Daily Mail [UK]
How social services are paid bonuses to snatch babies for adoption
By SUE REID, January 31, 2008
From the article:
….over the five years since I began investigating the scandal of forced adoptions, I have found a deeply secretive system which is too often biased against basically decent families.
I have been told of routine dishonesty by social workers and questionable evidence given by doctors which has wrongly condemned mothers.
Meanwhile, millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been given to councils to encourage them to meet high Government targets on child adoptions.
Under New Labour policy, Tony Blair changed targets in 2000 to raise the number of children being adopted by 50 per cent to 5,400 a year.
The annual tally has now reached almost 4,000 in England and Wales – four times higher than in France, which has a similar-sized population….
More information on the apprehension of children by the State
It is a fallacy that adopted children do better. The outcomes in adopted children is on average as dismal as it is in children who grow up fatherless. The best outcomes by far are to be found in those children that grow up in the care of two married parents (one of each sex) who live under a common roof.
And here are a few thoughts on the circumstances of child apprehensions:
|Plato, in Republic, has Socrates offer this advice to philosopher kings:
Who owns the youths controls the future.
Slogan used by Napoleon and also by
Give me your 4-year-olds, and within one generation I’ll construct a socialist state.
[The State] must set race in the center of all life. It must take care to keep it pure. It must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. It must see to it that only the healthy beget children….
Hitler, in Mein Kampf
Walter H. Schneider
The thing about all of this that should be of the greatest concern to those concerned about the escalating centralization of power, growing totalitarianism and outright tyranny in all developed nations should be that child apprehensions by the state escalate in one particular sector of the population. That is single-mother families that never had or no longer have the protection of the fathers of the children in those families.
Should anyone be surprised? Why? The war by governments against the family in the developed nations is real and has been escalating ever since so-called “no-fault” divorce (in which the fault is always the man’s) became the rule in the late sixties and early seventies. The easiest and most effective method by which to destroy families is to break and remove their weakest links, the fathers.