Kiwi Polemicist

January 30, 2009

Pure evil: social workers give children to gay couple for adoption despite wishes of grandparents

The Daily Mail is reporting that social workers destroyers in Edinburgh have given a five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister to a male homosexual couple for adoption, despite the children’s grandparents wishing to adopt them:

The couple, who cannot be named, wanted to give the five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister a loving home themselves. But they were ruled to be too old – at 46 and 59.

For two years they fought for their rights to care for the children, whose 26-year- old mother is a recovering heroin addict.

They agreed to an adoption only after they faced being financially crippled by legal bills.

The final blow came when they were told the children were going to a gay household, even though several heterosexual couples wanted them.

When the grandfather protested, he was told: ‘You can either accept it, and there’s a chance you’ll see the children twice a year, or you can take that stance and never see them again.’ *

Then there’s the illness excuse:

But council social workers became worried that the grandparents’ ages and health problems meant they would also be unable to care for the children properly.

The 59-year-old grandfather, a farm worker, has angina while his wife is receiving medication for diabetes.

There are so many issue here that it’s hard to know where to start. I’ll confine myself to four points, based on the assumption that you don’t want to read a 10,000 word essay:

1) First and foremost: the state has no right to steal these children

By taking control of what happens to these children the state has stolen them. Even if the children were given to a heterosexual couple despite the grandparents wishing to adopt them I would describe that action as evil and totalitarian.

2) Children need and want stability

It would appear that those grandparents are the only stable thing in the lives of these children. Children who do not have stability are far more prone to mental health problems.

3) Children need one male parent and one female parent

In case you’re thinking that I’m just a fuddy-duddy christian I’ll quote two people who have commented on this case.

Melanie Philips says

The reason why adoption is so successful at raising healthy, well-adjusted children is that it replicates as far as possible the biological mother and father whose presence in the family is so crucial to the well-being of their children. * [She’s hit the nail on the head there]

The prevailing argument that all types of family are as good as each other as far as the children are concerned simply isn’t true. While some children emerge relatively unscathed from irregular households, children need to be brought up by the two people ‘who made me’ – or, in adoptive households, in a family which closely replicates that arrangement.

Where that does not happen, the child’s deepest sense of his or her identity as a human being is at some level damaged.

A child needs a mother and father because their roles in bringing that child up, and the way the child sees each of them, are not interchangeable. They are different and complementary, which is why if one of them is absent the child suffers, in many cases very badly indeed.

For very young children the absence of a mother, whose nurturing role cannot be replicated even by the most loving and attentive of fathers, is particularly tragic.

Therefore to say that depriving children of a mother figure is in their best interests – as the Edinburgh social workers have said – is clearly ridiculous.

Amanda Platell says

It appears that social services, despite all the evidence to the contrary, still believe that all relationships are equal when it comes to raising children. Indeed, in this case they seem to have decided that a gay relationship is preferable to a couple of opposite sex.

This is simply not true. They are not equal when it comes to the things children need most – commitment and stability. Yet is is regarded as heretical even to state the facts: which are that marriages last longer than cohabiting heterosexual relationships and they both last longer than gay relationships.

Those are the cold, bare truths. It is too soon to know the statistics on same-sex marriages as there has not been enough time to assess the trends and many same sex couples enjoy enduring and truly fulfilling relationships.

But if commitment and stability matter most to children’s happiness and success, the least suitable place for them to be raised is by a gay couple. That’s not homophobia, that’s not bigotry, that’s a fact – unpalatable as it might be to the Left consensus.

4) Social workers are hypocrites

Peter Harris of the Grandparents’ Association in the UK says

Lynn Chesterman, the Chief Executive of the Grandparents’ Association, and I have both, when talking to audiences of social workers, undertaken the following exercise.

We asked our audiences to say whether they would ask a family member, in particular a grandparent, to look after their children if they became incapable of doing so themselves. Almost universally they raised their hands in assent.

When asked whether they would prefer social services to do so – guess how many of their hands went up!

I’ll bet you a chocolate fish that they don’t put their hands up the second time because to do so would mark them as opponents of the liberal left/feminist agenda that is a loose in their departments like a fox among chickens. These two children are in the mouth of that fox.

***

The traditional extended family structure is one that contains multiple layers of redundancy, e.g. if the parents of a child die in a car crash there are potentially four grandparents (and other relatives) able to step in: this is the most natural order of events. Indeed, before rest home care was common many grandparents lived with their families and earned their keep by caring for grandchildren and doing other jobs around the house. If anything happened to the parents the transition to care by the grandparents was easier for the child because they were already familiar with the grandparents (that’s stability, point 2 above). Yes, there were plenty of families with problems, but there were also plenty of families akin to what I have described; sadly this traditional family structure has largely disappeared in Western cultures.

Strong family units are essential to a healthy society, so totalitarian, politically correct and evil actions by social workers will only hasten the Left’s plan to destroy the foundations of our society.

What do you think about the state forcing these children to go to a gay couple against the wishes of their grandparents?

Click here for an update to this post.

Hat tip: Samuel Dennis

* emphasis added

Advertisements

9 Comments »

  1. That quote from Peter Harris is very telling. Someone who is quite happy to mess up the lives of others in ways they wouldn’t wish upon their own children is being absolutely sick.

    Anyway, there are plenty of fathers who are 59 – so it is fine to look after your own children at that age but not your grandchildren?

    Comment by Mr Dennis — January 31, 2009 @ 8:53 am

  2. […] Here’s another quote from Peter Harris which didn’t fit well in the earlier post: The policy clearly set out in the Children Act 1989 is that wherever possible, and unless it is […]

    Pingback by Update to “Pure evil: social workers give children to gay couple for adoption despite wishes of grandparents” « Kiwi Polemicist — January 31, 2009 @ 9:44 am

  3. I once heard of a case in the US where the social services[sic] were pushing through a law giving them more powers. In one case they were trying to remove a child from grandparents, and told them explicitly that they’d have no leg to stand on after the law was past.

    Well, those grandparents went to their local representative, who managed to insert the quite reasonable condition that children could not be removed from responsible blood relatives.

    The second the law was past the SS were on the doorstep – they hadn’t even bothered to read the law as it was passed.

    My observation is that many social workers are caring people. However, too many love wielding their power to the point where they’re drunk on it – this case seems like one where that drunkenness lead to pushing personal agendas to change society.

    Comment by scrubone — January 31, 2009 @ 8:42 pm

    • scrubone: SS in the perfect acronym – why didn’t I notice that?

      Many so-called public servants are drunk on power IMHO.

      Comment by kiwipolemicist — February 5, 2009 @ 2:25 pm

  4. […] single parents cannot provide the male and female input that a child needs. For more on that see Pure evil: social workers give children to gay couple for adoption despite wishes of parents. These children will almost certainly not have a healthy, balanced […]

    Pingback by Octuplets result of IVF: what are the ethical issues? « Kiwi Polemicist — February 8, 2009 @ 7:21 am

  5. […] As I said, conflict between individuals is no business of the state’s. Furthermore, state interference in child abuse almost always brings evil, and the state will adjust its definition of “child abuse” to whatever will allow it to steal children (for examples click here and here. For an egregious example of state theft of children click here). […]

    Pingback by • How to deal with child abuse: Part 2 « Kiwi Polemicist — March 3, 2009 @ 1:24 pm

  6. Social Workers EH! well get this I am a 53 year old guy and I have 2 twin boys of 7 and 1 boy of 12 too old my backside the grandparents are family and should have the kids instead of the homosexual pair I refuse to use the word gay as it to me means carefree and happy before the homosexual fraternity hijacked it
    To do this I think is an abomination what planet are these people living on certainly not mine If any social worker came to my house they would leave in body bags I swear it

    Comment by Derek Inglis — May 21, 2010 @ 6:21 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: