DCSF No plans to undertake any further reviews of historical cases of child abuse
Department for Children, Schools and Families wrote “The Government has previously commissioned two major reviews into historical abuse of the type that you are calling for. These are Sir William Utting’s report ‘People Like Us’ and Sir Ronald Waterhouse’s report ‘Lost in Care’. The detailed responses to both these influential reports have informed much of the subsequent reforms in children’s policy
There are no plans to undertake any further reviews of historical cases of child abuse”
These inapropriate decisions will leave thousands of historic abuse survivors cases unheard and Kendall House is one such institution that wasn’t covered by the “People Like Us” or “Lost In Care” reports. Putting every childs experiences into one or two baskets with no voice for those involved in other forms of abuse can only undermine individual circumstances. The dcsf said “although the Government acknowledges that it can be particularly harrowing for victims of child abuse to seek redress through the Courts, each case must be considered on its merits and be the subject of the due processes”. How can each case be considered on it’s own merits when the dcsf have bunched them to fit into two reports with no room for other cases that are not covered by those reports?
Such a review of Kendall House is in every child’s interest because the drugs and processes that were failures then are still predominantly failing looked after children today because nothing has been learnt from historic abuse on children drugged or misplaced into institutions that are inapropriate and damage children physically and mentally. The inapropriate use of psychiatric drugs on many looked after children and teenagers is a serious issue and needs an urgent review. The use of drug trials on looked after children must also be reviewed as historic abuse shows children were used in trials and it was over looked by the Government who failed to act on cases like Kendall House.
The CICA have refused the ex residents the right to exceptional circumstances and refused them the right of appeal so when the dcsf write “ they are aware people, such as yourself, who have been the victim of child abuse, are entitled to seek redress through the Civil Courts through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. Although the Government acknowledges that it can be particularly harrowing for victims of child abuse to seek redress through the Courts, each case must be considered on its merits and be the subject of the due processes.” it makes me realise they always point us in directions of closed doors.
We have seen the way the CICA deal with compensation claims from victims and survivors of child abuse and also how the civil law despite recent changes is still not adequate enough to ensure civil action for many survivors who’s cases do not fall into the new limitations act leaving many survivors of abuse without civil justice and without compensation.
One of the problems I found with the email sent to me was the innacurate content and I quote
“I understand from the House of Commons debate that took place in October 1994 that Kent Police were satisfied with their preliminary investigations and that an invitation was extended to former residents of the children’s home to go through those files held by the council with relevant members of the council’s staff. In addition the church authorities responsible for the home did in fact release the files that they held.”
I need to correct the DCSF on their totally inaccurate version of events
Kent police were not satisfied with their preliminary investigations because Wandsworth social services refused them access to the files, they then offered the police the option to request what it was they wanted from my files and the police made it clear that how could they possibly know what they wanted if they were not allowed to see the files to acertain what was needed. Wandsworth then allowed them to see the files but refused to let them copy or take any of the contents which in a criminal case is of no use as they would need the contents. Kent Police David Pryde wrote a letter stating from what he had seen in the files he could see why Wandsworth social services did not want to be open to external scrutiny. They also stated that they were alarmed that Wandsworth were able to undermine a criminal investigation. That case did not progress and whilst Wandsworth were undermining my case they had something else going on as the foster father the police were investigation was at the time being charged and convicted for other offences to a young adult with learning disabilities.
Wandsworth social services refused all access to my files because they did not want Teresa Cooper (myself) to sue them and they witheld those files to prevent civil action.
Those files were witheld until late 2006 and were only obtained because I went through the normal route of getting my files and I didn’t mention to Wandsworth and their insurers did not want me to have my files. Those workers didn’t check either but when they handed me my files 99% of the Kendall House information was missing but my files were there in the parliment debate in 1994 because they were used by MP Bowis.
At no stage what so ever were any other ex residents invited to view their files and as mine were being deliberatly witheld it would not of been in the authorities interest to provide other girls with their files either. Every single file of ex Kendall House residents files are missing from 1980 and before that date but they did exist until 1980 when a documentry came out exposing Kendall House and Dr MS Perinpanayagam which was ignored by everyone including the Church of England, MP’s and various others in senior positions.
Not one girl (ex Kendall House resident) has ever been invited by any council to view their files and of each girl apart from two has any files because the councils have infact mislaid their files and they have never been found. It is only girls after 1980 whos files exist with the Church and Councils and each of those files has 99% of the Kendall House files missing including mine.
The Department of Children, Schools and Families have not based the Kendall House case on it’s own merits and as they have stated they are not planning to review any further cases of historic abuse this is of serious concern to any survivors who are seeking a review or enquiery into the abuse they suffered in a home/institution for looked after children.
If the two reviews were sufficient we would not be seeing the continued failure to looked after children today but the problem has clearly not improved and a review into Kendall House is likely to make a huge difference to how children are treated and the drug regimes investigated.
Enjoy this post? Share it with others.
Comments
Add a comment
Next entry: Fathers: The War Against Error
Previous entry: Family Law Solicitor's needed. West Sussex (Legal Jobs in Sussex)
On 9th Oct 2008 at 09:46 AM michaelmac said...
No one want a proper inquiry into KH, Because to do so would prove the government of the day proffited from drug trials on children
On 17th Oct 2008 at 12:28 PM Teresa said...
I managed to find a story my dad once told me and I found it on the net
Once upon a time there was a non-conforming sparrow who decided not to fly south for the winter. However soon the weather turned so cold that he reluctantly started to fly south. In short time ice began to form on his wings and he fell in to a barn yard almost frozen. A cow passed by and crapped on the unhappy little bird.
The unhappy sparrow thought it was his end, but the manure warmed him and defrosted his wings. Warm and happy, able to breathe he started to sing. Just then a large cat came by and hearing the chirping investigated the sound. The cat cleared away the manure, found the chirping bird and promptly ate him up. The moral of the story:
1. Everyone who shits on you is not necessarily your enemy.
2. Everyone who gets you out of the shit is not necessarily your friend.
3. If you are warm and happy in a pile of shit - keep your mouth shut
On 17th Oct 2008 at 03:18 PM michaelmac said...
Or you get eaten alive lol
On 17th Oct 2008 at 03:41 PM Teresa said...
I think it is awful that the dcsf have decided not to review anymore historic cases of abuse and whats more is most of their own workers dont know about it. This is another embarassment for Ed Balls on yet another bad decision.
On 11th Nov 2008 at 08:41 AM pam said...
Brilliant! I was warm and happy in my pile of shit, literally, we were well fed and clothed and more importantly, educated, but something niggled me at night at the age of 5 or 6 and still bothers me to this day and sometimes I wish a big effing cat could have come along and taken me away, not eaten me of course. But it always makes me mad to think that these perverts are paid to care for us and do quite the opposite, leaving us with phobias, nightmares and hideous memories for years to come.
On 17th Nov 2008 at 01:15 AM michaelmac said...
The mind numbing hypocracy of Brown and Balls over child protection beggers belief, Brown called for people to resign over the Ross and Brand affair, But in the murder of a child there is no such call, But those of us in the know do not trust any government minister where child protection is concerned, Balls department has issued a statment saying there will no more investigation into historic child abuse cases, This statment is rather staggering considering, Because one of the people he appointed to OFSTED resigned after the out cry from victims of abuse, Who had been drugged in care