British grandparents lose custody of children to homosexual couple

  • Thread starter Thread starter irishpatrick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

irishpatrick

Guest
Edinburgh, Feb 3, 2009 / 06:36 am (CNA).- Two British grandparents aged 59 and 46 have been told that they are too old and unfit to care for their grandchildren, who are to be placed with an adoptive homosexual couple.

The children had been in their grandparents’ care during their mother’s struggles with heroin. After their mother failed to bring them home from a visit, social workers became involved and the police were called in.

The children, a five-year-old boy called “Josh” and his four-year-old sister “Chloe,” were placed in foster care, an arrangement the grandparents believed to be temporary.

The local adoption and foster council went to court four times to have the children permanently removed and adopted, but each time the court ruled in favor of the grandparents.

According to The People, the council threatened to hire expensive lawyers, causing the grandparents to abandon their legal fight because of the potential legal fees and because of their fear the court hearings would prevent the grandchildren from having a settled home.

The unnamed 59-year-old grandfather, speaking in an interview with The People, said the day the social workers came to take away his and his 46-year-old wife’s grandchildren was “the worst day of my life.”

“Chloe was still little and although we were saying goodbye and reassuring her we’d see her soon, I don’t think she fully understood we wouldn’t be putting her to bed that night and we wouldn’t be there when she woke up. But Josh knew and he was howling. He was holding on to me and saying ‘Please, Granddad, don’t send me away. I want to stay with you and Grandma’.”

Two weeks ago they learned the children were to be adopted by a homosexual couple.

“"If we had known how it would turn out, that social workers would choose a home without a mother for them and we’d have to like it or not see them again, we’d never have given up the fight,” their grandmother said.

"The thing is they were so happy here. They knew they were loved and they were safe.

"They had all this countryside to play in. They loved going on the farm with their granddad. They’d see deer and badgers and all sorts out there.”

The children are now with a foster mother while they are gradually introduced to the homosexual couple.

The grandparents claim that social workers told them their access to the children would be restricted if they opposed the homosexual adoption, according to The People. Last week the grandparents were told they would never see their grandchildren again because they had made public the fact that the children were taken from them and to be adopted by two homosexual men.

According to the Telegraph, the case is believed to be the second time that a homosexual couple has been chosen to adopt in Edinburgh.

Peter Kearney, a spokesman for the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, criticized the adoption, saying:

"This is a devastating decision which will have a serious impact on the welfare of the children involved.

"There is an overwhelming body of evidence showing that same-sex relationships are inherently unstable and reduce the life expectancy of those involved.

"With this in mind, the social work department has deliberately ignored evidence which undermines their decision and opted for politically correct posturing rather than providing stability and protection.

“It is impossible to see how this decision is in the best interests of the children,” Kearney remarked, according to The Scotsman.

catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14964
 
so these grandparents relinquished rights to their grandkids from the mere threat of a possible legal action? sounds like the courts may have made the right decision…
 
so these grandparents relinquished rights to their grandkids from the mere threat of a possible legal action? sounds like the courts may have made the right decision…
Friend, you have put into words something I have been wondering myself.
 
so these grandparents relinquished rights to their grandkids from the mere threat of a possible legal action? sounds like the courts may have made the right decision…
What probably happened was that the council told them they would fight to the death and when the grandparents spoke to lawyers about the case, the lawyers demanded a substantial retainer of several thousand pounds (like $10,000 or more), plus wanting to know where they would get more money in the probable case that more was needed, and being pessimistic about the likelihood of their getting the children back on top of it all.

The council was probably under pressure not to back down for fear that the homosexual lobby would go ballistic.
 
What probably happened was that the council told them they would fight to the death and when the grandparents spoke to lawyers about the case, the lawyers demanded a substantial retainer of several thousand pounds (like $10,000 or more), plus wanting to know where they would get more money in the probable case that more was needed, and being pessimistic about the likelihood of their getting the children back on top of it all.

The council was probably under pressure not to back down for fear that the homosexual lobby would go ballistic.
i’ve dealt with family law attorney’s and none of them would charge anywhere near a $20,000 retainer, maybe it’s different in the UK.

also i would imagine some would take the fight on pro-bono if the grandparents couldn’t afford it. and all of them would be very confident in not only getting custody back, but suing the pants off the people who essentially kidnapped the children without cause (if we believe what’s written, but the fact that their daughter is aheroi addicted single mom there may be more to the story).

if some agency took my kids i don’t care if the threatened the wrath of god against me i would fight them until i had no life in my body. i would certainly laugh off any threats or attempts to bully me out of the picture.
 
i’ve dealt with family law attorney’s and none of them would charge anywhere near a $20,000 retainer, maybe it’s different in the UK.

also i would imagine some would take the fight on pro-bono if the grandparents couldn’t afford it. and all of them would be very confident in not only getting custody back, but suing the pants off the people who essentially kidnapped the children without cause (if we believe what’s written, but the fact that their daughter is aheroi addicted single mom there may be more to the story).

if some agency took my kids i don’t care if the threatened the wrath of god against me i would fight them until i had no life in my body. i would certainly laugh off any threats or attempts to bully me out of the picture.
This Friend speaks my mind.
 
If the Grandparents had no money to battle this, then their decisions makes sense.
 
Its not the grandparents’ decision that bothers me-its the court’s decision in placing these children with practicing sodomists. I am an adoptive parent myself, and believe me, there were plenty of normal couples over there that would have loved to been able to take them. The court was sending a cultural message to the people-gay is best!!!
 
Evil is good, good is evil. The symtoms of a morally bankrupt world.:sad_yes:
 
Evil is good, good is evil. The symtoms of a morally bankrupt world.:sad_yes:
Is the “symptom of a morally bankrupt world” the fact that gay people can adopt…or that the grandparents were willing to “give them up” to keep their monetary status?
 
Is the “symptom of a morally bankrupt world” the fact that gay people can adopt…or that the grandparents were willing to “give them up” to keep their monetary status?
I don’t think we should judge the grandparents on this without knowing more. I have seen people who have had to make decisions which looked really bad to those who didn’t know the details.
 
I don’t think we should judge the grandparents on this without knowing more. I have seen people who have had to make decisions which looked really bad to those who didn’t know the details.
How true don’t judge the man until you have walked a mile in his moccasins. I know in raising a grandchild I would do anything to keep her but I do not have the money to fight so I totally understand this. Even if I was to mortgage my house the liberal agenda seems to have a lot of money behind it.
 
Are there not infertile people in the UK? This seems crazy. I would rather see a child be with a single or gay person than in an orphanage, but it seems to me that married people should be the first resort if possible.
 
I don’t think we should judge the grandparents on this without knowing more. I have seen people who have had to make decisions which looked really bad to those who didn’t know the details.
Yet we seem to have no problem stating things about the agency that placed the children with a gay couple…or the gay couple…without knowing them in the least…the only fact we know about them is…they are a gay couple…perhaps they were the best placement option…and since none of us know the alternative options…we’re all just “judging”…aren’t we?
 
Yet we seem to have no problem stating things about the agency that placed the children with a gay couple…or the gay couple…without knowing them in the least…the only fact we know about them is…they are a gay couple…perhaps they were the best placement option…and since none of us know the alternative options…we’re all just “judging”…aren’t we?
We know enough about the adoption agency to judge their action: they are placing children for adoption with an intrinsically disordered “couple” since both are of the same sex.
 
We know enough about the adoption agency to judge their action: they are placing children for adoption with an intrinsically disordered “couple” since both are of the same sex.
Ahhh…I see…it’s ok to judge their character if we consider them “disordered”…interesting…but to “judge” the grandparents character based on their need to keep their financial security at the “expense” of their grandchildren given to "disordered gay parents’ must not be raised as they are the “victims”…
 
Ahhh…I see…it’s ok to judge their character if we consider them “disordered”…interesting…but to “judge” the grandparents character based on their need to keep their financial security at the “expense” of their grandchildren given to "disordered gay parents’ must not be raised as they are the “victims”…
Or maybe it is a case that Big Brother has gotten so big it has become impossible to fight him. In a civil and sane society no judgement would need to be made.
The grandparents claim that social workers told them their access to the children would be restricted if they opposed the homosexual adoption, according to The People.* **Last week the grandparents were told they would never see their grandchildren again because they had made public the fact that the children were taken from them and to be adopted by two homosexual men.

The rights of Gays always trumps the rights of blood. in the gay manifesto, Chapter 13; Paragraph: 6.9 “Every animal is equal, but a gay animal is more equal.”

So they are being punished for being too old, (when is 59 and 46 too old to care for children), for being out spoken homophobes, and of being too poor.

So what is this thing about “gay” rights not being a slippery sloop against all other rights. It seems in order to give rights of equality to this homosexual couple the other couple, blood relatives to the children, lost their rights to their grandchildren, their right to freedom of speech and their right to redress a wrong that should not have happen in a sane and civil society.

And you want to judge “their” charactor.:rolleyes:
 
I have no desire to “judge” anyone’s character…I just want to point out that the “judging” of the gay parents is just as much “judging” simply for the reason they are “gay” as it is toward the grandparents. I just think judging the gay parents simply because they are gay and “demonizing” them for no other reason has a different side to it…namely if “judging” is going to be carried out indicrimantly and in a “self-righteousness” tone…let’s turn our “self-righteousness” toward the grandparents who do not care enough for their grandchildren to fight tooth and nail against all odds to keep them…even at the peril of their financial security…but alas…their financial security means more than these children…their priorities are misaligned it would seem.

My point is we all have place value judgement upon this situation…we wouldn’t be having this discussion if the adoptive parents were straight…and the issue of the grandparents financial security in not pursuing their “rights” would not even be discussed.
 
I have no desire to “judge” anyone’s character…I just want to point out that the “judging” of the gay parents is just as much “judging” simply for the reason they are “gay” as it is toward the grandparents. I just think judging the gay parents simply because they are gay and “demonizing” them for no other reason has a different side to it…namely if “judging” is going to be carried out indicrimantly and in a “self-righteousness” tone…let’s turn our “self-righteousness” toward the grandparents who do not care enough for their grandchildren to fight tooth and nail against all odds to keep them…even at the peril of their financial security…but alas…their financial security means more than these children…their priorities are misaligned it would seem.

My point is we all have place value judgement upon this situation…we wouldn’t be having this discussion if the adoptive parents were straight…and the issue of the grandparents financial security in not pursuing their “rights” would not even be discussed.
You tend to like the word demonizing as to throw it back at those that oppose your view.

It seems to me it was more then fincnacial security that was at issue concerning the grandparents since legal intimidation was being used. This legalization of social abnormalties(yea I think made the word up) is the creation of problems we will continue to see. It is a slipperey sloop into confusion and blearing of what is considered right and wrong.

This issue other homosexuality will continue to be a creator of conflict. Despite the view of some that think the opposing view of the normalization of homosexuality is based on ignorance when in relality the very nature of same-sex copulation goes against the very grain of nature, natrual law and common sense.

Prejudice (prejudgement) and judgement in general is not a sin, but a natural proctection mechanism we have to protect our species. That is not being self-righteous, but honest.

As to having discussion if the adoptive parents were staight, for personally it really urked me that the social workers thought the grandparents were too old to care for the children, for I’m a father in his 50s and my wife is 46, if the state could take the children from them, then could they do the same to me because of my age. That is a scary thought…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top