Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 12/01/2010 2:05:07 PM PST by NYer
LONDON, December 1, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A “blanket ban” on convicted sex-offenders adopting children is discriminatory, says a report from Helen Reece of the London School of Economics. Reece, a family law expert, has said that each case should be examined separately “on its merits.”
“Sex offenders shouldn’t all be tarred with the same brush,” Reece said. “People need to be carefully screened for adoption and fostering, but each case should be taken on its merits.
“There shouldn’t be blanket rules. What somebody has done before is not necessarily what he or she will do again. When someone has served a sentence, as far as you can, you should treat them the same as anyone else.”
The report was published in the latest edition of Child and Family Law Quarterly.
Reece bases her argument on court challenges that have overturned “blanket bans” on unmarried, cohabiting couples adopting. She pointed to the 2008 case, heard in the House of Lords, which decided that cohabiting couples were being discriminated against by adoption rules. Reece pointed out that cohabiting couples are allowed to adopt even though statistically they have a high rate of break-ups that tend to harm children emotionally and psychologically.
“If we believe that blanket bans are an effective and legitimate means to protect children then we should no more allow cohabiting couples to adopt or foster than convicted sex offenders,” she said.
Currently, there are very few remaining “blanket” restrictions on adoption and fostering in Britain. Single people, unmarried cohabiting couples and homosexual singles can all adopt.
Recently, however, some individuals have been refused because of their traditional religious beliefs, a category not officially banned. In 2008, a Christian couple in Somerset, Eunice and Owen Johns, were refused for fostering because they would not teach their foster children that homosexuality is acceptable. Their local adoption authority was also reportedly “upset” that the couple insisted that children in their care would be required to accompany the family to church on Sundays.
This year, a Christian pediatrician, Sheila Matthews, applied to have her case heard at the European Court of Justice after she had been removed from the adoption panel of the Northamptonshire County Council for expressing her view that homosexual adoption is not in the best interests of the child.
In the case of Ian Wathey and Craig Faunch, two homosexual men who were charged with sexually molesting the boys in their care, the council who gave them the children admitted that a “politically correct” prejudice in favor of homosexuals in adoption was in play.
In an inquiry, Wakefield Metropolitan District Council employees said that despite growing reservations by staff and complaints from the mother of two of the boys, the two men were treated by the authorities as “trophy carers” because of their status as homosexuals. The two men were regarded as beyond scrutiny and “the fear of being discriminatory” lead the council to “fail to discriminate between the appropriate and the abusive.”
The Daily Telegraph quoted one social worker who told the inquiry, “you didn’t want to be seen discriminating against a same-sex couple.”
Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
wow... it gets worse and worse
I guess Muslims can marry their 9 year olds in public now.
It is not wrong to discriminate against Sex Offenders where children are concerned.
Even if it’s discriminatory, so what?
And the recidivism rate for Child Molesters is what?!!!!
And the band plays “The world turned upside down”
Like that filthy ¨prophet¨ of theirs.
And we wonder where our european worshipping leadership gets their crazy ass ideas...
Indeed we should, Ms. Reece.
Utterly insane.
“Great” Britain has become a total moral vaccuum. Put a fork in it.
Their decision to allow sex offenders to adopt is not discriminatory to the offenders---but guess what? It is highly discriminatory to the lives and well being of the children who may end up in the home of a sex offender!
vaudine
100% if given the opportunity.
I am a armed robber, who is it to deny me my right to income and employment? Thats discrimination!
...I am a terrorist
...I am a pedophile
worse yet,
I love goats and living in the past.....preferably about the 700’s... lets go raiding , looting, raping, plundering and we will tell them we are giving them religion....and they have to follow us in our style or we’ll kill them....
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
There has to be some reason why the leftists love perverts, criminals, child molesters, as well as every aspect of the culture of death.
The only rational reason I can come up with is that they are demoniac. I'm open to suggestions, though.
(speechless)
I suggest that you are 100% correct.
Currently, there are very few remaining “blanket” restrictions on adoption and fostering in Britain. Single people, unmarried cohabiting couples and homosexual singles can all adopt.
Recently, however, some individuals have been refused because of their traditional religious beliefs . . .
I suppose the only remaining question is what will replace the United Kingdom when its collapse is complete.
“Discriminatory”, yes. And very wise, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.