Read the NG Welfare Vereeniging website
"When children are no longer protected sufficiently by their parents or family members, social workers obtain a court order to protect the children involved. Then the children are often placed in an alternative caring position such as foster care or in a children’s home. Once children are placed in alternative care, assistance to the biological parents still continues. The aim is to rehabilitate the parents so that the children can be restored in their care. This is also known as family reunion services."
THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED!
- Carol removed the kids before a court order
- The kids were protected by their father and could be protected by other family members (Carol did not ask)
- There is and was no assistance and reunification
The meeting with NG Welsyn went badly - they are keeping the children. Today is a second chance - a meeting with the Magistrate at the Children's Court at 3pm.
Will the right questions be asked?
- why did Carol not follow s7? (answer: because it puts family preservation first)
- why no court order first? (answer: because that gives the parents a chance to speak)
- why remove directly to foster care and not family? (answer: there is no money in family placements)
- why remove at all and not offer support instead? (answer: there is no money in family strengthening)
- how does NG Welsyn benefit from removals? (answer: they only get paid for assessments if kids go to foster care and children can easily be sold if separated from their parents and family)
- why did Carol Ankiewicz leave the mom's address off the J36? (answer: it made mom look unavailable to the Mag and prevented the question "why don't the kids go to her instead?")
If the right questions are asked, the kids come home.