A no-win situation

Further to the previous posting, there's a story in the Times today of a mother who lost the plot and struck her child with a hairbrush. The boy, who is only 8, has now been taken into care. Without knowing the full details it's hard to be certain, but it sounds, well, mad.

And there does seem to be a bit of a dilemma for the mother here. If the boy doesn't get to school she's jailed for allowing him to truant. But if she uses physical force to make him go, she gets her child taken into care. I suppose there must be something short of hitting him that she could have tried, but at the end of the day it's still physical coercion.

Comments

[Pat]

I wonder what penalty all those well meaning people will suffer if any harm befalls the boy whilst in their care? And what will they do if he doesn't feel like doing what he's told- call his mummy? Essentially they just want to preen at other's expense.

[James P]

"taken into care" is such a weaselly phrase, isn't it? If the real meaning, something like "removed against you and your family's will to a scary communal residence where far worse things will happen to you" had to be used, perhaps it wouldn't happen quite so often.

I hope that anything he suffers while 'in care' is as openly discussed.

[Terry]

It's a smack with a hairbrush for a naughty kid - on the face of it, well within parental rights

[James P]

"parental rights"

I didn't know we had still had any!

[Steve]

So he is less at risk from a bruise on the shoulder and more at risk from violence, drugs and abuse (all of which are common in care). We don't put our brightest into the Waffen Social Services do we?

How do we escape from a decade of imbecile legislation?