![]() |
Welcome to Grandparents Apart
|
GRANDPARENTS APART |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Display Web page text larger or smaller. On View menu, point to Text Size, and then click the size you want. |
|
|
Search this Site |
Jim &
Jean
Hi James, feel free to
post our story on your web site, if our fighting for
a change helps just one grandparent, I'll be so happy, some
grandparents
must find it hard to talk to people in authority, but they must
always
remember, firstly, Social Services is run by the government,
therefore they are civil servants, they work for US secondly and
most important, if a grandparent
fights to the best of there ability, and loses, there is no
shame in that,
they tried there best, and when that child comes in later life
and asks what
have you ever done for me? they can say, hand on heart, we did
our best. My
self and Christine are always here if we can help anybody, get
in touch.
3 years ago our grandson was assaulted by either his mother or
her boy
friend, Social Services didn't hesitate in putting both children
into foster care. we
asked Social Services to bring them to us, as we lived next to
the sea we thought they
would jump at the chance. How wrong we were, so, we started
having
assessments to become family and friends carers, little did we
know that a
Social Worker had already begun adoption papers, they held our
assessment
back for 6 months, then they came to visit, "We've come to tell
you why you
are not getting the kids" we listened, wife in tears, Then she
took great
pleasure in telling my wife, "they'll be easy to place" That
sentence was
the last straw, I said to the manager "get your bag , get that
bag sat over
there and get out, and before you go I'll promise 2 things, I'll
get the kids
and then I'll get your job" and off they went.
No solicitor would touch the case, apart from one. Up to this
point all
people had read about us, is what had been written by Social
Services.
I managed to contact the guardian, he came to visit, he was very
abrupt,
obviously had read Social Services lies, 3 days latter he
phoned, "I want to see you both
in Bradford in the company of the kids", so off we went, we
spent the
afternoon at Alphabet zoo with the guardian looking on. A week
went by, the
guardian rang, " I want to see the children in your home" the
guardian came,
we live on a leisure complex, I asked if he would like a look
round he said
"I've seen enough".
He stopped the adoption, he spun the case there and then, Social
Services were having none of it and started mud slinging, they
even made us go to a shrink for an
assessment thinking they'd get some dirt on us, after 12 months
of court and
£10,000, we walked into Bradford crown court, our barrister, a
little gem
came over, we could see the tears in her eyes, "YOU'VE GOT THE
KIDS" Social worker sat there face like thunder I said
"remember 12 months ago I promised 2 things, I've got number
one.( tomorrow, how to get number2)
The next weekend I picked up the children from the foster carers
to start
their new life with us, driving home my g/d who then was 4 years
old said
"were getting a new mummy and daddy" I asked her who? "you and
grandma
silly" my heart melted, after all the fighting, all the tears
and sleepless
nights I knew myself and my wife had gone into hell, but came
back with 2
soles that we snatched from a devil.
Many a person would have left it there, content that they had
the kids, but
we made a promise, and we intended to keep it, I started a
complaints
procedure, we got letters back saying nobody had acted
improperly, I sent
letters back saying we were not satisfied, and took it to
another level, you
see, a few months ago we were paying £250 per hour for a legal
team to fight
for us, now the boots on the other foot, it would cost me 37p to
send them a
boat load of complaints, every department had to read them,
refer them and
answer them, until after 14 months we ended up back in Bradford,
this time
to the Town Hall. In we walked, met by the head councillor,
through a door
we could see about 8 people sat round a big table, the
councillor said
"before we go in, remember, you've got the children, its all
over", did this
clown think I was a muppet?, we'd gone to hell and back and I
wanted
answers, we went in, 3 councillors, 2 complaints officers from
the council,
2 from Social Services, and there she sat, the director of
Social Services, they rattled on for an
hour or more, excuse after excuse, then it was our turn, tie
off, jacket off
sleeves rolled up, we didn't hold anything back, but every point
we put, we
backed up with proof, a copy for all of them. The director of
Social Services was made to
face us and apologise. I was asked for one last comment I said
"there's a
lot of good grandparents out there can give kids a loving home,
but for the
sake of a couple of hundred pounds, you'd rather put them into
care. 3 days
later we received their findings, all points in our favour, "the
panel
would like to thank Mr and Mrs Green for there written and oral
submissions
and the manner in which they were presented, we further
recommend the
following improvements.
Legal entitlement of significant
relatives
Their rights for their opinion to be
heard
A change in family and friends
procedure
We hope our story gives you some hope in your fight.
Don't give up ,best wishes, Andy and Chris G, East Yorkshire.
In September 1993. our oldest granddaughter came to stay with us
and when we saw that at almost six years of age she weighed only
30 lbs. we decided to apply for custody of her. After a long
court battle we eventually received full custody of our
granddaughter in March 1998.
We were first contacted on 15 December 1 999. by the social
worker in Slough who informed us that they had become involved
with a horrific case of abuse concerning our grandchildren and
would we be willing to provide a home for them. As we had full
custody of our oldest granddaughter we replied that we were more
than willing to provide a home for these other children. We were
further informed that if we stayed in the background everything
would be all right regarding the children. On 10 February 2000
the four children were taken into care.
On 25 May, the Guardian ad Litem arrived in the afternoon to
introduce himself and explain his role in the proceedings. He
stayed for approximately 3 hours and took no notes. Before
leaving he stated he had arranged for the children to come the
following day and stay for a short visit. The children duly
arrived the next day for a week's holiday and returned home to
their respective carers on 2 June. After their return home
contact remained with the children on a weekly basis by
telephone, this was arranged through the social worker. It was
also arranged at this time that a local social worker would
visit us on a regular basis to prepare an assessment for the
court case in Slough.
\\e had a good relationship with the Slough social worker until
7 July 2000, when there was a court hearing and the social
worker was changed. The Guardian ad Litem appointed a solicitor
to act on behalf of the children and a child psychologist.
Between 30 August and the 2 September the psychologist came to
assess my wife, son, his fiancé and myself After these
assessments were carried out all contact with the children was
cut. We realised at this stage that we required a solicitor in
England.
On 8 September at our- request the social worker that had been
assigned to the case arrived at our house, introduced herself
and outlined what bad been happening as regards the case She
stayed for about 2 hours and at no time did she take any notes.
I later found out that on leaving my house she went to the local
social work department and stopped the assessments being
prepared since June.
Court case was held in Uxbridge on Jan 23rd 2001 when it was
decided that the two youngest children would be put into care.
Since the case we have heard nothing from Slough Social Services
about where the children are or if the two older ones are
together. We later discovered that we are entitled to view all
reports held by the local authority on us but to date all
requests have been ignored.
.There was only one person who carried out assessments on the
extended family and yet they state the clinical psychologist,
guardian ad litem and social worker came independently to the
same conclusion. The judge made his decision on the assessments
made by all three and in fact marked out praise on the social
worker in his summation. We asked through a solicitor in
December 2000, for all the papers in the case but only received
a copy of the assessments carried out by the psychologist. To
date we have requested to see all the reports and assessments
held by Slough Social Services but all requests have been
ignored. We have now received a complaint form but only after a
number of requests were made through the Department of Health.
Everything that has been stated we now have documented evidence
of these facts.
Taking into account all the solicitor fees, court and travel
costs we have paid out approximately £ 18.000.oop but like a lot
of grandparents it is not the money. We only wish to know that
the children are being well looked after and having access to
see the children
If the law was changed to allow grandparents the same rights as
parents then the costs of protracted court cases would be less
to the tax payer through legal aid costs as a greater number of
grandparents would qualify for legal aid. Grandparents may be
the only persons who can inform these children in later years
about their family and medical history.
Hugh and Margaret Rennie
9 Whitletts Road
Ayr KA8 OJA Tel - 01292 289 658
The Tiff
by Sandra Docherty
Sandra, a Grandparent from West Lothian and her
daughter Jan had a fall out a TIFF. It was one week before
Christmas 1999 a special time for all families, especially Grans
and their and their Grandchildren. Sadly Jan took it as far as
stopping her children from seeing their Gran who, as stated in
court, was for the past 11 years a loving Gran until the TIFF.
During the next 3 years Sandra was forced to revert to court
proceedings because of her daughters determined attitude
however, Sandra was always ready to resolve the matter out with
court at any time if an agreement or reconciliation could be
reached. Alas, Jan dug in deeper making all sorts of allegations
towards her mother - none of which were true. Jan also managed
to convince Sandra's only son that his mother was a bad person
and that Jan's story was the true version of events. Sandra now
has no family contact with either her own 2 children or her
Grandchildren.
I ask you all 'WHAT MAKES A DAUGHTER DO THIS TO HER MOTHER?',
all I can say is Jan will have to live with herself and her
conscience for the rest of her life. Over a TIFF.
Many court appearances took place over the 3 years in question.
Sandra's first solicitor dropped her when it came to the fight.
Sandra's 'eleventh hour' solicitor, who is a fighter, tried his
heart out for Sandra but pressure from the Sheriff even had him
asking Sandra to call it off, but although the court proceedings
were proving futile, Sandra was adamant, they fought on. The
Sheriffs attitude to Sandra's case was 'Grandparents have no
rights at all. (Prejudgement). Her solicitor was not given a
chance to bring in solid witnesses to prove that her daughter
was telling lies about her. It all came down to Jan's
solicitor's cunning ploy, to state that the Grandchildren wanted
no more to do with their Gran - they simply did not want to see
her any more. WHY? Why would 2 young children who, as proven in
court had a loving, caring relationship with their Grandmother,
suddenly not want to see her anymore - was there something here
that the Sheriff was not picking up on. Can children of 10 and 7
(their ages at the time their ALIENATION took place) really all
of a sudden, decide a person is bad for them? Or are they being
brainwashed into thinking this by another party? These children,
I believe, are pawns in a game. They are being used as 'power
tools' in a game their parents are trying to win.
It was proven in court that Sandra was a loving Grandparent and
that the separation from her Grandchildren and herself started
because of a TIFF between herself and her daughter Jan. The
problem therefore is between mother and daughter not Grandmother
and Grandchildren.
Sandra wants everyone now to know how she feels. This is worse
than a death for her. She is grieving for 2 little girls who
live so nearby her but she is unable to hold them, give them a
cuddle, tell them she loves them - not even by letter (the
Sheriff would not even allow that) they are 'so near to her -
and yet so far away'. "No contact" as spoken by the Sheriff,
means exactly that, no birthday cards, no Christmas presents, no
phone calls - NOTHING! His summing up comments were, [Avizandum
following parties submissions],( whatever that means), the
sheriff did however note that he would be awarding no award of
contact and went on to say, that, "what Mrs. Docherty had done
to upset the children in raising this action was nothing short
of a disgrace."
If this so called "wise man" (the Sheriff) had really been wise
surely he would have saw through this charade and told mother
and daughter to resolve their TIFF for the sake of the children.
Families should be brought together by people like himself, not
torn further apart. HE REMOVED THE PERSON, NOT THE PROBLEM.
Although Sandra's hearts broken she lives for the day when,
hopefully her Grandchildren will be old enough to decide for
themselves if they want contact with their Grandmother. And I
have no doubt that day will come. Until then she resolves
herself to commit her time to helping other Grandparents out
there who are going through much the same as she has been
through, and with her charity work for Grandparents Apart Self
Help Groups she will push for the rights that all Grandparents
should have in this world ( if no other reasons involved) the
right of contact, not by the whim of another.
To Top
Hannah's daughter Jill had just come out
of prison serving 3 years for shoplifting and drugs. Jill's
daughter Jenny had been living with Hannah her Granny for 4
years and was set in her ways with friends at school who knew
nothing about her mothers past life.
Jill decided she wanted Jenny back and Hannah was horrified as
Jill had moved back to her old haunts.
Hannah contacted Social Services who told her they did not want
to know, then she contacted a lawyer who started custody
proceedings and lost costing her £8000,oop
Jill kept custody by saying she had learnt her lesson.
Hannah contacted Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland and
went to one of their meetings, pouring her heart out to the
group she found a great comfort in knowing there was other
people to support her and give her a friendly ear and a cup of
tea, and to realise they were not only a support group but are
trying to do something about it. Hannah has been a stout member
ever since trying to change the law to give grandparents the
rights they so deserve.
She has been to the Scottish Parliament to lobby and hand in
petitions and the social life is pretty good too dances, race
nights, karaoke nights, keeping herself really busy giving her a
sense of worthwhile knowing she is doing something about it,
with really dedicated mates, she finds when she is down one of
the gang is there to help.
Jenny is Still with Jill and the reports are not to good, Hannah
is standing up to be counted and is determined to get
grandparents rights.
To Top
Grandparents Jim and Jean were horrified to find that when their daughter fell out with them and told them they could not see their grandchildren.
They thought the tiff would blow over and she would come round but alas she stuck to her guns and the worse thing about it she had the law on her side.
Jim investigated to see what rights he had and was devastated to find he had literary no rights at all, and that grandparents had went to court and spent thousands of pounds of their nest egg with no results, they were broken hearted.
Jean saw an advert in a local newspaper and called the helpline Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Glasgow and went along to one of their surgeries staffed by volunteers who have undergone the same heartbreak and are dedicated to helping others experiencing the same problems.
The Group formulated a letter to send to Jim and Jeans daughter inviting her to attend a mediation session, she did and with the help of the group mediator reached an agreement and realised things had got out of hand, glad of the chance of intervention they are now a happy family again avoiding the trauma of going through courts that harms children and makes the problem worse, where children are used as weapons to get at one another, brainwashing the children for their own gratification, thankfully the daughter had the good sense to realise this and Jim and Jean realised the futility of further arguments.