Friday, September 27, 2013

Michael Gove and the care of vulnerable children


From Brother Ivo:

When Michael Gove raised his deep disquiet at the way “confidentiality of data” had been restrictively administered, to the detriment of child protection, he did good service to the young within Local Authority care. No doubt he will hold meetings, ask questions and issue instructions.

He is an intellectually rigorous man, and Brother Ivo hopes that he will begin to appreciate that such difficulties arise within a wider context, both within his Department’s culture, and that of our society. Both need to be changed, which is easier said than done. Our public care for vulnerable children is not yielding happy or cost effective results, and Mr Gove will need to dig deep and think harder if he wishes to uncover the full extent of our failures and develop the changes necessary to advance the interests of the young.

The Secretary of State's outrage was triggered when he learnt that his own Department had difficulty in identifying the localities of children’s homes for which it was responsible, whereas the paedophile networks had managed to construct links to ensure that the information they needed was readily available and passed between them countrywide for their vile purposes.

"Mr Gove described a situation where it was very difficult to gather basic information about care homes and the children in them. He said he believed this could have hindered the police and helped individuals and groups seeking to harm children.”

“In the name of 'protecting children' by officially 'protecting' their information, we had ended up helping the very people we were supposed to be protecting them from.”
Mr Gove is characteristically blunt, and yet because he does not have direct experience in this area, he has yet to grapple with the other dimensions of the problem.

Not only have well-meaning 'confidentiality' principles compromised the safety of young people, so have 'Children’s Rights'.

Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan. Our children are being let down by our public interventions in their lives, but this deficiency is not just a failure of administration; neither is it a consequence of insufficiently defined targets or performance indicators. It is a signifier of a much wider neglect of childhood brought about by many who have sought to re-define family values and what it means to be a child.

Even in the best regulated families, childhood has changed. Our little ones have a very different experience of nurture from their parents and grandparents: they may not have prolonged care by their mothers and extended family during infancy; their parents have become more motivated to ‘fulfill themselves', which may mean extended time at work and a greater readiness to bail out of troubled marriages, if they ever had them. To compensate our children for these losses, we have offered them extended public interventions and 'Rights'.

“Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone?” Jesus once asked. We might bear this in mind as we see what responses we make to the young.

When families fall into stress and inadequacy - which they do for a variety of accidental and cultural reasons - young people suffer from the inability of their parents to prioritise for them. Responsible parenting gets lost as parents fall out, fail, and give up.

Biological parents are supplanted by statutory interventions, and yet what our authorities offer is all too often little better.

The child who is removed often suffers through that removal whether or not he or she was physically or sexually abused or neglected. We are becoming aware that soldiers returning from war zones often suffer disorientation when they return to a peaceful environment, even when coming home to their families.

It should not therefore surprise us that when we remove children whose personalities are still under formation, they have similar problems. Even if their homes have been inadequate, there is still a bereavement, and removals usually overlook a wise principle: “When making changes in children’s lives, make them one at a time.”

A removal often involves a change of school and locality, the loss of friends, and sometimes sibling separation. Often the 'befriending' social worker who changed your life is relocated to another case within months.

The younger child can usually be managed more easily, and many of these are placed with foster carers. But there is a nationwide lack of foster parents, partly because local authorities do not always treat them fairly or with sensitivity.

It is hard enough to recruit them for the very young, but inevitably when foster homes are sought for the most rebellious, truculent, and aggressive adolescent, that is a more difficult prospect. The more troubled children can pass through multiple carers with incremental losses compounding the problems with every move. Carers skilled in managing such children are in especially short supply and institutional care at massive public expense can become the only option.

Caring for just under 5000 children in private care homes is costing £1billion per year.

Often these children are placed far from home. Sometimes this is for good and understandable reason: children may need to be removed from abusive families, drug dealer networks, or gang cultures. Unsurprisingly, a combination of isolation and association with other children in difficulty within such homes provides a context in which the deceptively friendly paedophile makes his appearance.

Often, these children will have experienced not only removal from family and friends, but multiple failed foster placements and multiple social workers. They have become difficult to manage administrative problems. They may not cry out “I am not a number”, but that is how they will feel. Ill-equipped to make good choices for themselves, the older children frequently become self-contained, suspicious, and self-assertive. Why wouldn’t they?

What few outside this world of public childcare understand is that these institutions - which are providing some of the most expensive child care in the country (several times the cost of Eton) - can struggle to attempt to contain the children with any degree of parental authority.

If a child becomes so disruptive and uncontrollably at risk, one moves to yet another level of institution (and expense) within 'Secure Accommodation'. Only here the doors are locked. Getting a child behind a locked door - the better to keep him or her safe - is not easy. It requires a court order and an expensive legal process which is regularly reviewed. Local authorities under financial pressure regard this as a last resort.

This raises the question of why all our institutional children’s homes not 'secure'?

The shameful answer is 'Children’s Rights'.

In the same way that the high-minded principles of data protection permitted the obstruction of the Secretary of State's ability to identify the risky areas and plan accordingly, so the consequences of human rights activism has its unacknowledged dark and dirty side in the neglect and exploitation of the poor.

Nobody wants to own responsibility for this consequence of the human rights culture.

While the costs of residential care may be astronomically high, the residential social worker is a lowly-paid and much undervalued cog in the wheel. Having been given the responsibility to live with and manage difficult children, they have been given no power to impede the coming and going of young adolescents, and in the high profile cases of organised abuse, they have spoken of their anger and frustration as they watched young girls getting into taxis, knowing what was happening, and impotent to interfere. Some sense that managers of budgets have effectively given up trying to contain such youngsters.

We live in a rights culture. That should in no way be confused with a protective culture, a nurturing culture, or a responsible one.

It is not only the organised older men who exploit these troubled adolescents. They form sexual relationships with those of their own age which often lack affirming love. Often this begins under the statutory age of consent, but who cares about that anymore?

Brother Ivo does, for he has encountered one such young woman who described how her multiple sexual partners delivered no sense of exclusive intimacy or self esteem. It was only when a boyfriend became jealous and hit her that she felt any sense of being 'special'.

Few will articulate the problem so clearly, but it may offer a clue as to why the average woman who suffers domestic abuse tolerates 27 assaults before concluding that something needs to be done to stop it.

Why is this problem seemingly growing?

Brother Ivo suggests that it started to go seriously wrong when the courts decided to reject Victoria Gillick’s attempts to protect her children from unlawful under-age sexual intercourse, with the result that parents are no longer alerted when their children seek to be prescribed contraception. The arrival of the non-judgmental school counsellor further reduced parental controls, as did the virtual abandonment of enforcing the age of consent.

The Gillick legal decision thought in terms of a minority of cases where a young person was responsible enough to make such a medical decision for herself, but, as with abortion, a free-for-all followed. Who now seriously bothers to challenge the wishes and feelings of any middle adolescent in these matters? The school? The social worker? Our culture?

Brother Ivo knows a primary school teacher who watched a nine-year-old storm out of school when the headmaster refused to allow her to come to the classroom dressed as jail-bait. On the way out she asserted her 'human right' to dress as she pleased.

There are two telling sentences in the summary of the Gillick story:
“The House of Lords focused on the issue of consent rather than a notion of 'parental rights' or parental powers.”
One Judge explained:
“..the authority of parents to make decisions for their minor children is not absolute, but diminishes with the child's evolving maturity; except in situations that are regulated otherwise by statute, the right to make a decision on any particular matter concerning the child shifts from the parent to the child when the child reaches sufficient maturity to be capable of making up his or her own mind on the matter requiring decision.”
We saw there the crippling of traditional parental authority which was replaced by the judgments of the State. What could possibly go wrong?

Doubtless mature, informed decision-making by intelligent, articulate young women all plays out very well in Primrose Hill, but we now see the consequences of such liberal reasoning in the inner city estates where multiple deprivations might have been survivable if strong families subsisted. With family breakdown and dissolved parental authority, we see the children of the poor betrayed. A stroppy youngster with human-rights rhetoric on his or her side is beyond the containment of many a struggling single parent.

Families used to be able to point to a societal 'line in the sand', confident that if they asserted a prohibition, society would support them. That age of consent, that right to know if a child was becoming sexually active, that right to enforce a curfew time, each was a useful weapon in the arsenal of the parent, helping them to discharge their responsibility to protect their child, sometimes from themselves, often within a dangerous environment.

Yet if biological parents no longer have knowledge or control over risks to their under-age children, why should we expect any different from the State when it acquires the role of 'Parental Responsibility'?

Many of the youngsters who are being drugged and gang raped have little self esteem, which is why they are so vulnerable to the slightest show of affection and interest. Often this begins with absent parents, usually fathers, but throughout the culture from their earliest years there has been a “Do what you like” message, and the endowment of 14-year-olds with a false sense of maturity.

This sounds liberal and liberating, but when it has been the underlying theme throughout your childhood, it has a profoundly depressing outcome.

An infant finds the world a very scary place. From the outset it looks to its family for nurture and protection. Above all, it wants boundaries, for within the boundaries, love, safeguarding and a sense of worth can grow. If you are constantly extending your hand towards a boundary that gives way, you begin to realise that not only are you not able to keep yourself safe, nobody is taking that responsibility.

The young adolescent, egged on by media and peers, may act confident, but the insecurities remain: human rights and legal rights are no substitute for what has been lost.

This is especially the tragedy of the child of the underclass within state care; they are overwhelmingly the victims of those who sneered at Victoria Gillick.

Our society thinks the dispensing of money shows how much we care. We are spending huge sums at present for poor value to all concerned, and doubtless some will advocate for more. Paying money while witholding what these children really need is actually the intellectually cheap and uncaring alternative.

However much Brother Ivo may sound like a dinosaur to Nick Clegg, our current uncaring cold-as-charity abuse of our young people will look every bit as bad to future generations as the abuse of the Magdalene Laundries.

The double tragedy for these young people is that when they have reached adulthood and leave public care, their expensive 'education' will disproportionately lead them to populate the cohorts of the alcoholic, the prisoner, the unemployed, the drug addicted, the homeless and the mentally ill. They will also be more likely to suffer the heartache of their children being removed as the whole cycle repeats itself.

The disturbing picture at the top of the page graphically portrays what our publicly declared 'compassionate liberal' society actually delivers through its values and the expensive care system to the children of the poor.

If any commercial organisation consistently delivered damaged goods at such prices, we would prosecute them under Consumer Protection legislation.

Mr Gove has his work cut out.

Brother Ivo is the Patron Saint of Lawyers.

25 Comments:

Blogger David Hussell said...

My thanks to Brother Ivo for an exceedingly carefully and thoughtfully crafted article on this most difficult and vital of subjects.
So many of the delusions of our present age are exposed for the lies that they truly are, in the abuses exposed here. Which is why this subject is conveniently ignored by leading politicians and promoters of sexual liberty, the Human Rights industry and cultural Marxists generally. I do not agree with Mr Gove in many areas, but his attempt to confront these problems is admirable, and I wish him success.
There is a useful article on Anglican Mainstream this morning entitled "Our Sexual Wasteland" -- all highly relevant.

27 September 2013 at 11:23  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

Good article, but your pop at the Magdalene Laundries is way out of date and the comparison therefore absurd.

The truth of the laundries was revealed by the McAleese Report on the Magdalene Laundries, ('Report of the Inter-Developmental Committee to establish the facts of State involvement with the Magdalene Laundries.'), which was published in February 2013.

The sensational stories of abuse, torture, sexual assault, humiliation and depravation are all utterly false. The laundries actually provided girls with sanctuary from the gross abuses that seem almost a rite of passage in our own children's 'care' homes. How do we know this? Because it's what the former girls of the laundries actually told the Committee, rather than the parti pris fantasies of Catholic bashers.

Needless to say, the usual bollocks about the 'Irish holocaust' still surfaces in the left wing press. I expect better of you though.

Read here and then read the actual report:

http://www.catholicleague.org/myths-of-the-magdalene-laundries/


27 September 2013 at 12:22  
Blogger Irene's Daughter said...

The psalmist was right when he declared that 'The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.' (Psalm 14:1)

The problem of abandoned children and their consequent suffering is a manifestation of Godlessness. I may be being very simplistic but it strikes me that most, if not all, of the suffering is not so much the presence of problems but the absence of agapé (that love which always gives rather than takes) in society. And the Scriptures tell us that God is Love (Agapé) and thus we can say that Agapé is God. We have turned from Him (and thus agapé) and run after mammon and self-seeking. As a society we have rejected God and trusted in our own abilities to solve problems. We have made money and the things that it can buy our ‘god’. Everything in our society is seen in financial terms and it cares more about what things cost than the people they should be helping. (Healthcare and child protection are just two examples) Why? Because what we pay for these will reduce the amount of money we have to spend on our own selfish wants.

As a nation we have become very self-seeking. And self-seeking, by definition, ignores the suffering around it. Pray for a change of heart. Our God is able to turn hearts of stone into hearts of flesh. Weep and mourn for the vulnerable and ask Him to help them. God is the only one who can help the widows and the fatherless. He is the only One who can change society. We cannot do it ourselves!

27 September 2013 at 12:23  
Blogger seanrobsville said...

One wonders whether the management of some of these care homes are in collusion with the Islamic pedophile gangs who prey on their residents.

27 September 2013 at 12:41  
Blogger Brother Ivo said...

Brother Ars,

You plainly feel strongly about the Magdelene Laundries.

Brother Ivo was using them as a comparison in terms of public response and not as as part of any vendetta. Some things went wrong there; more is wrong in our responses to vulnerable children: let us agree on that.

27 September 2013 at 13:07  
Blogger IanCad said...

Thanks Brother Ivo for bringing this up.

When the care for a disturbed or troubled child is billed at over $200,000.00 per year you can bet that many crooks have their hands in the till.

These kids need as much normalcy in their lives as it is possible to give.

Foster care in stable homes is the best solution but it must be made financially attractive.

The prison system and our social services should not be privatised or farmed out to shysters.

27 September 2013 at 13:12  
Blogger richardhj said...

Brother Ivo,

Leaving aside the choice of comparison, I believe that to be a wonderfully written article, possibly the best that I have read, even on this excellent website.

As you say, Mr Gove is supposed to be a highly intelligent man. Is there any hope at all though that he will understand what he is up against? I am afraid that I doubt it. But this article should be required reading for all MPs who claim to be decent.

27 September 2013 at 13:25  
Blogger A.K.A. Damo Mackerel said...

for he has encountered one such young woman who described how her multiple sexual partners delivered no sense of exclusive intimacy or self esteem. It was only when a boyfriend became jealous and hit her that she felt any sense of being 'special'.
- Brother Ivo

I'm sure readers would be interested in this essay by Theodore Dalrynmple called Tough Love.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/9_1_oh_to_be.html

27 September 2013 at 13:43  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Ars Hendrick,

Thank you for the website for the report on the Magdalene Laundries. I heard the usual anti-Catholic stuff on our "friendly" liberal media propaganda outlets, conjectured that it was biased, but had no knowledge of where a less biased account was available.

I'm not Catholic but Anglican. However I am always defensive of whatever denomination is today's fashionable media sacrifice to the voracious God Compulsory Secularism and Christianity bashing. It's really difficult to get to the truth often. Each day it seems they have sport trying to shred one branch of the vine or another. But Christianity will still be strong when their miserable media outlets are dust.

Despite your questioning Brother Ivo, quite rightly I'm sure, I feel that his article is truly excellent. His response to you seems fair minded I feel.


27 September 2013 at 13:51  
Blogger Brother Ivo said...

Brother Damo

The article to which you refer us is indeed excellent and should be read in tandem with this post. Theodore Dalrylmple knows whereof he speaks.

27 September 2013 at 14:01  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

Thanks for this article.

I am thinking that maybe it is a request for information from Operation Greenlight that has highlighted these failings. Operation Greenlight are collating information from across children's homes as to where and when abuse took place, and hope in so doing to establish further the shape and scope of the networks operating and carefully pass on info to the hard-pressed and too thin on the ground police who operate on these matters. If anyone knows any info., with corroborating evidence and preferably a conviction, please pass it on to them.

What has happened recently is that retired police officers and social workers who worked in this area and were frustrated at some of the injustices they saw, have since worked gratis on the web, and through various journalists to try and improve matters.

Needless to say the abusing networks are organised, and have their objectives, associations, and patter well-rehearsed. Also their favourite and sometimes highly skilled lawyers.
Many will have heard the patter after the Saville scandal. Roughly speaking it includes these key words:
bandwagon - witch-hunt- exaggeration- money-grabbers - attention seekers - and various forms of the Lolita myth. Just below the water on this iceberg of cold and calculated spin lie the Man-Boy Love books, that purport that paedophilia is quite normal and can be wholesome and affectionate, and that it is only middle class bourgeois parents who shackle their children with bigoted notions of protection that stop them from a free and fearless exploration of sexual possibilities. In other words we are the monsters!!

We must make a determined and prolonged stand. I wholeheartedly agree with this article.

27 September 2013 at 14:06  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

A desperate sad state of affairs is the abandoning of our children’s home youth on reaching adulthood. They are on their own, with none of the support a family can provide at that important age. No doubt, this plays on the mind of the younger teenager. Nothing positive to look forward to, you see. May well explain the disruptive behaviour from many of them.

Interestingly, this was recognised up to the second world war. Great care was taken by the authorities to provide the best alternative to a family life. For females, placement in domestic service. For the lads, it was the Armed Forces, with, a hundred years ago, a surprisingly large percentage going to the Royal Navy. Even now, the services are proud to call themselves a family.

It all went wrong come the post war socialism outbreak. That aspect of the care stopped. Socialists don’t care – not at all. So long as their mantra is met, you can go hang as an individual. It’s why this man raises an eyebrow whenever he meets a Christian who claims to be a socialist. You’re either one or the other – never both.

And the socialists and their helpers in crime, the liberals, are still at it. Can you imagine today the young in care being encouraged into the Armed Services ? Hardly, better they walk the streets all their lives than end up in THAT profession. Says these callous bastards who have a home to go back to in the evening…

27 September 2013 at 17:24  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Irene's daughter

" I may be being very simplistic but it strikes me that most, if not all, of the suffering is not so much the presence of problems but the absence of agapé (that love which always gives rather than takes) in society. And the Scriptures tell us that God is Love (Agapé) and thus we can say that Agapé is God. We have turned from Him (and thus agapé) and run after mammon and self-seeking."

It is much greater than this regarding agape..God has a family and that structure is given to us for joy and fulfillment. "And because we are his children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, prompting us to call out, "Abba, Father." Our issues are better expressed through the term, Self-Serving...'how can I best serve myself' or the pirate code 'Take everything, give nothing back'!.

Everything that Jesus said was under-girded in His teaching about God as Father and is the idea that God has revealed Himself to be such and that His revelation to us should be normative for us.
God, how can we say, calls the theological shots in this matter.

If He wants to be understood primarily in masculine terms, then that is how we should speak of Him. To do otherwise, is tantamount to idolatry—fashioning God in our image, rather than receiving from Him His self-disclosure as the Father and His written word through scripture of what compromises family and how best to live that model.

Only a fool buys a car then tosses the manufacturers handbook straight in the bin!!


We are called to celebrate the young single mum as an example of fortitude and self determination rather than a tragedy of circumstance through the wrong sexual choices that impacts the child and lone parent further down the years..That they heroically struggle to bring the child up is not the issue anymore than living with an amputated leg is what is to be associated as normal...we need two legs to best get around not one.Then we wonder why the impression of family in society is at rock bottom.

They have been taught its a 'choice' issue rather than a manufacturers necessity for a successful society of balanced individuals.

Ernst

27 September 2013 at 17:32  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

Ernst

Agreed

Single mums make rational decisions based on societie's priorities. (As do the men who decide not to stick around or not given the opportunity to... because they are not needed ... so society says)

Fatherhood is not valued. Deliberately undermined, often with the blessing of the Church. That is the real tragedy.

and the result is.....

Phil

27 September 2013 at 20:12  
Blogger non mouse said...

Hmmm.

It never ceases to amaze me that certain people worry about our 'fertility rates' ... we're not producing enough children, according to them.

And yet --- the population of our island is outrageously greater than it has ever been before. My point, here, is that we therefore have more children than we ever had before.

Now ... certain elements of Ango- and Norman society - expecially the wealthy and warrior classes - have always had a problem of what to do with the children. There are very ancient traditions of farming them out. Anyone who doesn't believe me can look at the stories propagated by, for example, Marie de France. That Norman tradition continued in England - one only has to look at some of Chaucer's tales to learn of absentee parents and institutional education (e.g. in monasteries and convents).

Thence, later, to the natural corollary: boarding schools. The Brontes may no longer be fashionable reading, but they sure knew (firsthand) what happened in girls' institutions. Tom Brown's Schooldays provides insight into the boys' situation.

My point again --- there's nothing new about any of this. There's just more of it. Increase in numbers/population has certainly exacerbated the problem.

However, I would suggest that the solution is as it ever was: stable loving families that are less fractured than extended. The Christian tradition has effectively informed and nurtured that tradition in the greater part of our traditional society.

But now ... the euro-marsixt-educated social workers, politiciahns, and educators have undermined and subverted our institutions; they are taking over. And they are preparing the way for another solution: Brave New World.

We should be on the lookout. Once Western societies start to accept that parents are no longer capable of raising their own children - the State will take over entirely.

So well done for raising the topic, Brother Ivo. The Church and the remainders of normal, stable, British society need to effect a change in direction here.
They know how to do it ... Mr. Gove and his social workers do not.

27 September 2013 at 20:19  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Is anyone else getting a download attempt for analytics.js from a.sitemeter.com every time the page is loaded? IE8 flags it up.

27 September 2013 at 20:27  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

A very thoughtful and balanced piece of writing about a difficult problem.

I tend to blame godless socialism and what TSEliot described as dreams of '...systems so perfect that nobody will need to be good.'

Behaviour that is rewarded will be repeated.

27 September 2013 at 20:50  
Blogger David Hussell said...

These things are nearer than we think....

Many of us are just one person away from tragedy....

A very well travelled, roving Anglican priest, a modern missionary that I know, just told me that he is trying to comfort a friend, who has lost his small children in the Peshawar church massacre..... now they have joined his wife, also gone.

Very dark forces are stalking The Church yet the liberal west looks away.

27 September 2013 at 20:57  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

PS Theodore Dalrymple is brilliant. 'Life at the bottom: The woldview that makes the underclass' is essential reading, or watch him on YouTube. A non-Dawkinist atheist who writes about the effects of Original Sin, which he has described as 'the one Christian doctrine that can be empirically demonstrsted.

27 September 2013 at 20:59  
Blogger Jay Bee said...

DanJ0@20:27

analytics.js provides counter and tracking information for websites. This sitemeter download invitation is popping up in IE on a number of websites besides Cranmer possibly due to a bug in this Java Script file. Hopefully the programmers will fix it and the little blighter will soon disappear.

27 September 2013 at 21:59  
Blogger Che Yeoh said...

Reminds me of something that Ronald Roleheiser said, 'The opposite of love is not hatred, but indifference.' We have turned away from these children and we don't want to know what's going on. I think the state is afraid to find out, lest they be sued.

27 September 2013 at 23:34  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Yes Danj0, it's a bug.

28 September 2013 at 00:41  
Blogger Len said...

The theme that seems to run through the Govenment agencies that 'care' for children seems to be incompetance and denial of any responsibilty.Promises are made after each tragic incident but lessons are not learnt and no positive action to prevent further incidents taken.

28 September 2013 at 13:26  
Blogger Chaconia said...

It’s all too little, too late. By the time children are in the care system the damage has been done – and we do not have the financial resources – years and years of good psychotherapy – to undo it. Good carers even if they exist, are just not enough.

This is because one of the enduring legacies of parental abuse and neglect which we are seeing more and more of in the mental health system (in which I work) is young people with the diagnosis of emotionally unstable personality disorder (also called borderline personality disorder). This condition which is a serious mental illness is difficult and expensive to treat and many consider it untreatable : its hallmarks are emotional instability (mood swings, anger outbursts), a pervasive sense of emptiness and boredom, self harming behaviours, risk taking behaviours, substance abuse, and distorted patterns of thinking -- to name a few. These people are extremely difficult to work with and managing the illness is very costly – indeed it is not being managed effectively because there just isn’t the funding. We need to stop treating the symptoms of our sick society and address the cause which is dysfunctional families/family breakdown. In short the only answer is prevention.

29 September 2013 at 19:03  
Blogger Len said...

I am afraid that our Society has got immense problems which are going to hit it soon like a tidal wave.
The break up of the family unit is going to cause immense problems.I have nothing against single parent families(I was brought up in one)but the problems this causes are many and far reaching.

We have youth who have no jobs and no prospect of ever getting work.There already is a 'sub culture' of those alienated from Society.
It is a truly frightening World we are living in unless the problems are addressed with some sense of urgency it will only deteriate further.
Our Politicians need to wake up to the reality of what is happening to our Society before it really is too late.!.

29 September 2013 at 20:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older