E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSLONDON -- Three children were removed from the care of an English couple because their support for the U.K. Independence Party meant they were unsuitable to provide foster care, an official said Saturday.
Local government body Rotherham Council said that the three children were not “indigenous white British” and that social workers had raised concerns about the UKIP political party’s stance on immigration, ITV News reported.
Joyce Thacker, the director for children and young people's services at Rotherham Council, told BBC News that the children were placed with the couple on an emergency basis and were not due to remain with them permanently. She confirmed they had been removed from the couple's care.
“If the party [UKIP] mantra … is ending the active promotion of multiculturalism, I have to think about that,” she added. “I think they [UKIP] have very clear views on immigration.”
She told the BBC that the decision had not been “easy” and she did not think UKIP was a “racist party.”
'Ruled by this regime'
UKIP campaigns for Britain to withdraw from the European Union, saying "we do not have to be ruled by this regime" in order to trade with European countries.
On immigration, it says "the tide of mass EU immigration has pushed down wages and restricted job opportunities. Only by leaving the EU can we regain control of our borders." The party is calling for a permanent immigration freeze for 5 years and says immigrants "must be fluent in English, have minimum education levels and show they can financially support themselves."
Read more UK and world stories from ITV News
UKIP party leader Nigel Farage said in messages on Twitter that the authorities “clearly have no understanding of UKIP and by their actions, clearly no desire to know.”
He said the council was “partially backtracking” by saying the couple would still be allowed “to adopt. But by the sounds of it, only white children. New Apardheid? [sic]”
Read more World stories from NBC News
The British Education Secretary Michael Gove, a member of the center-right Conservative Party, also attacked the decision, ITV News reported.
“Rotherham's reasons for denying this family the chance to foster are indefensible. The ideology behind their decision is actively harmful to children,” he said.
“We should not allow considerations of ethnic or cultural background to prevent children being placed with loving and stable families. We need more parents to foster, and many more to adopt,” he added.
The center-left Labour Party said in a message on Twitter that “Membership of UKIP shouldn't block parents from adopting children. There needs to be an urgent investigation by Rotherham Council into this.”
ITV News is an NBC News partner.
More world stories from NBC News:
- Scientists rush to save manta rays, the 'pandas of the ocean'
- Understanding the beauty and diversity of Raja Ampat, aka 'Underwater Eden'
- One of FBI's 10 most-wanted fugitives captured in Mexico
- Despite troubles at home, Egypt's Morsi is pivotal player in Mideast
- Puerto Rico a backdoor to US mainland for drug cartels
- Will American be next pope? US cardinals a factor
- Analysis: What Gaza crisis taught Israel about Iran
- The ghosts of Muranow: A journalist's mission to illuminate Poland's haunted past
Leave a Comment:
This sounds like the equivalent of taking someone away from their parents here in the US because the parents don't support immigration. In addition to that, this couple was also told they could still adopt? Something smells fishy here.
Political correctness , a test to see if couples may raise children; I believe it was done in Nazi Germany in the 1930's.
While they say they're not racist (very few stand up to proudly proclaim they are racist), perhaps the agency, whose job it is to protect children, sees this somewhat similar to non-white children being temporarily placed in the care of a local KKK leader.
Considering that both the labor party and the conservative party in the UK as well as the man in charge of childrens welfare for the UK in general (Grove is the name I believe) say this was a bad move, I'm pretty sure you and that social worker are in the wrong on this one Steve.
Took to long to edit, sorry about the second post..
A little more on the story as well as how the politicians in the UK are responding to it can be found here
Read to the end of the report the woman in charge of the foster service says that there were no problems given with the care of the children and we find this quote from the foster mother later on “We enjoyed singing one of their folk songs in their native language, and having been told of the religious denomination of these children we took steps to ensure that a school of their denomination was found.” All signs really do point to it being one social worker who thought that the UKIP was bad and racist and therefore these people must be bad and racist. A political litmus test so to speak.
If the Dems have their way, expect to see things like this happening HERE!
It sounds to me as if the Rotherham Council is making the decision that people associated with UKIP can only care for white children which makes the Rotherham Council look racist rather then the people they are trying to pratray as racist. Kind of weird.
Steve Said
That's true But on the flip side a lot of people who say they aren't racist are!Also, based on most of what I see and read by the so-called minorities, the only requirement to be racist, these days, is to be white.
Did you read that part of the article that said they were foster parents? Perhaps a better analogy would be not allowing a Sioux couple to raise white kids in the 1880's.
Interesting when your political view dosent meet the states view of whats right.Britain has knothing but trouble from foriegners who dont want to truly blend in.Learn the language and be part of the country.That sounds like where i live!
AKRandy YOU ARE AN IDIOT AND YOUR REMARK PROVES IT!
WOW! Foster children removed for failure of open-mindeness on the part of the foster parents! WOW!
How cool is that? That took some real kahunas that we don't have here in the U.S.
Looks more like a closed minded agency hurting children. Why would you want government to have the power to take children away because someone doesn't believe the exact same way as you. Close minded thinking like the agency it what brings regimes like Hitler into power.
Actually, it seems as though the social workers have the best interest of the children and their futures in mind. The family's entrenched political beliefs seem to contradict the non-white children's future welfare, self-esteem etc. Who would want them to grow up in an environment that would make them feel less than welcome in their country?
Sounds to me like you have a closed mind. The position should be are they giving good care to the children. You seem to think they must have YOUR political philosophy in order to raise kids.
Sorry, your whacked out Liberal leanings are showing.
I don't think we are getting the whole story. Would anyone want skin heads fostering children? How about known survivalists, the KKK members?
No one said they were skin heads, racist or bigots,
They simply belong to a political party that supports a sensible immigration policy that supports a temporary ban on immigration, have minimum education levels, be fluent in English, and be able to support themselves.
It is something our own government should implement immediately for the sake of our own country and its citizens. Unfortunately, politics will prevent them from doing so.
actually yea we would, u narrow minded monster, if those "skin heads" are good to their kids its not your place
GM screme
its a weekend, the libs come out of the woodwork, you know that. and throwing the race card is habitual with them.
After reading all the reports, what I gather is that these children were placed in this particular home on an emergency basis. Upon learning that these foster parents are against multiculturalism, I can understand taking the children from the home. The role of the agency is to protect the children by removing them and investigating. It's hard enough to be taken from one's parents, and would be horrible to be subjected to being ostracized by your foster parents. There is enough trauma from the initial removal. My first concern is for the children.
Should not the test be are they providing a stable, nuturing environment for raising children. OMG they are actually in favour of teaching their children about respect for the law and a return to England of old. have they gone too far. Clearly they are unsuitable especially since they probably insisted that their adopted children attend a christian religous service. OMG.
Wow, sounds like a lot of people don't get it. Their political beliefs have nothing to do with being racist. The party simply believes that they should remove themselves from the EU and close their borders to stop the flood of people coming in because they feel that it is hurting their economy. Nothing is being said about hating other cultures. If your jumping on not giving ethnic children to KKK members you are correct, we shouldn't. That in no way means anything as it relates to this article because this is simply about political bias.
If open-mindedness was a requirement for parenting, there would be no population problem.
It seems that the parent's view on immigration policy closely resembles the Republican view on immigration policies.
Adoption rules should not be based on one's political view, if it was shouldn't members of the Tea Party also be denied adoption?
Those who automatically assume that the belief that immigration policies in the UK need to be reformed are parallel with 'being racist' really need to stop comparing the British to Americans. Just because Americans associate 'immigration' with those from 3rd world countries, does not mean everyone does the same. Immigration rules for any country that was once a British Colony are different than normal immigration rules. So there is no basis for assuming that these parents are 'racist' or 'prejudice' or anything other than believing that England (like the United States) needs to secure it's borders for a time to allow their country to repair itself fiscally.
I'm still trying to figure out the leap from "we want to stabalize our economy and population without the added burden of a constant influx of immigrants" leads to "we are against multiculturalism". We have a constant houseful of neighborhood children, and many are hispanic. We love these kids like they're our own, and get along well with their parents - but I still think that we need to slow the influx in the US of immigrants from Mexico until our economy is more stable. The two issues have nothing to do with each other.
People do not understand nor do e have the full story. Remember that this children were placed there for emergency care. There can be a multitude of reasons why the children were removed. The children themselves may have said that they felt unsafe there. We do not have the full story. All e have from the council is
But something happened that the children were removed. This is all we know for sure. The safety and welfare of the children always comes first.
Oh make no mistake Annie we most definitely have those "kahunas" in the U.S.
A local administrator of a national program that lacks clear and precise understanding and a much larger concept of his or her power than actually exists.
I remember (distantly) a case in Minnesota somewhat like this except it was their actual offspring that took years in court for the return of the children and the firing of the case worker.
Makes sense to me. It could be bit like sending black children to be fostered by KKK members.
Rick-881466 do you have any idea what the UKIP's party actually believes? This is one of the most uninformed statements I've read this week.
oh boy the classic "race card"...........
With a statement like this, it would be a good idea to provide a link so that people can find out about this party.
It is important that while we are on Newsvine we get smarter. :)
Right huskergal, and while reading their beliefs it becomes even clearer that people who think that these kids were in danger or placed with KKK type members is even more unfounded.
Their beliefs are to remove themselves from the EU and TEMPORARILY suspend immigration because the influx of immigrants since they joined has hurt the economy of England. Nothing about racism, nothing about never wanting another ethnicity to show up again. Its simply stop immigrants from coming in until they can balance everything economically like having enough jobs and the such. In the US we have limits on the number of immigrants allowed each year for this very reason. They believe as long as they are part of the EU they will not be able to control the influx and therefore it is not a good thing.
or the offspring of illegal mexicans being given to teabaggers to raise. i think the british social services made the right call here. it's not about the rights of the foster parents, it's about the safety of the kids.
... or the offspring of teabaggers being given to a gay couple to foster? If the requirement is that the foster parents exactly match the culture, background, beliefs, and opinions of the parents (if the parents are known and can be thoroughly stereotyped), then the number of available emergency foster parents will be drastically reduced.
Why don't we just return to the system of orphanages and workhouses for the waifs? Then the current ruling party can arrange a program of political instruction and indoctrination for the little tykes.
There is nothing in the article to suggest a safety hazard for the foster children. Variety in political viewpoint is not a physical danger.
Another ignorant whacked out Liberal. Too bad you are just sheep and do what your Liberal leaders say without any research at all.
"Safety of the kids"? Are you serious? What's unsafe about speaking the language of the country you live in? What's unsafe about teaching children to have the education/knowledge to earn a living? That's all that's stated here about their beliefs. Sounds like solid thinking REGARDLESS of color. Do non-whites believe a person SHOULDN'T speak the language of the country they live in, nor be able to support themselves, nor pursue an education? What article were you reading?
As far as the racists comments here about KKK, et al, it seems that the close-mindedness comes from those who believe that all immigrants are non-white!
classic case of too many lemmings and not enough cliff.........
....unless you're a Liberal. Opposing viewpoints have been know to cause hissy fits that last 4 to 8 years.
Please enlighten me as to how exactly you think someone's thoughts about immigration create an unsafe environment for children.
Allison 2 -
Oh please - you can't deny parents the right to adopt because you don't like the political party they belong to. What if the "tea-baggers" get in political power and start doing the same thing to your political party? You are espousing a "might-makes-it-right" philosophy. Of course you don't understand that's what you're doing because you haven't bothered to think through the logical conclusions of what you're saying.
Once you base people's rights on their political ideology (ie - you can't do "fill-in-the-blank" because of your political party) - no one has any rights after that. Because whoever is in power now has the ability to define what ideology is allowed and what ideology is not allowed.
Which is great as long as your political party is in power. But not so great when you lose power and the people you were oppressing suddenly get in power - and now they are ticked at you and they want pay back - so now the political system becomes a vehicle for personal vendettas. That's not how American government was ever designed to work.
It's pathetic how little most Americans understand about the basis for our civil liberties. The fundamental basis of our liberties is we Americans are free to believe and practice whatever politics and religion we want to, as long as we don't hurt anyone else in the process, and all our rights are equal regardless. Take that away, and we have no civil rights at all.
Uh, I'm not an Obama supporter, but he did deport more Mexicans than any American president. He's a Dem, not a Teabagger. You're just an uninformed lemming with a hanging chad.
PC = freedom of speech and belief, as long as the beliefs match those of the ruling liberals.
Bingo! Failure to actively promote multiculturalism - coming soon to a locality near you. Only question is whether it will be a high crime or misdemeanor
Good lord, what a bunch of left-wing drones on these messageboards. So if I happen to believe that "immigrants must be fluent in English, have minimum education levels and show they can financially support themselves" and want to pull the US out of NAFTA, I shouldn't be allowed to be a foster parent? Really!? I guess I should also be sent to a "re-education camp" where you bolsheviks can teach me the right way to think.
sbode, no you should not be allowed to foster parent if your world view includes the idea that the children placed in your care have no right to be in your country, never mind your home. again, it is not about the rights of the adult here, it's about the best interest of the child.
@allison 2
Where in the story did it say that this particular foster family have that view for the children they where caring for?
Ah, yes, The "best interest of the child" So many claim it, so few are really vary interested in it..
allison 2: There was nothing in the article that says that the foster parents felt any negative feelings toward the children. If you have not been to England lately you have no idea how liberal immigration policies have changed that country. A large segment of the immigration population do not want to assimilate they want to change England to meet their cultural biases. Wanting a sensible immigration policy makes sense.
Allison, Might I suggest you read the article from the UK which explains the actual UKIP party platform? It doesn't advocate removing children in the UK. The couple has fostered over a dozen children all of different ethnic backgrounds with never a complaint. In this case it is due to a social worker "Believing" that because someone is a member of a party which she or he THINKS has a racist platform (Which it isn't please read the UKIP's platform on immigration) then they must be racist.
allison, there is nothing in sbode's statement to suggest a belief that immigrants should not be allowed in the country - you are reading way too much into it. Do some reading on the requirements in Mexico for a citizen of El Norte to get a work permit and stay in that country for an extended time (much stricter than US requirements.)
All countries have requirements for the entry of temporary visitors and permanent residents from other countries. The degree and number of those requirements are open to discussion in free societies. Expressing a political viewpoint (that does not espouse violence or overthrow of the government) does not result in forfeiture of other rights if those societies are just.
This dose not even sound good on the surface. You have to understand that practices like this could vary easily spread to natural parents. Imagine this... The US government knows that you are conservative and you think the "entitlement" programs are really really bad. Now, you get a knock on the door one day by the local social services, they have come to take your children... Why? Because the government thinks that you will teach your children to be intolerant of the poor and weak and that you pose a risk to your children learning their "Socialist" agenda.
See, you can use any number of crazy justifications for taking children away from anyone with this type of mindset... It is crazy, and if you look into it, situations like the one in this story have happened plenty of North America, just with varying reasons.
1984 has taken 28 years longer to manifest than we thought. If I am taking care of children, feeding them well, clothing them and ensuring their health and providing for their education, the government hs no right to judge my belief system. This is a pandoras box that some libs would loove to open.
This behavior is not limited to liberal or conservative mindsets. Each have created family law and a barely accountable social services and family court system.
This is a manifestation of the general trend of intolerance an hatred we created for our selves and we will all get bit by it..
removing children because the foster parents dont share the political ideology of the government, is a step towards losing all of your rights.
First, they didn't take the couple's children. They removed foster children.
Second, the story is very slim on facts. I suspect the couple's views were impacting their care but with what was written we just don't know.
Then one would think that the social service workers would have made that known to news organizations. They did not, most likely because this had nothing to do with how the family cared for the children and everything to do with an over the top social services nut job.
Thorough coverage can be found in UK sources - the impression I get from those articles is that of a social worker over-reacting on the basis of his/her own personal prejudices.
mailman, I am sure that there is a liberal child services worker salivating at the thought of removing children from homes that don't share their "political or philospohical ideals". Question 1: You do realize that the government knows what is best for you and your children ? Question 2: You do realize that if you do not agree with Question 1 that you will not be allowed to have children under your care, and that your beliefs may prevent you from raising your own children ?
You do realize that conservatives in government make and pass laws all the time that have the vary same effect as what your saying about liberals, right?
As i said before, this is a liberal and conservative issue, not just 1 or the other.
kudos mailman8.....ya nailed it.........you may have a cookie.
I'm not so sure this was warranted, but those in the American "tea party" should definitely be locked in rubber rooms wearing straightjackets!
Locked in by whom?
give it up tex, do you remember how a record would get scratched and keep repeating itself? leroys a whole lot like that.
By the men in white coats Tex! TPers are completely nuts, they don't even understand what they are asking for. They would never agree themselves to the country they claim to want.
I'm sure that if the couple really felt this way they wouldn't have taken the children in. For most people it's about the child and not their political belief. Maybe the liberals were just afraid of having the children in a house that doesn't have the same twisted thoughts they have.
Wreck - I agree. They may not want immigration to continue and all that, but that does not mean they in any way shared their views with the foster kids, or even their own for that matter. It may have been something as simple as answering a question asked by the person who checked on them, then that person made the decision to take the kids.
Personally, I wish we'd shut our border, to Mexico and Islamist countries most of all, and I also agree with the need for them to learn our language while they're allowed to keep coming. At least a little before showing up and taking our jobs. They're getting paid under the table, not paying taxes and using every govt aid we allow them - and that's not fair.
But that does not mean that I would treat a foster child any different than my own kid, aside from maybe trying to help them learn English. They are after all, just children and have no idea what all the whoop-la is about.
It maybe the welfare officer is of an ethnic group and therefore the motive to remove the kids is racial. This is the way it works in UK.
we could use more of that kind of thought process here.
Do you believe that the politicians in America would have the B...s to do something like that? I do not, especially when it comes to certain politicians...
Hi, Scooter.
AMEN!
hi scremin
woke up to 18 degree temps today. about time to get off here, make a turkey and cheese omelet and curl up with a book. you know how whacked this place is on the weekends.
stan
i very unfortunately must agree....
Consider the Islamist that were permited to enter and live in England. What are they doing now. England's government should read the Koran, and see for themselves what Islamist believes.......It may be to late!
America should be looking at the challenging issues Europe is encountering now because we are following the same paths. However, how do you shut Pandora's Box once it has been opened?
So the Independence Party insists that "Britons" must be white AND "must be fluent in English, have minimum education levels and show they can financially support themselves.".
So let's be clear here. That excludes, one way or another, the Scots, Irish and Welsh, as well as Liverpool, Manchester and a good portion of the North of England.That leaves what, the South of England, and maybe Cornwall?
Yes, by all means, let's encourage political extremists and loons to be foster parents. maybe here in the USA we coiuld have the Aryan Nations run summer camps for urban youth. All that fresh Idaho mountain air!
Kids in foster care have been through enough without being pawns in anyone's political agenda.
Actually Majimportax, no where does it say white. Put your race card back in the deck.
wow....how ignorant people with "authority" can be....you can be against immigration and still respect other cultures...im tired of the dimwits leading the way....
or if they are so concerned about their native "culture" then simply STAY there. it really is that simple.
its for the "good of the children" is pure lib B.S...............period.
There must be more to that group than they are saying.
If Britain keeps letting in hoards of muslims those kids will end up blown to bits.
let's see what else comes of this situation.
yeah right...look at what wait and see has gotten us thus far.
Again, it always great to read comments from those who are so misinformed. You spend so much time at the computer, why don't you put your time to better use and educate yourself before you spill your words so loosely ...kind a like a dam that overflows because it can't control its water. Read about the political party in the story. Oh, and go back at least eight years. And no I don't support the action, because the Brits social services "team" have done some pretty stupid moves before they realized there probably was a better way to handle it. The unfortunate issue about some social service systems is that they allow an employee to act "within their purview" and then back their employee when they jump ten feet over the line. Again, read up and learn before you let your credibility burn. Remember, the children were taken from the parents, which indicates they were placed there. And yes it does looks a little like what occured in Germany and Africa.
excellent advice chief, but very few on here ...especially on the weekends... make it past the headline. and even fewer comprehend what they read. sad but true fact.
I don't get what all the lib bashing is about. You might be confused.
Liberalism is about freedom and equality
Considering this is a free speech issue I would think most liberals (like myself) side with the parents. Theres nothing liberal about taking kids away from their parents for a point of view.
This is the Liberal dream for America. And, Luke/War, liberalism isn't about freedom or equality. They might promote themselves that way, but the reality is that they are another hate group. They can't even say the words christian or conservative without at LEAST 3 negative adjectives. Hate group.