Paul Dyson, independent chair of Hull's safeguarding children board, said: "The board takes extremely seriously cases which result in injuries of this kind to children. The board is aware of this case and, now that the criminal case is concluding, will consider whether any further learning is required."Because that's always a dead giveaway...
As is the fact that - despite concerns - there was no official record:
Jon Plant, city safeguarding children manager, said: "The child was not previously on an 'at risk' register or child protection plan with Hull children's services.
"Following the incident, immediate steps were taken by professionals to remove the child and ensure their long-term wellbeing and to ensure that those responsible for causing the injuries were brought to justice."Yes, you were very prompt after the baby was scalded with the bathwater. Pity you didn't do something before...
Health visitors and social services are understood to have had concerns about the baby in the months before it happened and had failed to gain access to see her on 12 separate occasions.And yet, the squalor in which an inadequate young couple were bringing up a child provoked no urgency:
The Mail can reveal the authorities failed to gain access to the Bransholme house the couple were living in, despite warning signs such as 20 bags of rubbish and hundreds of soiled nappies piled high outside.If that's 'taking cases extremely seriously', one can only wonder how they deal with the rest...
"Horner was jailed for 21 months for child neglect after the court heard she failed to take her baby to hospital until five hours after discovering the horrific injuries."
ReplyDeleteI don't want to sound like I'm making excuses for Ward, who was the established causer of the injuries (including bites and fractures), but the welfare of the child was unquestionably in the hands of the mother, Kelly Horner, who had parental responsibility, with second-tier responsibility by the social workers who appear to have adopted a tick-box strategy of saying "Well, I asked her to phone us".
When Horner failed to register the birth of the child within 42 days of the birth (*), the social workers should have gained forcible entry via the police to establish the whereabouts and condition of the infant. It was clear grounds to intervene.
This is going to keep happening so long as we continue to give unsupervised accommodation to teenagers as a reward for not using contraception.
Background:
Kelly Horner, 23, was mother to three children (still is, I suppose) indicating that she began having children some time earlier.
In April 2012 she admitted the above offence and agreed to cooperate in the prosecution of Ward. Sentencing was delayed until after Ward's trial in September 2012. She was therefore free to leave court.
Following trial in November, Ward was sentenced. Horner's sentencing was expected in December after the probation service wrote a report on her. Presumably the sentencing had to be delayed so as not to affect Ward's trial.
To repeat: I don't want to make excuses for Ward but he was possibly a minor with known limitations at the time of the offence if his relatives and defence are describing him accurately. It made about as much sense to leave a child with him as with the pitbull. It always will be; he's not suitable to have care of anybody.
Horner, however, was the adult and apparently already had care of two older children (based on her FB page, according to reports). This may perhaps have been why the social services failed to identify that she had become incompetent, possibly due to the introduction of drugs via Ward.
The sentence of 21 months presumably reflects her admission and cooperation. I suppose that means she will serve about half of that so by next Christmas she will be out. I don't know what will happen to the other children.
(*) Not sure which instrument sets it at 42 days as this seems to have been shortened from 3 months. The social workers will have known of the basic requirement.
Unfortunately such greater powers to force entry would not be used against scum like this but SS's real enemy, normal bourgeois families.
ReplyDeleteI think this is yet again another unintended consequence of the modern interpretation of feminism. The assumption that women are better, never lie, and never ever harm children (it's always those horrible men).
ReplyDeleteYes, I've experienced it. My ex-partner whom I share parental responsibility with was allowing her newest male 'friend' to intimidate and injure my four year old son. I reported it to Childrens Services (after attempting the adult response of talking to her got nowhere). Their response? To (only after multiple requests) ask her if 'everything was OK', no investigation or even attendance and to investigate... me. (her male friend was later arrested and deported for behaviour towards other children at his place of work - their response? ' Ah well, we didn't know, and it doesn't mean he was harming your son' FFS).
Women are equal, that means they are as likely to lie, cheat and harm as men. the facts are that women kill/injure more children a year than men do. As WoaR said, the responsibility is hers, and there is as yet no explanation as to who exactly caused the bite marks and other injuries, or are we to assume it was all 'the man'?
My belief is that her sentence reflects the mistaken ideology that even when a woman is caught doing wrong, 'it's the mans fault'.
God help the children because Social workers never will (enforcing their ideology trumps the welfare of a child every time(.
Image search 'Jon Plant' + Hull.
ReplyDeleteMake sure that you are sitting down, preferably on an old towel.
@Twenty Rothmans
ReplyDeleteOh my God.
I'll just leave it at that. (shivers)
"This is going to keep happening so long as we continue to give unsupervised accommodation to teenagers as a reward for not using contraception. "
ReplyDeleteYup. :(
"Kelly Horner, 23, was mother to three children (still is, I suppose)..."
Some aren't so lucky! I guess Horner had a fractionally better taste in partners...
"Unfortunately such greater powers to force entry would not be used against scum like this but SS's real enemy, normal bourgeois families."
I fear you're right...
"...another unintended consequence of the modern interpretation of feminism. "
ReplyDeleteSadly so. I should have given this one the 'pussy pass' tag.
"I'll just leave it at that. (shivers)"
Awww. I hope for his sake he has inner beauty.
Probably not, though.