What do Mass School Shootings and Joining ISIS have in common?


ADHD and Ritalin?

Mental Illness?

Father Absent Homes?

I was stunned to read the other day about the research of Dr. Warren Farrell, co-author of the book “Boy Crisis”.  I watched a video interview with Dr. Farrell on Facebook and investigated further.
We all know or should know, that children raised by single parents have poorer Outcomes in life, but to what extent has been exposed by the work of Dr. Farrell.  I won’t repeat what he says, I would rather you watch the video yourself, I will just add my thoughts on the topic.

The National Rifle Association believe the common denominator in School Shootings is Ritalin and Psychotropic Drugs, they are not wrong, but Dr. Farrell looks far deeper into it and finds the reason that the shooters are on Ritalin to begin with, Father Absent Homes.

I supported Feminism and Women’s Rights for many years, but in the 1980’s I saw the emergence of Radical Feminism. I believe we have surpassed Women’s Rights and now it’s time to even out the playing field and start concentrating on boys, who will, of course, grow into men.  Just as “Affirmative Action” was necessary at the start to allow African Americans to compete in universities and the workplace, it went far too far in discriminating against Whites. The result of this experiment is that people who were not qualified entered universities and workplaces and couldn’t cope with their new “Equality”. This was the wrong approach. The over-compensation for Black and Hispanic adults was misguided in hindsight. They should have been concentrating on Black Children instead to help them qualify to compete on a level playing field. You cant have Equality without first having Equity.

History should be teaching us that “Affirmative Action” is the wrong approach. By the time a damaged child reaches adulthood, it becomes far more difficult to fix the person. The same story with Women’s Rights, we have gone overboard at this point. If there are fewer women in politics, it is probably because women don’t want the job. Gender Quotas are wrong, employers need to hire based on ability and performance. We are now seeing a situation where women graduates are outnumbering men in professions previously dominated by men. If we want Equality, why should a man need a higher Grade Point Average than a woman for college admission? This is not Equality or Equity.  To compound these issues we also have to deal with Political Correctness and a generation who grew up being they were told by their parents that they were “Special” and didn’t need to compete. We have mothers calling their sons manager and complaining. We have new terms like Toxic Masculinity but thanks to Dr. Farrell, we can now see the problem all along was Lack of Masculinity, as in Father-Absent Homes. A boy raised by a “Single” Mother goes to school and there is an 80% chance his teacher will also be female, who is going to teach this boy to be a man? I say “Single” Mother because I believe that they do not exist, it took a male and female to produce that child and that child has a right to both parents. No, you are not a “Single Mother”, you are a “Single Woman” because your child also has a father.

In the past, women had it tough, no doubt about that, but now the pendulum has swung too far the other way. The Suicide Rate of Men to Women should inform us of this, 4 out of 5 suicides in Ireland are Men. All the evidence points to the fact that men have it tougher these days than women. The fact is that for years now the pendulum has swung against men, in a divorce or separation, men are far more likely to lose their children. The losers in this are the Children, the evidence is clear from Dr. Farrell’s work, and the work of many others. It’s time to adjust the pendulum, but not in the way that has previously failed like “Affirmative Action”.

Listening to Dr. Farrell on the interview, I feel he may be missing part of the equation.  I have said for years that fathers should not say; “I can’t see my children”, they should instead say; “My child’s Human Rights to have access to both parents is being denied”.  It’s the same argument, but in the latter, you are reporting a case of Child Abuse. The other missing equation is the fact that Sociology has caused these crises by devaluing the Family, and especially professing that fathers are superfluous to the process of raising a child. I wrote in the book that Sociology believes that;

“Family is an outdated concept with its vestiges in our tribal roots.”

I also wrote that an Irish politician once stated that children do not have an automatic right to a parent. For children born outside of marriage, only the mother has automatic rights to guardianship. (Even though a father’s name may be registered on the child’s birth certificate, this does not give him any guardianship rights in respect of his child).

Let me be clear. A child needs both parents. There are certain things that girls or boys can only learn from their mothers and not their father, or vice-versa. But we know this as Human Beings, you don’t need a degree in Psychology or Sociology to know that children do better with both a mother and father, your instinct should tell you this. Some of you might say; “what about same-sex parents”? There isn’t sufficient evidence to state that children raised by same-sex parents do better or worse, primarily because there are not enough cases of children raised by same-sex parents to arrive at a scientific conclusion one way or the other. Data is only now becoming available but it doesn’t look good for children raised by same-sex parents. What is very clear is that children raised by both parents do better in terms of Outcomes and several other indicators.

We are paying a huge premium as a society for children abused by courts, judges, lawyers, mothers, fathers and especially social workers. To deny a child the right to a parent is child abuse, but unfortunately not illegal in many places. I hope Dr. Farrell gets behind the Parental Alienation movement and I hope he continues his excellent work.

As an addendum, I have included some disturbing stats from another blog I found.

  • 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (US Dept. Of Health/Census) – 5 times the average.
  • 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes – 32 times the average.
  • 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average.  (Center for Disease Control)
  • 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes –14 times the average.  (Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26)
  • 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average.  (National Principals Association Report)

Father Factor in Education – Fatherless children are twice as likely to drop out of school.

  • Children with Fathers who are involved are 40% less likely to repeat a grade in school.
  • Children with Fathers who are involved are 70% less likely to drop out of school.
  • Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to get A’s in school.
  • Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to enjoy school and engage in extracurricular activities.
  • 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes – 10 times the average.

Father Factor in Drug and Alcohol Abuse – Researchers at Columbia University found that children living in two-parent household with a poor relationship with their father are 68% more likely to smoke, drink, or use drugs compared to all teens in two-parent households. Teens in single mother households are at a 30% higher risk than those in two-parent households.

  • 70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average.  (U.S. Dept. of Justice, Sept. 1988)
  • 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average.  (Fulton Co. Georgia, Texas Dept. of Correction)

Father Factor in Incarceration – Even after controlling for income, youths in father-absent households still had significantly higher odds of incarceration than those in mother-father families. Youths who never had a father in the household experienced the highest odds. A 2002 Department of Justice survey of 7,000 inmates revealed that 39% of jail inmates lived in mother-only households. Approximately forty-six percent of jail inmates in 2002 had a previously incarcerated family member. One-fifth experienced a father in prison or jail.

Father Factor in Crime – A study of 109 juvenile offenders indicated that family structure significantly predicts delinquency. Adolescents, particularly boys, in single-parent families were at higher risk of status, property and person delinquencies. Moreover, students attending schools with a high proportion of children of single parents are also at risk. A study of 13,986 women in prison showed that more than half grew up without their father. Forty-two percent grew up in a single-mother household and sixteen percent lived with neither parent

Father Factor in Child Abuse – Compared to living with both parents, living in a single-parent home doubles the risk that a child will suffer physical, emotional, or educational neglect. The overall rate of child abuse and neglect in single-parent households is 27.3 children per 1,000, whereas the rate of overall maltreatment in two-parent households is 15.5 per 1,000.

Daughters of single parents without a Father involved are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 711% more likely to have children as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a pre-marital birth and 92% more likely to get divorced themselves.

Adolescent girls raised in a 2 parent home with involved Fathers are significantly less likely to be sexually active than girls raised without involved Fathers.

  • 43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
  • 90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
  • 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
  • 71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
  • 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
  • 85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
  • 90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
  • 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
  • 75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
  • 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
  • 85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
  • Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]

Census Fatherhood Statistics

  • 64.3 million: Estimated number of fathers across the nation
  • 26.5 million: Number of fathers who are part of married-couple families with their own children under the age of 18.
    Among these fathers –

    • 22 percent are raising three or more of their own children under 18 years old (among married-couple family households only).
    • 2 percent live in the home of a relative or a non-relative.
  • 2.5 million: Number of single fathers, up from 400,000 in 1970. Currently, among single parents living with their children, 18 percent are men.
    Among these fathers –

    • 8 percent are raising three or more of their own children under 18 years old.
    • 42 percent are divorced, 38 percent have never married, 16 percent are separated and 4 percent are widowed. (The percentages of those divorced and never married are not significantly different from one another.)
    • 16 percent live in the home of a relative or a non-relative.
    • 27 percent have an annual family income of $50,000 or more.
  • 85 percent: Among the 30.2 million fathers living with children younger than 18, the percentage who lived with their biological children only.
    • 11 percent lived with step-children
    • 4 percent with adopted children
    • < 1 percent with foster children

    Recent policies encourage the development of programs designed to improve the economic status of low-income nonresident fathers and the financial and emotional support provided to their children. This brief provides ten key lessons from several important early responsible fatherhood initiatives that were developed and implemented during the 1990s and early 2000s. Formal evaluations of these earlier fatherhood efforts have been completed making this an opportune time to step back and assess what has been learned and how to build on the early programs’ successes and challenges.While the following statistics are formidable, the Responsible Fatherhood research literature generally supports the claim that a loving and nurturing father improves outcomes for children, families and communities.

  • Children with involved, loving fathers are significantly more likely to do well in school, have healthy self-esteem, exhibit empathy and pro-social behavior, and avoid high-risk behaviors such as drug use, truancy, and criminal activity compared to children who have uninvolved fathers.
  • Studies on parent-child relationships and child wellbeing show that father love is an important factor in predicting the social, emotional, and cognitive development and functioning of children and young adults.
  • 24 million children (34 percent) live absent their biological father.
  • Nearly 20 million children (27 percent) live in single-parent homes.
  • 43 percent of first marriages dissolve within fifteen years; about 60 percent of divorcing couples have children; and approximately one million children each year experience the divorce of their parents.
  • Fathers who live with their children are more likely to have a close, enduring relationship with their children than those who do not.
  • Compared to children born within marriage, children born to cohabiting parents are three times as likely to experience father absence, and children born to unmarried, non-cohabiting parents are four times as likely to live in a father-absent home.
  • About 40 percent of children in father-absent homes have not seen their father at all during the past year; 26 percent of absent fathers live in a different state than their children; and 50 percent of children living absent their father have never set foot in their father’s home.
  • Children who live absent their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.
  • From 1995 to 2000, the proportion of children living in single-parent homes slightly declined, while the proportion of children living with two married parents remained stable.


A Lie travels half way across the World before the Truth has a chance to put on its Pants.

Do you believe that Satanic Ritual Abuse exists?

I have borrowed the following paragraph from Wikipedia which explains SRA.

Satanic ritual abuse (SRA, sometimes known as ritual abuse, ritualistic abuse, organised abuse, sadistic ritual abuse, and other variants) was the subject of a moral panic that originated in the United States in the 1980s, spreading throughout the country and eventually to many parts of the world by the late 1990s. Allegations of SRA involved reports of physical and sexual abuse of people in the context of occult or Satanic rituals. In its most extreme form, SRA involves a worldwide organisation including the wealthy and powerful of the world elite in which children are abducted or bred for sacrifices, pornography and prostitution.”

Every once in a while on Social Media I see people who firmly believe in a great conspiracy which involves “Illuminati”, “Freemasons” and secret societies. The people promoting the ideas are otherwise good, intelligent people. Their belief is that there has been a massive cover-up, which would have to involve millions of people. I wrote extensively about this in the book in a chapter called “Dreadophiles“, in which I discuss the topic of Child Sexual Abuse (CSA). Much of what many people believe about the topic is not supported by historical fact.

The entire thesis of SRA comes from a book published in 1980 entitled; “Michelle Remembers”, the concept of SRA did not exist before this book. I have stated this fact many times that SRA was invented in 1980, but there are those who will claim that it has existed for centuries. No amount of proof will convince believers of SRA was invented in 1980. They will cite paintings and myths and ancient stories, and while it is true that Human Sacrifice to Gods has existed as long as human beings, there is nothing in history to show that “Illuminati” or “Freemasons” sacrifice babies or children to Satan. Despite many investigations, no link has ever been found to secret societies, or “Cabals” or Satanists sacrificing babies.

Unfortunately the much discredited book also invented another concept; the belief by Psychologists that traumatic memories could be blocked out and be recovered by various psychological techniques. Again, up until 1980 nobody had heard of or believed in Fractured or Recovered Memory Syndrome, it has since been used in courts to prosecute people for rape and sexual abuse even there is no other way of proving the rape or abuse. Funnily enough, the same techniques and theories are used on people who believe they were “beamed up” into UFO’s and anally probed by little green men.  There is of course another condition in which memory can be lost which is called Amnesia, which an entirely different concept. Although widely accepted now, FRMS did not exist before the book in 1980, it is interesting to note that all of the papers written on the topic were written after the book. Also interesting that when this technique is used, it is almost exclusively used in cases of Sexual Abuse and being probed by “Little Green Men in UFO’s”.

SRA began a Moral Panic from the 1980’s on but faded into obscurity as every Police Force in the world investigated cases of SRA but not one police officer ever came up with any evidence. What is interesting is that the Moral Panic was spread by Social Workers with the aid of the Media. In the 80’s every talk-show host had some waning celebrity on their show claiming to have been abused. Many books were written and many TV shows did fictional shows about “Secret Societies” and the stories became more exaggerated by the day. The Witch Hunt went as far as a Sheriff driving around town with a child who accused almost everyone she saw. There were thousands of prosecutions, often based on nothing more than accusations and no evidence presented. The most egregious case was the McMartin Pre-school Trial which was the longest trial in USA history and the most expensive, but didn’t result in a single prosecution. An interesting movie starring James Woods is widely available on the internet.

In the UK a similar Moral Panic called the Cleveland Inquiry saw many innocent people charged and convicted of CSA based on an extremely flawed medical theory called Reflex Anal Dilatation (RAD). I met the original theorist of this in 2017 when he testified in a Shaken Baby case in Ireland. In the court I witnessed this dangerous doctor exaggerate and give misleading evidence about SBS. After testifying I tried to talk to him on the topic of SBS but I got the impression he didn’t want to discuss anything. The conversation ended when I mentioned people wrongly accused of abuse. Because of his theory, hundreds of people were wrongly convicted. An actual study of RAD showed that the signs and symptoms are found in about 50% of children, which debunks the theory.

In Ireland there was a famous case widely known as the Dr Moira Woods Scandal, in which hundreds of parents were wrongly accused of sexually abusing their own child. Dr Woods was brought down by one father who eventually forced the Medical Council to hold a Fitness to Practice hearing against her. She was found guilty of professional conduct but it took 16 years for the father Eddie Hernon to be vindicated.

Online in social media now, we are currently seeing self appointed “Pedophile Hunters” entrapping men and enticing them to commit crime. I have no sympathy for these men who attempt to groom children online. The comments online are overwhelmingly in support of these “Pedophile Hunters”. These “Hunters” are generating these crimes, no actual children are involved. The perpetrators are enticed into committing a crime, the “meeting” is recorded on video and posted online before the Police arrive. Essentially these “Hunters” are creating crimes.

In one video I saw a man who appeared to have a mental illness, possibly Asperger’s, thought he was meeting a child. You could tell by his mannerisms and speech that he obviously wasn’t a “Rocket Scientist”. I don’t condone what he did, but I would be concerned that these “Hunters” would likely cause the death by suicide of some of these perpetrators, especially people who are mentally ill. In one case in the UK a Pediatrician was driven from her home because someone had confused the word Pedophile with Pediatrician.

I don’t agree with Vigilantes or people setting themselves as heroes in their own mind. I have met far too many Social Workers, Child Abuse Pediatricians and Psychologists who have this mindset of; “protecting children at all costs and if some innocent people are wrongly accused, then that’s the price we must pay to keep children safe” kind of attitude. I have seen doctors convinced of abuse and when I or a colleague present alternate causes, their mind wont allow them to believe anything other than child abuse. Once these people believe they are saving a child, even the imaginary children the “Hunters” save, they will not be swayed from their course. I have even seen this mindset in Police Officers who will stray from normal investigative procedure and secure a prosecution at all costs.

Justice is supposed to be predicated on the principle that 10 guilty men go free before 1 innocent man is convicted, it is also the reason why we have Juries and convictions based on a unanimous verdict. A persons Good Name and their Freedom and Liberty are too important for us to get wrong, and  yet we frequently do. We have seen many celebrities accused of sexual abuse and found not guilty. Even when found not guilty, this is not vindication, which can take years to achieve. In the most famous miscarriage of justice in Ireland, Nora Wall, a former Nun at a Care Home for children was convicted of rape. After the conviction, 4 days after, it was found that the “Victim” had fabricated the rape, and it was not the first time she had wrongly accused someone.

For the wrongly accused, there are devastating consequences. Many people have committed suicide even years after vindication or a not-guilty verdict. When accused your name will appear in the media, you will likely lose your job, partner and maybe your house before the case even comes to court. For sexual abuse victims, many also suffer life-long consequences and suicides are common among victims. Many people also believe that adult rape and sexual assault are under-reported or that few cases are prosecuted.  The landscape of Child Sexual Abuse cases is even more disturbing.  When Social Services are handling these cases, many don’t even get reported to Police so the alleged perpetrator is never investigated. Of course social workers don’t need Police to take children from their parents, the allegation is often enough to remove the child, and any other children, for life.

Almost everything that most people believe about sexual assault is wrong, even professionals are guilty of this. In the last few years a few countries have introduced legislation to castrate perpetrators who sexually assault children. In many cases the Public called for this and it received broad support. What many don’t know is that Castration doesn’t work, professionals have known this for decades. And how exactly do you “Castrate” a female offender? “Castration” doesn’t involve amputation or the severing of “appendages”, a drug is given which supposedly reduces Libido by interfering with Testosterone. In many cases offenders are given a reduced sentence if they agree to take the drug, this is complete madness.

The drive or urges to sexually assault are a function of the brain and not the reproductive organs. Let me put it another way, you don’t need to use your sex organs to sexually assault someone. We have known, or should have known for years that Chemical Castration doesn’t work. I must apologize in advance for bringing up Homosexuality in the same piece as a story on Child Sexual Abuse. There is no connection between Pedophilia and Homosexuality, studies have shown that the incidence of Pedophilia among Gay and Lesbian People is far lower than with Heterosexuals. But there is one important connection that cannot be ignored.

Up until the 1970’s, Homosexuality was illegal and many Gay Men were forced to be chemically castrated by courts. A stunning example being Alan Turing, the genius who decoded the “Enigma Machine” and shortened WWII by years saving countless lives, was convicted of being a Homosexual. Turing eventually grew female breasts from the drugs and committed suicide, a know side effect of the drugs. The world lost a beautiful genius who could have contributed a great deal to Humanity. He should have been treated as a hero, but instead suffered a great injustice. We should know from the cases of men convicted and castrated that although castration was performed, it did not prevent their attraction to other men, it did not prevent them engaging in sexual activity and the entire practice was a disastrous failure and monstrous injustice.

To give a Pedophile a shorter sentence on the basis of  agreeing to Chemical Castration is insane. We know that diagnosed Pedophiles are incurable. Aside from Pedophiles, there are also Psychopaths, Sexual Predators and individuals who we know will re-offend when released from prison. Again, it is insane to release an individual into Society knowing that they will commit a crime, obviously this applies not only to predators, but to anyone who is a danger to Society. With the current system, a predator must be released upon serving a sentence, the only possible solution to this is to see them as mentally ill, this allows them to be locked up forever.

In the entire book there is only 1 Graph, a picture I gleaned from Department of Justice statistics in the USA. It shows the ages of offenders and the incidence at any given age. Over 80% of sexual assaults of children are committed by 14 year olds, 70% of offenders are boys. At 14 a child is far too young to be diagnosed a Pedophile. Obviously there is a huge problem in our society that is being over-looked, Puberty. In the nearly 20 years since this graph and the report came out, nothing has been done. Let me put that in perspective, we know that we could prevent nearly 80% of all sexual abuse of children, but are doing nothing about it.


When you look at other aspects of this topic you see incredible stupidity, a direct result of the Moral Panic about Pedophilia that we are currently experiencing. We see cases of 15 year olds engaging in consensual sex, and being jailed and branded sex offenders as a result. As parents, we don’t want our 15 year old becoming a mother or father, and we probably don’t want to think of them having sex. We tell them don’t have sex and even make laws, but tell me this; If someone gave you a Ferrari at the age of puberty and told you not to drive it, do you think you could abstain? With hormones running through their body, and not yet being mature enough to abstain from acting on their impulses, is it reasonable to expect children to go through this without support?

I’m not advocating lowering the Age of Consent, but to criminalize children for crimes against themselves, is a step too far. Many young teens have been prosecuted for sending naughty pictures to other teens, stupid maybe, but how can you be victim and perpetrator at the same time? In the USA, Federal Law prescribes twice the term of imprisonment for a boy who takes a picture of his erection than attempted murder. In one absurd case, a 5 year old, to young to be prosecuted, was placed on the Sex Offender Register. In Kindergarten he nuzzled the breasts of his teacher. Under Mandatory Reporting, the teacher felt she had no choice to report or she would be prosecuted. The Police had no choice to list the child under a federal law called the Adam Walsh Act. This is how far the hysteria has gone.

I too have been wrongly accused as have my colleagues. I cant say that I lost any sleep over being falsely accused on social media, but one of my colleagues did suffer as a result. A conspiracy theorist fabricated a story that anyone who helped families against social services were actually scuppering cases in order to get more children removed into “Care”. At one point the theory was that I was running a child trafficking operation, but of course not a scrap of evidence was ever produced. The conspiracy theorist actually went to Police with his theories but was laughed out of the stations he went to. After years of abusing and falsely accusing many people, I decided to get all those people together and make complaints to Police. In the first case against him the trial is in 2 days time.

Nevertheless, mud sticks. I lost several Facebook “Friends” overnight, again, not losing any sleep and many people still believe a myth. I abhor Conspiracy Theory regardless of the source, but I don’t hate any person. Fantastic stories are really interesting, they make great novels, tv shows and movies. Real life is boring and mundane. I can see why, given a choice between an interesting story that makes someone look bad and is a complete fabrication, versus the boring truth where nothing interesting happened, I can see why a lie travels across the world before the truth puts on his pants. I can understand it but I cannot condone it.

What I also cannot understand is why people who themselves have been wrongly accused by social workers or who have been victims of the Child Abuse Industry, are actually helping the Child Abuse Industry by promoting propaganda and creating hysteria? No folks, Pedophilia, Child Abuse and Neglect are not at epidemic proportions, the Crime Statistics and Prosecution Statistics don’t support this theory.  No, there are not millions of Pedophiles out there, or if there is there is no evidence of it. In Ireland, there are thousand of reports of CSA every year but only about 540 cases are “confirmed” by social workers, out of 540 only 130 or so are reported to Police and only 40 prosecutions take place every year on average. Other countries have equally low statistics. According to my own estimates, only 1 in every 184 cases of child abuse is ever prosecuted. Social services cannot justify the ever increasing numbers of children be removed from parents and placed in “Care”. We are not a nation of child abusers despite the conspiracy theories.

By ramping up the hysteria about child abuse and allowing outrageous statistics to go unchallenged, we are allowing more children to be harmed by being removed and placed in danger in “Care”. By supporting conspiracy theories and wrongly accusing people, we are giving a license to remove children to the Child Abuse Industry. Saving a child is the most heroic action a human being being can undertake. It feels good to save a child but let’s not confuse saving children with the actions of vigilantes or self appointed heroes saving imaginary children. Removing a child from a fit and loving parent creates a wound so deep in that child that we have no way of measuring it. Lets not confuse feeling good with the belief that we are doing the right thing for children.

In everything that we do we should be guided by evidence and not accept the word of conspiracy theorists whether they are social workers, doctors, or people who have been victims of a cruel and unjust system. Whenever people are being branded or accused of a crime, ask for evidence. To wrongly accuse someone can have devastating consequences for them. Taking the law into our own hands has never ended well, if not for the “hunter”, then for their victim. The KKK comes to mind and many other vigilantes and conspiracy theorists. If you spread conspiracy theory or take the law into your own hands you are no better than a social worker doing the same to a child and their innocent parents. Give the Truth a chance to put on its pants before you spread a Lie.


Where do (Adopted) Babies Come From?

I am watching a video on Facebook of a mother who has lost her newborn to Forced Adoption. As heartbreaking as it is to watch, it is a story I have heard over and over again. In a few of the cases I have worked on in the UK, I have seen all of the documents, in fact, I have seen more of the evidence than the judges have seen in these cases. I have also seen cases where parents have fled the UK and Social Services in other countries, where Forced Adoption is not legal, they were allowed to keep their babies. In fact I have even met social workers involved in these cases and interviewed them for the book.

In the video I am watching, a young, first-time mother, as soon as she got pregnant, social services became involved because they had “concerns”.  Bear in mind that this was her first-born, her ability as a parent could not reasonably be determined since she didn’t have a child and there was no evidence that she had ever abused a child. I have to say in the interest of fairness, that I don’t know enough about the case to say whether the Forced Adoption is justified or not. I am listening to one side of the story, and I wouldn’t make a judgement based on hearing one side. I can say however, that in every other case I have seen or dealt with, in none of those cases was the Forced Adoption justified.

I wrote in great depth about other cases in the book, but there is a pattern that you get to see over and over again. When councils were being paid bonuses to adopt more children in the UK, only 6% of the children in “Care” were adopted, the majority of cases were like this one, social workers identify a baby for adoption and the parent is put on a treadmill with targets they have no hope of hitting.  The UK government set an impossible target of Fast-Tracking Forced Adoption within 2 months. They will tell the parent they need to do a course or training which will take several months, and then say no places are available for months, the Forced Adoption would be finalized probably 4 months before the parent finishes.

In a case I assisted on in the UK, the mother had been placed in a “Mother and Baby Unit”. By the time this mother and her team were finished with social services, Tadpole Cottage was shut down and Dr George Hibbert was facing a Fitness to Practice Committee at the GMC. Incredibly, he was cleared of professional misconduct. Among the psychological tests a mother faced was changing a flat tyre at the side of the road while caring for her baby.  In the end the highly controversial General Medical Council dropped the charges against him.

I have even seen a case in Ireland where an English mother and her husband relocated to Ireland even though he was serving in the British Army and had completed a tour in Afghanistan. Irish social services were notified by UK social services that this woman was such a risk to children that her previous children were forcibly adopted. When she was pregnant, 6 months before the due date, she became a legal resident of Ireland. She contacted us on arrival and we advised her to contact Irish social services, provide them with all her records and engage with them to see what concerns they had if any. Their response was not to engage with her until the day the baby was born. In fact, they even placed a Police surveillance car outside her home for weeks before the baby was born. She was monitored 24/7 even though she was not accused of any crime. If she had decided to flee the jurisdiction before the baby was born, Police would have been powerless to do anything.  I know of several cases where Police resources were wasted in this way.

When the baby was born, social workers attempted a kidnapping under the law. They had no court orders and attempted to illegally invoke Section 12 of the Child Care Act which allows Irish Police to remove any child in danger without court orders. In many cases babies or children are kidnapped misusing S12 and then social workers will lie to a judge and say the baby was in such danger that the Police had to remove the child and hand them over to social workers. However, S12 requires that the Police Officer is required to establish what danger the baby was in. Since it was highly improbable that a newborn could be in any danger in a hospital while surrounded by doctors and nurses, if Police had used S12 they would not have been able to justify their actions. Despite this, S12 is regularly misused, which in the legal sense would be kidnapping, fraud upon the court, perjury and perverting the course of justice.

Despite not engaging with the mother, an Emergency Care Order was granted based on the UK evidence. Despite fighting through the courts in Ireland, the baby was deported and forcibly adopted. Last year the same mother moved to another EU country, engaged with social services there before the birth, and they had no issues. Today she lives with her new baby and is pregnant again, social services there have no issues. If she was in Ireland or the UK she would be guaranteed to lose any child she gives birth to.

So my question is; Where do adopters think these babies come from?

It has been a long time since Orphanages have existed in most of Europe. The marketing of these children includes posting their images in advertisement online and paying advertising agencies to find “forever homes” for the less adoptable children who  are over aged three. Of course most adopters want babies, preferably if the baby never bonded with their mother. In a few cases in Ireland I have heard social workers trying to justify reasons why a newborn should not be breast-fed or bond. In one case we asked a High Court judge “who is the baby supposed to bond with?”. They have even stated outright that if the baby bonds and is breast-fed, that the baby will grieve for their mother and this can impact the bond with the adopters. Obviously this is child abuse to deny a newborn the opportunity to bond. It is well-known now that “Kangaroo Care” is tremendously important for newborns. Babies can die for apparent reason described as “Failure to Thrive” and human contact with their mother. It is also widely known that the bonding process begins long before the baby is born, and newborn know their mothers.

Adoption, which has long been a thriving business, believes that you can take a baby from “A” and place them with “B” and that there are no consequences to the child. Adopters believe they are saving children from a miserable existence and many have set themselves up as heroes in their own mind. Social workers have no issue with abusing a baby and as the evidence appears to show, the more financial incentives involved, the more adoptions that will take place. In the middle of all this is the baby who is being abused. But lets not forget the mother or the father of this baby who will spend the rest of their lives grieving for a living child. If these parents speak out they will be jailed. If they parents see their child on the street, they could be jailed for any form of acknowledging their own child.

In many cases children were adopted because their parents were wrongly accused of child abuse. By the time the case came to Criminal Court their children were already forcibly adopted. Supposedly, these adoptions are “Irreversible” even though they were not legally justified. This in itself is proof that Forced Adoptions are illegal. It also proves that a child can be adopted without the parents being guilty of any crime, a Human Rights abuse under “Punishment Without Crime”. A friend and colleague who has helped parents against social services since the 1960’s, Ian Josephs is the person who first coined  the term “Forced Adoption” and for years he has had a website entitled Forced Adoption – Punishment Without Crime.  Ian, although now in his 80’s, still works daily helping parents flee or fight their cases. Another colleague, a former British MP John Hemming has done amazing work in compiling statistics and raising the issue many times in the British Parliament. Despite all the sterling work over the years not a lot has changed.

What has changed is that far more people are now aware that children don’t come from orphanages or are voluntarily given up by bad parents. If you are going to adopt a child these days you need to do a lot of courses, spend a lot of money and a lot of time before you are given a child. With so much information these days about the controversies and the injustice of Forced Adoption, you would either have to stupid, brainwashed or so cruel that you don’t care where the baby or child came from. If an adoption can fail and an adopter hand the child back to social services, there is no good reason that adoptions can be reversed as easily as they were made.

We need to stop seeing Adoption as being a heroic act, there is nothing heroic about adopting a child who doesn’t want to be adopted or taking a child away from a parent who has not committed any crime. If the failure rates of adoption and the suicide rate of adopted children is higher than children in the general population, seeing Adoption as anything other than a form of Child Abuse is no longer acceptable. I wrote in great detail about this in the book.


Why is Child Abuse Sometimes Acceptable?

I have mentioned before how I am fascinated with Cognitive Dissonance and how facts and indisputable evidence wont change people’s minds. It is a topic that has been well-studied by scientific experiments over the years and the conclusion that could be drawn is that Humans are not yet at a stage of our development where our brains can differentiate between fact and fiction, and that Reasoning Power in humans is driven by our prejudice, fear and “Filtering”.

It has only been in the last century where many, but not all people on the planet have not needed our Instincts. We live in a reasonably free society and are protected by Police, Laws, Armies and we can go about raising our families and working our jobs, tending to our homes and land and most of us will not fall afoul of the law or be abused by governments. This is the entire point of having a society and working together to make a better world for our children and their children. We have a duty to advance as Humans and improve our intelligence, to make a fairer society and work towards the day when there are no more wars or dictators, where Human Rights Courts and Lawyers will no longer be necessary because nobody would abuse our rights. I also discussed this in the book.

The reality is that there are wars and humans suffering from environmental disasters, we still have famines, droughts, dictators and millions dying. I wrote extensively about the failure of the United Nations, especially UNICEF and why these organizations sometimes do more harm than good. I have been taken to task for speaking on these issues by otherwise good people with the best intentions and the “Best Interest of the Child” at heart, but I have gained their respect in many cases by pointing out that good people can easily be led to do bad things. We try and try but still fail. We don’t give up on these failures, we try harder but the reason we fail ultimately is because we fulfill Albert Einsteins prophesy when he defined Insanity;

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

We keep trying, failure is not an option, but without listening to others and changing our methods, we are doomed to failure, which is Insanity.

Arab Child Abuse

child abuse

I may lose a few friends with this next paragraph, but I urge people to think logically and constructively about this and not allow your prejudices or biases to accept new information.

I am going to discuss what I see as Child Abuse, mainly by Arabs in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict which has raged on since 1948. Case in Point is a 16-year-old girl by the name of Ahed Tamimi. She was arrested and detained without bail for assaulting 2 soldiers outside her house in the West Bank. She is also known as Shirley Temper and there are many videos of her shouting and striking IDF Soldiers. Her family background is that her family have a history of “rebellion” and terrorism, this is the environment she and many Arab children were raised in. Throughout history we have seen children indoctrinated into regimes and ideologies, as children we are not autonomous and believe our parents to be Gods, to be infallible and always be right about everything. It’s no surprise that children become their parents in many ways and that conflicts go from one generation to another. Some fact I have seen on Ahed Tamimi;

  • For years she has attacked Police and Soldiers, always with Media present to record the event. This is the first time she has been arrested and charged.
  • At the age of 13 she received 2 awards for her “Activism” by the Presidents of Turkey and “Palestine”. (in 2012 she was reported as being aged 13 by the Turkish and International Media, which if my math is correct makes her an adult, but if the Media insists she is only 16 let’s go with that)
  •  Her aunt Ahlam Ahmad Al-Tamimi  a Jordanian citizen, was jailed for her part in the infamous Sbaro Restaurant suicide bombing in Israel which killed 15 Israelis, half of whom were children. She remains unrepentant to this day.
  • Ahed’s mother Nariman Tamimi regularly incites violence against Jews, and usually appears with her daughter at events where Ahed slaps soldiers and the mother videos the event, not to mention the heavy media presence usually seen at these “protests”, which are organized by her father.
  • Ahed’s Father Bassim Tamimi, also a Jordanian, was jailed for incitement, particularly for instructing children to throw stones at Jews and Israelis.
  • It would appear that the Tamimi Family are not in fact “Palestinians” but emigrated from Jordan.

The arguments of the Anti-Israelis in the Ahed Tamimi case show and incredible bias. Some peoples views are so fixed against Israel that they try to justify the abuse of Ahed by her family and community. Here is a sampling;

  • Ahed was angry because her cousin had been shot in the eye by an IDF soldier. If this is true, what motivation did she have for attacking soldiers hundreds of times for at least the last 5 years?
  • “She is only a child, the soldiers are fully armed”. Can I ask, what mother or father would allow a child to attack a fully armed soldier and film it rather than try to protect their child?
  • “The soldiers were entering her house”. The video shows the soldiers outside her property on the street and making no attempt to enter her house. Ahed threw the blows and kicks, the soldiers did not defend themselves. Can I ask if a child in any Western country did the same to a Police Officer, would they not be tazered or shot or beaten with batons? Would the Police not arrest the child and mother and place the child in Foster “Care” and charge the mother with Reckless Endangerment of a Child?
  • “Throwing stones is harmless compared to a fully armed and trained soldier”. I would say, have you never heard of Death by Stoning?

You have to laugh sometimes at the hypocrisy of people like George Galloway who points out that Jews are not indigenous to Israel or the area because some are blue-eyed/blonds, just like Jordanian Ahed Tamimi. I don’t want to be drawn into a debate about who’s right or wrong in this conflict, the point I am making is that Ahed Tamimi is an abused child, but many people try to excuse this form as child abuse as they try to excuse terrorism. I often hear people say that “One man’s Terrorist is another man’s Freedom Fighter”, no folks, if you attack civilians as Ahed’s aunt did, you are either a Psychopath or a Terrorist. If you subscribe to the “Freedom Fighter” concept, you have lost your Moral Compass and need a heavy dose of Critical Thinking.

We have indeed lost our Moral Compass if we celebrate sending a 12-year-old out to attack soldiers, throw stones or Petrol Bombs, roll burning Tyres filled with petrol at troops, or more serious, teaching hate to toddlers on TV or in UNRWA Schools. I am in disbelief that people allow their bias and hate against Israel and Jews to affect the logical part of their brain and not see blatant Child Abuse, especially in the case of Ahed?

Israeli Prime Minister Golda Maier (also spelled Meir), understood the mentality when she said;

Peace will come to the Arabs when they learn to love their children more than they hate ours (Jews)

Please don’t bother responding with comments drawing me into a debate over right or wrong in this conflict, the topic is Child Abuse and how people allow themselves to justify and celebrate the abuse of a child. I have not seen any evidence of Israelis or Jews similarly abusing or brainwashing their children. Please share any evidence you have to the contrary.

The question this child abuse raises for me is “Where are the Social Workers”? Where is the outrage and condemnation or scholarly articles? why do UNICEF and UNRWA not speak out against children being used by adults as “Martyrs” when the PLO sent out child suicide bombers? If there was ever an opportunity for Social Work and Sociology, who claim to have the power to control and influence Society, why are UNICEF not sending armies of Social Workers to Arab countries to prevent Child Abuse? But I’m sure if you have read the Secret Courts Book, you already know the answer.


The Psychics Hotline Method of “Protecting” Children

I’ve said, and many others have said many times, that to repeat the same experiment over and over again is “Insanity”. It is one of the great gifts that Albert Einstein gave us. So when Social Workers try to find new methods, this is to be encouraged and applauded. I wish them luck, but I believe it will fail.

History teaches us about Child Protection that social workers are no better than anyone else at determining which children should be removed. A stunning example is the Baby P Case. Baby Peter was visited by “Professionals” 60 times in his short life, 18 of those visits by social workers. What was the principle learning from this case by social workers, is that you should take every child on the least suspicion, because you will be “damned if you do and damned if you don’t”.  The reality is that nobody but parents are damned, usually by social workers, but social workers are damned only when they make mistakes, as they did in Baby P.

The conclusion that I arrived at in the Baby P case is that social workers are no more capable of determining which children should be removed than anyone. I put this down to many factors, all detailed in the book. The bottom line as I see it, is that Sociology is not Evidence Based and has no Scientific Validity. In many countries only specially trained Police can determine if children should be removed, in the case of Police, their work is Evidence Based and their decisions are based on fact. Compare that to what social workers are being asked to do; predict Future Outcomes for Children. I made it clear in the book that I believe that we are asking social workers to do a job they will never be capable of doing. By the very nature of their work, social workers don’t do investigations, they do assessments, and they are not very good at it.

So the latest Flavor-of-the-Month Pop-Psychology is to use computer algorithms to screen calls to social services. A system now being trialed is called Predictive-Analytics Algorithm.  When Social Services receive a call about a child who may need to be “protected”, it is hoped that a computer program will be able to determine which calls should be dismissed and which cases require a visit to the child.

Predictive analytics are something we use every day without knowing it. When you type in part of a search into a search engine it will pop up suggestions, and finish your sentence for you, giving you a selection based on popularity of questions. As a computer geek myself, who has worked not just on PC’s, but on highly complex Automation Systems, I will make my own prediction on why this will fail. Any geek will tell you that a computer program is only as good as the data you put into the program. Any computer technician will also tell you that the computer and program is only as good as its user. “False data in, false data out”. Here’s why it wont work;

  • The algorithm will not be science or evidence based but rely on faulty guidelines that social workers use on a daily basis.
  • The user is not qualified to conduct investigations, or to determine “Risk” based on a phone call or email.
  • Social Work has no history of success in determining which children are in actual need of protection.
  • Based on Baby P, social workers wouldn’t recognise abuse or risk is they visited the house 18 times and sat on the couch and watched it happen.
  • Existing checklists used by social workers are extremely vague, they rely heavily on subjective opinion to such an extent that most signs or symptoms “may or may not” be present, such that any child could be removed, or not removed, based on subjective opinion.

But let me state clearly, there are systems that are “tried and true” that have been used for many years with great success. At a case conference I plopped my phone on the table at the start of the meeting and pushed a few buttons. I was asked by the team leader if I was using a voice recorder? I answered “no, this is a Lie Detector”, do you have any objection to my using it? There was uproar and I had to remove the battery from my phone before the meeting would continue. I actually use a dedicated Digital  Audio Recorder and not my phone, just as courts and many social workers use.

With a DAR, if you have sufficiently good quality and levels, you can run the recording through a Voice Stress Analyzer, while this is not a Lie Detector as such,  in skilled hands it gives a very accurate reading of stress in a persons voice. While stress may or not be lying, it can encourage people to tell the truth.

In another case a parent recorded a social worker and clearly caught her lying. The parent wanted to use the recording in court so the judge could hear the lies. Social services strongly objected as they claimed tapes could be altered afterwards. Rather than the judge listening, he put the onus on the mother to have the tape analyzed by an expert technician and have her pay for it, making it impossible for her to use the tape. I offered my services for free as a qualified Electronics Technician and a Musician but now the judge put another condition on analyzing the tape, I had to analyze it without actually listening to its content. I said this was entirely possible, but there was no way that they were ever going to allow the tape to be played for the judge. Unbelievable but true. If I had been allowed, I would have over-stepped my mandate by also providing the judge with a Voice Stress Analysis, and also a Voice Recognition program which would have matched the speaker on tape with the speaker under oath on the witness stand.

So yes folks, there is technology that can help you prove your innocence or someones guilt, but I doubt very much that social workers or family court judges would embrace the use of tried and true technology. No amount of money spent on social workers will ever produce a method where social workers could detect by scientific means which children need protection, ever.

Might I suggest that social services re-route all child abuse and neglect calls to Psychics Hotline?




“I want to go Home”

I am often fascinated by comments on social media pages and will read through hundreds of comments. I find it educational to get others opinions and views, it can be a good gauge of public opinion, not forgetting that half the population are not on social media and usually hold a differing opinion.

This morning I am watching a video of Facebook of a young boy, about 10 years old, being dragged crying, kicking and screaming from his home  to be taken back to “Care”. As ordered by a judge. I don’t know if you can see the video from this link without a Facebook account, but no matter, I will describe the scene for you. 

The comments seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of the Police and against the mother. To give you a sampling;

  • Children are only removed after social workers have exhausted all other possibilities.
  • The Police were acting on the orders of the court, they don’t take children away without good reasons.
  • Bad parenting is to blame.
  • The mother is a bad parent for not telling her son to leave quietly with Police.

The Police in this case had a job to do. Their job is to enforce the orders of judges. It’s not the job of Police to question judges, just follow orders, (Nuremberg Defense). I have talked to many Police over the years about removing children.  In many cases they were very proud of their actions because they saved a child. They had no hesitation or regrets, neither would you or I have a problem removing a child in danger, when the actual danger to the child has been established.

I have also talked to Police in situations where they were “just following orders”, and were perplexed by why the child needed to be removed. I know 2 Police officers who went to their superior and expressed concerns over the actions of a social worker who removed 3 children but were dismissed as they were “Thinking above their rank”, and had no right to question the actions of the social worker. As it turned out, the social worker had fabricated evidence and essentially kidnapped 3 children and the officers were unwitting pawns who were “just following orders”.

I don’t wish to draw any parallels here between the action of the Police Officers in this video and the actions of Nazi’s. I believe it is important however to mention  how people blindly use the “Nuremberg Defense” to justify the actions of some people. In the Nuremberg Trials some Nazi’s used the defense; “I was just a soldier following orders”. As my friend and colleague Ian Josephs has said many times; “I’m sure there were nice guards at Auschwitz, but if you are part of a wicked organization that does wicked things, you are just as complicit”.

The Police did their job here, as per orders, but could they have done any better? I have no opinion of the capacity of the parents to care for their child, the parents are not my concern and I know nothing about their situation.

The facts that I have gleaned from the case, is that the child was placed in “Care” and ran away. This happens far more often that most people believe, if you ask children in “Care” what they want, in 99.99% of cases the answer will be; “I want to go home”. Obviously this child wants to be at home or wouldn’t have run away. I know of a child in Ireland who has attempted 3 times to commit suicide because his “carers” try to keep him away from his father. I fear that soon he will succeed in committing suicide, but despite our best efforts, no judge will listen to the child.

It is highly likely (70% chance) that the boy in this video was removed on the basis of nothing more than; “Possible Risk of Future Emotional Abuse”, I honestly don’t know. My observations here would be that if the parents had abused their son,

  • Why aren’t the parents in jail?
  • Is child abuse or neglect not a crime?
  • If the child had been abused by his parents, why would he go running home?
  • If “Care” is a safe place for children, why did he run away?

Far too often in these cases, judges “rubber stamp” decisions of “Professionals” without any evidence or scrutiny. The secrecy is such that Police Officers are told to mind their own business, follow orders and don’t get involved. The judge doesn’t get their hands dirty, they issue orders and almost never get to meet the child they are making decisions for. In an alternate universe I would have called the judge to the home and made the judge face the child and explain their decision. I would have made the judge physically drag the child to a vehicle. Why should judges be allowed to keep their hands clean and expect others to blindly carry out orders? Many senior Nazi officers never killed anyone or ever fired a weapon. In other atrocities since WWII, too many to mention, senior leaders were held accountable and many given the death penalty for their orders. While I don’t advocate killing judges, or anyone for that matter, why is it that children who are victims of judges decisions cannot sue them for their actions?

For me, what is overwhelmingly apparent from the comments, is that everyone wants to make decisions for and about this child, but nobody is listening to the child. The child wants to go home. If this child were given the opportunity to speak, I’m sure he would say; “No decisions about me, without me”.

I’m sure everyone feels they are acting in the “Best Interests” of this child, but nobody is listening to him. Many misinformed and misguided people believe the child belongs in “Care”, I might add without knowing the facts of the case. Many believe the system is competent because to think otherwise would mean that Family Courts and Social Workers sometimes make horrible mistakes and children die as a result, which of course happens all to frequently, but with such secrecy that the public will never hear about it.

What do these people seriously think what will happen to this child? I can, in all probability predict that;

I can make these predictions with about 80% certainty because this is the future for many “Cared For” children. I wish him every success in life but I despair that the odds are stacked against him. His parents may indeed be unfit to care for him, I don’t know, but I do know that “Care” will not benefit this child. And I also know that the vast majority of children should not be in “Care”, ethically or legally.  Naturally he will be shuffled off to a Residential “Care” facility, too far away for his parents to visit as no other facility could offer him the “security” he needs, as in locked doors and high fences so that they can “Care” for him.

Was the Police Officer wrong to threaten the mother that she should tell her child to cooperate and leave quietly? If the mother had told her son to leave, what message do you think the child would have taken from this? Is the mother a bad parent for not cooperating? You can clearly see the thinking here, everyone wants to decide for the child, but nobody but the mother wants to listen to him. He wants to go home.

In a few days this case will be forgotten, I might even get a court order to remove the story from my page. I can guarantee that the parents will be jailed this week in a Secret Court and nobody will hear anything about this child again. All the strong opinions of the keyboard warriors will amount to nothing as the video will quickly disappear from Facebook and this child will quickly be forgotten about like all the children in “Care”. Maybe in 10 or so years if you see a homeless youth begging on the streets, you could ask them if they were in “Care”? Of course you can ask any beggar on the street that question now…..