Monday, 11 May 2009


Lets go back to what this charade began with and it was my husband giving my son a couple of smacks with an open hand around the side of his head as a result of the unacceptable behaviour of my son. My son had racially abused a young girl, spat in her face and was hitting her and pulled her jacket away from her and threw it on some scaffolding.

This type of punishment (a smack) is rarely used by us (and not something I personally condone), however in extreme circumstances it can prove to be the shock needed to curbe the offending behaviour and quite frankly my son's behaviour was offensive and illegal. The punishment he received must have served as a shock to my son (not really ever having a smack before) to go running around school the next day saying he had been beaten up.

Now as a defence my husband used the defence of reasonable corporal punishment. It failed, so below I have reproduced article 79 of the 2002 Children's Law (Jersey). This explains the limitation of the use of this defence:

79 Limitation of defence of reasonable corporal punishment
(1) Any defence of reasonable corporal punishment of a child shall only be available to a person who was at the time of the punishment –
(a) a person with parental responsibility for the child; or
(b) a person without parental responsibility for the child who –
(i) is the father or relative of the child;
(ii) had care of the child; and
(iii) had the consent of a person with parental responsibility for the child to administer such punishment.
(2) Any defence of reasonable corporal punishment of a child shall not be available if the punishment involved any means other than the use of a hand.

Bearing this in mind, it really does make me wonder if his lawyer knew the law. Maybe if we could have afforded a lawyer who was actually going to represent my husband, perhaps the outcome would have been different.

My current stance remains the result of needing the recognition of what actually happened, and the fact all that happened was just a couple of smacks, nothing more nothing less. We don't need any 'help' from them. Unless this happens, as my mum says, and I agree, my son would have my husband over a barrel and what do we do live on egg shells waiting for the next time he does something like this? What would the SS do then? I will not put my family in that position, I love them all too much.

The one question remaining with me is does my husband's actions justify the way we have been villified by Social Services?

Monday, 4 May 2009

Hitting the Jackpot!

For many months I have wondered why they have been able to take a selected few of my children away from me, well I think I have hit the jackpot I have found the only one thing in writing from an initial assessment. It states that I said that I would not take anyones side until I had heard both sides, for this reason and this reason only, come in No 1, you're sacked states because of this I would be unable to protect the children (only a couple of them though the rest were fine).

Now here is the thing, they have had a quick 'chat' with my son and raided my home like the Gestapo, asked my husband to do the infamous 'step outside' as they also did not have a warrent for his arrest or infact any care orders legally allowing them to remove my children from my care and have the cheek to insinuate that they now know my son and husband better than me. Well no they don't. I know their faults and strengths, I know who to trust and believe, I know when my son embelishes the truth, he has a little give away in his eyes most times and on occasion it is almost impossible to tell unless you know something 100% and even then I have got to give it to him, he's good. Luckily he also quickly forgets what comes out of his mouth so if you wait a day or so a clearer picture comes out. The initial my step dad's beaten me up and kicked me in the head (What my husband was arrested for in black and white) changed dramatically by the next day where no kicking in the head was mentioned. At one point my son says I watched everything then he says I did not see anything. However my husband's lawyer told him we could not interogate him as to whether he was telling the truth as the judge wouldn't accept it. I was not allowed to give evidence to get to the truth of the matter. They stated my son was at risk of intimidation. Well if you can call wanting to let him know that this is no joking matter and to tell the truth about what happened intimidating, then blow me, what's the point of a justice system if you do not want the truth.

There should come a point when common sense kicks in with a Social Worker, like on the second day, when his story had changed - they should have thought, hold on a minute we may have got this wrong.

However they had probably just gone too far in the destruction of my family to admit this. An interesting thing I found out recently was who would have given the go ahead at education for the removal of my children with a particular surname, and I would add it was who I thought it was. I just need it in writing now........