map_of_the_world: (Default)
Over on the The F Word there's a new post by Amity Reed of Fertilefeminism. I for one am really pleased about this. I really think British feminism has dropped the ball on issues surrounding motherhood and reproductive justice issues other than abortion. In my experience lots of feminists are anti mother and those that aren't are clueless of the experiences, needs and oppressions of mothers. Feminist meetings and conferences often exclude mothers through price, lack of childcare and location and sometime just by not addressing anything to do with the needs of mothers. Because the mainstream feminist movement in Britain is overwhelmingly middle class white and able bodied even the women within it who are mothers have no idea of the needs and oppressions of working class, BME,[Women of Colour] and disabled mothers


Amity describes how she has
a feeling of exclusion from the ‘mainstream’ ranks of feminism is sometimes strong. Many mothers I have spoken to (both self-proclaimed feminists and otherwise) feel the same way. When an entire conference on reproductive rights doesn’t include a single workshop on birth; when stay-at-home mothers are denigrated for wasting their skills and educations; when so many resources are directed towards fighting strip clubs and lads’ mags but so little towards child poverty; when public spaces and services are made inaccessible and unwelcoming to families; when feminist books devote many more pages to the evils of pornography than the fact that mothers are disproportionately the ones suffering the monumental and adverse effects of the gender pay gap…it’s enough to make many mothers feel they’ve been forgotten by feminism, that their struggles are unimportant or inevitable.


and this is not okay, yes objectification of women is a feminist issues, but why the obsession with it? Why is that such an exclusive thing in the British feminist scene. I have a sneaking suspicion its because of the quick hit activism that it often involves, standing in a street protesting, signing a petition, sticking stickers and inserts in lad mags may make you feel good, like you've achieved something but it doesn't entail getting your hands dirty, it doesn't involve listening to and supporting real people (it should but that's a whole other discussion)

there is a growing trend in the UK for young working class women with learning difficulties and/or mental health issues to be threatened with having their child taking away at birth and so few people are talking about this, we should be screaming about this, we should be part of the group that supports these women. We should be talking about how little parents on benefits have to live on, how difficult it is for mothers to go back in to education after they have children. We should be talking about child poverty, about the lack of flexibility in employment. We should be talking about the fact that children are taken into the foster care system when very often what their families needs is extra support (It cost £50,000 to keep a child in the care system for a year, it wouldn't cost anywhere near that much to support a family in crises to keep them intact.) We should be talking about the lack of housing for families, despite all the empty properties, we should be talking more about the lack of funding in maternity and post natal care, we should be talking more about the fact women's maternity choices are so often dismissed or curtailed

And at the base line we need to unpack the dominant concept of motherhood and the racism classism and ableism contained within that and the unexamined assumptions of what a good mother is and who deserves to be a mother that come along with it
map_of_the_world: (Default)
The guardian recently did an investigation into the state of Britain's foster care system and unsurprisingly it is an underfunded chaotic mess. I'm sure the people who work with in it absolutely have their hearts in the right place but they are not actually going to make any difference because the whole idea is intrinsically flawed. It all circles round on itself

Children who have been in the care system are far more likely to become teenage parents than their peers. "We struggle a little bit with children in care having children. There is a very negative, repeated cycle – they have ­children, and their children go through the care system again. Being a looked-after child, there is a significant risk of having another child in the care system," Delores, who has worked as a social worker for 14 years, says.

"We are always quite shocked when young people who have been in the care system have children who get referred to us. I have seen it a lot with children who were in care, in secure units, in foster care or residential care. We have to remove their children because they can't parent them, they can't given them ­emotional warmth. They can't do it."

Parents who have been through the care system are twice as likely to lose the right to care for their own children – this is just one of many negative indicators about the dismal life chances for children who are looked after by the state.





So it seems Foster care as it is done now is actually more damaging for families and society. It doesn't break destructive cycles it perpetuates them

I used to think putting more money in the foster care system would fix it and its clear that the foster care system is deeply underfunded:

It is clear from the state of the office carpets that money is tight. The phones are old, the computers are old, there are old grey filing cabinets, pushed together at ugly angles, there are a lot of unhealthy, deadish plants, the walls are covered with stranded spots of Blu-Tack and dried-up sticky tape



Probably training foster carers would make a difference: according to the government website preparation for becoming a foster carer consists of



Once it has been decided you are suitable to become a foster carer, The Criminal Records Bureau will check that you have not committed an offence which would exclude you from fostering. You will also have a health check, to rule out any health problems.

A social worker will then help you fill in an application form and you will be asked to attend a group preparation session with other people who are applying.

Finally your application will be sent to an independent fostering panel, which will recommend whether or not you can become a foster carer. This can take up to six months.


Which seems like less than adequate preparation for supporting and living with traumatised children. But even if foster carers were given excellent training I still don't think that would be the answer. It wouldn't solve or remove all the issues that caused the child to be removed in the first place.Every situation in the report involved poverty, mental health issues, addiction or learning disabilities on the part of the parents. So while there does need to be more money spent on supporting families and keeping children safe, instead of putting it into the foster care system why not spend it on rehab programs, mental health support, training and employing people to help parents with learning difficulties/disabilities to look after their children? Why not train would be foster carers as family support workers. Why not set up community support centers? Why not focus on community regeneration?

There will always be emergencies, there will always be situations where children have to be removed from their parents but putting and infrastructure like this in place would cut down enormously on the children being taken into care. It would also support families who need extra support but are under the radar of social services or families who are to scared to ask for social services support because they fear if they do their children will be taken away,

instead of focusing on overhauling foster care having an infrastructure like this would prevent the double trauma of abuse/neglect and then the removal from the family that children in care have to go through.
map_of_the_world: (Default)
This is something I wrote about before

This is taken from the Telegraph

She has now been warned that she will only be allowed a few hours with her baby, which is due in January, before it is taken into foster care.
After hearing the news, Miss Robertson, of Dunfermline, Fife, who is 26 weeks pregnant, said: “I couldn't believe it. I am so upset – I can't stop crying.”
Mr McDougall, an artist, said he wants to take on full responsibility for his son but claims that he is powerless because he is not married to Miss Robertson.
He added: “Social Services are ruining our lives. As we are not married – because social workers would not let us marry – it seems I have no rights as a dad at all.
“Kerry's gran is trying to apply for custody of Ben but social services have already told us it is unlikely she will be successful. We feel helpless.”


Luckily a slightly more recent report from GMTV suggest social services maybe backing down, but i still want people to know this is happening



Choice quotes from the video by Mark Goldring of Mencap
The starting point should be is it posible to keep the child with the family, and of course not just to look at Kerry, but to look at the support she also gets from her partner and from her wider circle of family and friends.




half of people with learning disabilities have their children taken into care, and we believe that many of those situations would be avoidable with relatively modest levels of support


People who are diferently abled need support in bringing their children up not punisment by having their children removed
map_of_the_world: (Default)
I am really excited about this! I stumbled across this charity on The One Show

Currently if a family become homeless social services has a legal obligation to take the children into care, which is horrendous, why they don't have a legal obligation to house the whole family I don't know

Save the family are a charity that houses and supports homeless families to stop their children being taken into care and teaches them life skills to deal with family life.

As well as being a humane and compassionate way to support people it is also very cost effective. It costs 50,000 pounds to keep a child in care for a year. Save the family can house support and reeducate/train a whole family for slightly less than that. It also will have an enormous positive knock on effect for the economic and social future. According to the After Adoption web site people who have spent time in the care system are sixty six percent more likely to have their own children taken into care. So it's really important to find ways of supporting families without splitting them up and without taking their children in to care if at all possible

I found these vids about the charity (the presenter is kind of annoying and patronising but they are worth while watching anyway)

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqSnYqSe3x0&hl=en&fs=1&;]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC24tWWn9rI&hl=en&fs=1&;]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvhZuxXtJrU&hl=en&fs=1&;]

Profile

map_of_the_world: (Default)
map_of_the_world

October 2010

S M T W T F S
     12
345 6789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 06:41 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios