Maybe Judge Purkiss Should Foster Him Instead?

A teenage boy with special needs has been "failed" by a Canvey specialist care unit, a judge has said.

'Failed' how, exactly?

The judge has aired her criticisms in a written ruling after analysing the boy's case at a private hearing at the East London Family Court in Canary Wharf, London, earlier this year.

Ah. One of those. And we criticise other countries for secretive justice systems...

Island Lodge staff had not been trained to look after a child with the teenager's disabilities, did not know how to communicate with him and had exercised "unnecessary and probably unlawful restraint", the judge said.

Translation: "He was a violent little nightmare and they didn't want to wind up with staff injuries and resignations..."

She said bosses at Island Lodge had written to the council indicating that they did not agree with some of her findings.

Heh! I'd love to read that. But we can't.

Judge Purkiss said the boy's parents had asked the council for help because they were having difficulties managing his behaviour.

Maybe Judge Purkiss should offer to let him stay with her? She clearly knows better than anyone else...

"Island Lodge was never the right place for (the boy)," said Judge Purkiss. "Staff at the unit did not know how to communicate with (him) and were hyper vigilant he would become aggressive."

They do have the welfare of their own staff to look after...

"This led them to exercise unnecessary and probably unlawful restraint."

Shouldn't you know what's lawful and what isn't? Aren't you a judge?