"Open Submission / Letter to Deborra-Lee Furness and Hugh Jackman about the push for easy adoption laws"
- Details
- Category: Uncategorised
- Created: Tuesday, 12 November 2013 11:29
- Written by Alecomm2
Dear Mrs Deborra-Lee Furness and Mr Hugh Jackman,
My name is Marney MacDonald and I work with a team of great people in the child protection arena. Our business has just been recognised as a charitable institute – and no, we're not writing to ask for money.
We write to you as the partner of Deborra-Lee Furness, who is currently pushing rather strong to have the Australian Federal Government make it easier for adoption of children.
Mrs Furness’ recent comments about hoping to have Prime Minister Abbot to push for reform on what she refers to “flawed adoption flaws”. [1]
You wife also states that “It's a matter of streamlining the process and doing it better. We are hoping to get the ear of Tony Abbott.'' [2]
As much as this sounds like a wonderful idea, in theory, in practise I feel your wife may be pushing for ideas that she may be a little ill-informed about. The idea of having a child that is in foster care being adopted permanently by a kind-loving family sounds great, and it is, so long as you are absolutely certain that all the “I’s” have been dotted and “T’s” have been crossed.
And this is where the very long list of errors starts occurring when it comes to adopting children. May I remind you firstly of the stream of apologies from Australia’s commonwealth and state governments for abuses that hundreds of thousands of children have suffered, and millions of families who lost siblings and children altogether.
People are still suffering because the government made decisions, that they were not accountable for, and unfortunately are still making those decisions, and being unaccountable today.
We have estimated, that as many as ninety percent of children in care, (children your wife is pushing to have adopted), SHOULD NOT BE THERE.
This may sound alarming, or maybe even absurd to you, but may I remind you that we have been working extensively in this field for four years and our team has studied hundreds of cases, and read thousands of pages of government paperwork that relates to the removal of a child from their parents. So please Mr Grant, do not think we speak from an uneducated point of view.
Thousands of children are being removed prior to there ever being a court hearing to determine that a child has been found proven of being at risk of harm, or in need of care. This includes newborn babies. In some cases we have seen babies removed at birth, placed in foster care, and the child is now over one year old – and it has not ever been proven that the child was at risk of harm. This is called the “establishment phase”.
In the Children’s Court, the rules of evidence (to prove a parent has neglected or abused their child) DO NOT EXIST. [3] This means that caseworkers do not even have to prove that a parent has abused or neglected their child prior to removing them and placing them in foster care, nor do they have to do this to have an 18 year order placed on them. (These are the children your wife wants to be able to adopt easier).
Mr Jackman, this is no joke, and this is why there are almost forty-thousand children in foster care Australia wide. The figures are possibly substantially higher also, because the government fails to provide the exact amount of children being removed and kept in care at any given time.
In cases where children have been removed, and the parents have proven themselves against all the fictitious allegations of the department, magistrates merely quote some former case they prefer to use to say that the child has been in care too long and that it would have a negative impact on the child to send them back home to their parents. This does happen.
In other cases where there has actually been a police investigation into the conduct of parents, where no charges have been laid, the department also kept the children in foster care, quoting the same argument that the children have a bond with the carer and it would have a negative impact on the children to send them back home. These are not fictitious cases Mr Jackman.
And these children are living, breathing, human beings that are being denied their mummies and daddies because the department is not accountable. These are children, that are now possibly going to be adopted out, where the government has no accountability whatsoever for them, that should have never been removed from their parents in the first place.
We ask you, to hear me in what we are saying, and to discuss in seriousness of the adoption campaign that she (your wife) is pushing for, when the system is as tainted as it is. I beg you to have her meet myself and my colleagues so she can understand what is happening - as with her fame and her power, she can be contributing to catastrophic events of the past where hundreds of thousands of children and families are being destroyed, not helped, because her campaigning is for a completely flawed system that is accountable to nobody.
Warm regards,
The Team at Alecomm.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/caypapa1998442/s93.html
Comments
Keep up the wonderful works guys I've included you guys to my personal blogroll.
My website; ways to get rid of acne fast: http://how-toget-rid-of-pimples.com/
Feel free to surf to my web-site: Secret Survey Review - Dawn: http://secret-survey--review.blogspot.com/,
These problems are symptoms of a society gone wrong, a society without care or compassion, a society that refuses to address the causes of these ills and work out solutions.
This may go someway as to why we have the problem.
Boats that bring culture, a wisdom spurned by Australian law makers to the detriment of Australian families.
Our multicultural society and the impact of inheritance law in Australia upon family development.
Our multicultural society has evolved as a result of worldwide events. These events have resulted in a large number of overseas families deciding that Australia is a good place to re-establish their families after social disruption including war, revolution and the breakdown of law and order within their countries of origin.
These people came to Australia in boats and Airplanes which I call “Culture”. They often arrived in Australia with no material wealth and relied upon the culture they and their family members bought with them. Their cultural input was so influential that the Australian government invented the word Multicultural Society for the phenomenon. These people have spent their lives working hard in order to help their children establish their families in Australia. These families apart from overcoming language and cultural barriers are thrown in at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder.
Inheritance within these family structures plays a major role in their intergeneration al development as it plays a major part in determining the schools we attend, the suburbs we live in, the ability of our family to pay for critical intervention services during our lives, and the holidays we spend together with our family. It influences the lives of our children our grandchildren and our offspring for eternity.
These families are particularly vulnerable to inheritance abuse by our current legal processing of inheritance matters.
• They are more likely to appoint a lawyer as an executor because they are deprived of an extended family network through the act of migration.
• They are less likely to have access to a permanent and trusted family lawyer.
• They will be unfamiliar with how the inheritance laws work within Australia and that because they have been constructed by lawyers in a nation that invented terra nullius are devoid of family input and fail to recognise the importance of healthy intergeneration al family development through inheritance.
We all know that wealthier people live longer and have happier lives on average. That is why so many of us work hard to earn more money so as we can become wealthier. Another component of wealth stems from inheritance. The wealthier the family heritage the wealthier generally are the offspring, provided factors impacting adversely upon that inherited wealth include war and acts of barbarism or theft are not enacted upon the family.
In our contemporary democratic and multicultural nation Australia we are educated to believe that we can trust lawyers. We know that when we hire a lawyer we are normally dealing with issues of life changing significance either for ourselves or for our family, in such an important consumer relationship we have to be assured that we can trust lawyers. The laws regulating lawyers bind them to their clients though the relationship of trust.
So important and fundamental is this trust between the public and the legal profession to the rule of law that our government finances the office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner to ensure us that any lawyers who are untrustworthy will be disciplined so as we can be assured that we can trust our lawyer.
Did you know that if you appoint a lawyer as an executor to your estate that when they become the executor they are no longer bound by the legal professional act and are not deemed to be acting as a lawyer by the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner?
Oh yes did you also know that Lawyers in Private Practice are not bound by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Last time I gazed in the mirror I saw a human, even though some may not see me as such and I never see dogs and cats entering lawyer’s offices only humans.
The failure of our legal profession to allow culture and family to incorporate into the law making process is a disgrace.
One has to ask why this is so. Particularly when we have all recognised that we are a nation of families many of whom have recently migrated to this land.
To see the problem one has to analyse the socioeconomic background of the legal profession. The majority of lawyers attend private schools which mean their families sit at the higher end of the social spectrum. The families have more money are better educated and because they have a high level of literacy in the English language, their children inevitably have a greater chance of getting the marks that will allow them to become lawyers. The exercise is self-perpetuati ng and is an intergeneration al transfer of legal power from one generation to the next within a confined social group. Due to the historical structure of this group of people who make up the majority of the legal profession, vested interest often dominates over social need when it comes to reforming our laws. The group itself can exert influence upon who will be given positions of influence and who will be excluded.
The legal profession currently has a serious conflict of interest by failing to develop a low cost efficient ,timely and truth seeking process to deal with inheritance matters and through its inactions is impeding the intergeneration al development of migrant families who have given up so much of their lives so as to re-establish their families in Australia.
The legal profession has been negligent in its duty of care to the Australian people by failing to incorporate this valuable cultural resource into the development and formation of our laws. Instead allowing Australia to remain tied to the rule of the lash and the culture of a prison.
Even though we have invented a new society with a new culture our legal profession has become delusional in preventing this culture to participate as we still operate under the format of a prison. Until family becomes the dominant influence during the law making process, we will never be able to cross the historical divide between, convict settlement and nationhood.
A cultural shift that abhors Grave Robbery will not occur and this will inevitably damage your families development.
.