Emulating the SS, Nottingham City Council have taken it upon themselves to snatch a child away from her mother because, in Nottingham City Council's eyes, the mother is too stupid to look after the child.
Welcome to ZaNuLabour Britain, where the state dictates who may or may not bring up their own children!
Rachel (24), who for legal reasons can be identified only by her first name, has been told by a family court that her daughter will be placed with adoptive parents within the next three months, and she will then be barred from further contact.
Is Rachel really that thick?
According to a psychiatrist Rachel has no learning difficulties and "
good literacy and numeracy and [that] her general intellectual abilities appear to be within the normal range".
Her daughter was born prematurely and Nanny's "officials" decided that Rachel didn't have the brains to cope with her complex medical needs, as such the baby was "fostered out".
It should be noted that the medical issue has now been resolved, the baby now needs little or no day-to-day medical care.
So why the fark is Nanny still taking the child away?
There is a rather nasty added twist to this sad story, Rachel's attempts thus far to fight Nanny have been scuppered by the fact that her case was taken over by the official solicitor.
Guess who the official solicitor works for?
Yes, that's right, Nanny!
Nanny brought her own man in because Nanny decided that Rachel wasn't bright enough to instruct her own solicitor.
Good game this isn't it?
Nanny skews the result in her favour by putting her own man in the defence team.
Can you guess what Rachel's (sorry, Nanny's) solicitor did?
Yes, that's right, he declined to contest the council's adoption application, despite the fact that Rachel wanted to fight it.
This sounds more like some third world dictatorship, rather than a "democratic" first world country.
Does Nanny not see how bad this looks?
Answer: she does, but she doesn't care!
After the psychiatrist's assessment of Rachel, the court acknowledged that she does have the mental capacity to keep up with the legal aspects of her situation. However, it has refused her attempts to halt the adoption process.
Rachel is now going to the European Court to fight this.
Correct me if I am wrong, but there seems to be more than handful of slackjawed, dribbling, knuckle scrapping morons in this country who breed like rabbits and are allowed to keep their children (even though they allow them to roam the streets like packs of feral vermin).
There have also been a good few cases of appalling cruelty inflicted upon children (eg baby P), yet Nanny stood idly by. In this particular case Nanny is not even pretending that Rachel will deliberately harm her child.
Given the above obvious contradictions in state policy, why have the SS in Nottingham City Council acted in this way?
Nanny's behaviour in this instance is pretty loathsome as far as I can see. My gut tells me that there is something else here that Nanny does not want disclosed, ie Nanny is covering something up that will damage Nanny (not Rachel).
Visit
The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit
The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from
Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by
www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves;
Food,
Bonking,
Toys,
Gifts and Flowers,
Groceries
