No, Judge, I Don't Think So....

Urfan Sharif and Beinash Batool used the right to keep evidence of Sara’s beatings ‘beyond the gaze of the authorities’ in her final months, the judge said. Yesterday the Government introduced a new Bill to Parliament which will block parents home schooling automatically if the child is suspected of being at risk of significant harm.

Yes, Reader, no doubt - like me - you’re astonished that this wasn’t already a factor. But it wasn’t. 

But the Children’s Commissioner said the proposed legislation must go further, as it would not have helped Sara in its current form.

What would, one wonders? Could it possibly have been 'public sector workers doing their jobs like they are supposed to'..?

Mr Justice Cavanagh said: ‘This case brings into sharp relief the dangers of unsupervised home schooling of vulnerable children.’ The Bill introduced in the wake of her murder will block parents’ automatic right to home school if they are subject to a child protection plan.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson described the Bill as a ‘seminal moment for child protection’. But Sara was not subject to social care intervention measures when she died, meaning it would not have blocked the home schooling.

/facepalm. Don't worry folks, we'll get the next one for sure!  

Dame Rachel de Souza said: ‘The Bill must therefore go further in protecting children like her, making it impossible for a child ever known to social care for abuse or neglect to be home schooled.’

We can call this 'stable door' legislation, Reader. 

Meanwhile, the judge in the trial has gone on an unhinged rant about the desire of the press to find out and publish the names of the public sector workers who failed this child. Because heaven forfend there should ever be consequences for screwing up! 

Hey, Williams, if they wanted iron-clad protection for incompetence, they could always go into the judiciary...  

It's About Time...

At the inquest into her death today, Senior Coroner Richard Travers said that he will prepare a Prevention of Future Deaths Report for Home Secretary Yvette Cooper about restrictions for dog-walkers in public places. Mr Travers confirmed during the hearing that 'there are no national restrictions or regulations regarding the number and weight of dogs that can be walked in a public place.'

Local councils have often imposed restictions but there's clearly a need for a UK-wide restriction, and - of course - proper enforcement of it. Because it's useless without that.

The inquest did not hear which dog had been responsible for Natasha's death. But it was previously reported two of her own dogs which were being walked on the day had since been destroyed including a banned bull terrier named Stan.

Anyone surprised? 

You Really Can't Fix Stupid...

The XL Bully ban comes to Northern Ireland, and rescue centres are starting to whine about the likely effects:

Karen Matthews, from Almost Home Animal Centre, says her team work to "rescue, not destroy" animals.

"The last thing I want is to have a centre full of XL Bullies and having to make that choice [to destroy]," she added.

Kill the dogs unable tro be rehomed to have the room to house those that can be rehomed? It seems a logical choice. 

But logic doesn't seem to be the driving factor for the pitnutter crowd: 

Michael McCartney from Glen Craig Canine training in Lisburn has more than 40 years' experience working with dogs, including XL Bully types.

"A dog's a dog, it just depends who's on the other end of it," he said.

Would that be the end with the teeth?  

Mr McCartney added that he often had more bother with smaller breeds.

But a chihuahua sends you to the medicine cabinet for a plaster, not to A&E or the morgue.  

H/T: Protect Our Pets via Twitter

I Don't Go To The Toilet To Feel 'Respected And Affirmed'.

New restaurants, offices, schools and hospitals in England will be required to have separate male and female toilets, in a move ministers say will combat growing concerns about “privacy and dignity” in gender-neutral facilities. The law will mean newly built non-residential buildings require separate facilities, and cannot solely have “universal” lavatories.

According to ministers, 81% agreed with the intention for separate single-sex toilet facilities in a consultation on the proposals, while 82% also agreed with the intention to provide “universal” toilets – a self-contained, and a fully enclosed toilet room with a wash hand basin for individual use – where space allows.

My (very newly built) works office has both, on alternate floors. Imagine the extra cost!  

However, the policy has been criticised as being transphobic since it was first proposed in 2021 because it offered no alternative plan for transgender and non-binary people.

*rolls eyes* 

Badenoch said the move shows the government’s commitment to “ensuring single-sex spaces are protected for all” after plans to overhaul the NHS constitution by limiting the use of gender-neutral wards. These changes will mean patients in England will have the right to be treated on single-sex wards and transgender people will be treated in single rooms.

Pity the Tories have been so lax in standing up for common sense in the past, they might not be so behind in the polls...  

Mermaids, an LGBTQ+ charity (Ed: missing the word 'notorious' there...), has responded to government proposals about gender-specific toilets. A statement on its website said: “We hear that trans, non-binary and gender-diverse people are too often not made to feel welcome, or even safe when using toilet facilities. It is unacceptable that any child should be made to feel this way.

“All children, including those who are trans, non-binary and gender-diverse, should be able to access the toilet that makes them feel respected and affirmed.”

“We want a future whereby every young person can choose a toilet with freedom and autonomy; for some this would be a gender-neutral toilet and for others it would be a gender-specific toilet.”

Might as well ask for a (non-binary) pony as well.