, who hadn't seen someone for 4 months would not understand why they should call them Mum or Dad IMO.

 

[Thebottomline]

Good old AS, she inserted herself in a case with no relevance to her, tried hard to get her grievances against Facs veiled in an attempt to support bio parents, all she did was open them up to the public to judge , what a fool.she was the one that had them exposed for public scrutiny.

 

[SouthAussie]

Just to add to your post SA, the podcast also stated that the June visitation was missed due to the Bio parents unavailability for 'various reasons'. Which means that they hadn't seen the kids for 4 months. A 3yo child and a 5yo child, who hadn't seen someone for 4 months would not understand why they should call them Mum or Dad IMO.

Yes, I noticed that an extra hour was given in the last visitation with William because the previous visitation had been missed.

 

[Thebottomline]

Just to add to your post SA, the podcast also stated that the June visitation was missed due to the Bio parents unavailability for 'various reasons'. Which means that they hadn't seen the kids for 4 months. A 3yo child and a 5yo child, who hadn't seen someone for 4 months would not understand why they should call them Mum or Dad IMO.

Exactly, 4 months is along time in relation to kids ages

 

[Thebottomline]

Yes, I noticed that an extra hour was given in the last visitation with William because the previous visitation had been missed.

How could and why would they miss a visit from the kids they desperately missed.
Edited after by me, not my place to judge

 

[sleepinoz]

How could and why would they miss a visit from the kids they desperately missed.

Probably something we shouldn't delve into

 

[Thebottomline]

Probably something we shouldn't delve into

You’re right and probably not relevant .

 

[frogwell]

How could and why would they miss a visit from the kids they desperately missed.
Edited after by me, not my place to judge

Maybe being sick from pregnancy?

 

[sleepinoz]

Maybe being sick from pregnancy?

Don't think BD would be suffering from that.

 

[Thebottomline]

Maybe being sick from pregnancy?

Both of them ? Regardless coroner has said William wasn’t taken because his status of a foster child.