Wednesday, August 30, 2006

NSPCC attacked for helping gay kids

A charity claiming to protect the interests of children has launched a bizarre attack on Childline and the NSPCC.

Despite advertising Childline on their website, the National Society for Children and Family Contact claim the well-respected charity is abandoning the religious views of its founders.

In a poorly-drafted statement to PinkNews.co.uk, the chairman of NSCFC, Mike Ellis, used language that would not be out of place in a Christian revivalist meeting to refer to the vulnerable children who contact Childline.

All spelling mistakes are those of Mr Ellis:
“Yet again it would appear that the NSPCC have faltered in its founders principles in relation to the traditional family and how best to sustain it, for here we see yet again that in opposition to its founders religious beliefs it wholeheartedly embraces that which befell Sodom and Gomorrah as if the norm.

“When in reality it should be upholding the principles which brought it to bear and as such challenging those who appose it.”

NSCFC claims to be working to ensure “that welfare organisations and the courts serve the best interests of the child.”

However, a quick examination of its website exposes it as obsessed with the rights of fathers, and opposition to the family court system. It emphasises the belief that children are better raised by both parents, yet there is no reference on their website to the fundamentalist Christian views of its chairman.

NSCFC has been granted meetings with Conservative party frontbench spokesman on children, Tim Loughton, in what will be seen as an embarassment to David Cameron’s party.

The Tories have recently attempted to rid themselves of their homophobic image.

A press statement about the key aims of NSCFC makes no reference to Sodom and Gomorrah:

“Above all the NSCFC promote the concept that generally the children love both of their parents and that they, as much as (if not more than) anyone suffer when parents go to war.

“Notwithstanding any dispute between the parents, a loving parent will use their best endeavours to encourage a meaningful and on going relationship between the child and both parents this to include the extended family.”

A NSPCC spokesperson said: “The NSPCC wants to see a society where all children are loved, valued and able to fulfil their potential. Our Royal Charter of 1895 requires that we ‘undertake and carry out publicity and educational work of all descriptions for making known the objects of the Society’.

“We also support the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child which says that children should be protected from all forms of discrimination.”

The NSPCC was founded in 1884, and was responsible for getting Parliament to pass the first legislation to protect children. It spends £60m a year on services for children and young people.
Childline became part of the NSPCC in February 2006. The charity supported the equalisation of consent. It has consistently opposed the idea that both parents have an automatic right to access to children, regardless of the wishes of the child, which may explain today’s statement from the NSCFC.

First published in PinkNews.co.uk

1 Comments:

At 12:36 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing that would reverse this and help re-claim childhood would be the scrapping of compulsory sex education. Let's preserve innocence as long as we can. Decidedly explicit stuff is to be foisted on children as young as five!
This is enough to make any decent person think that if ever they become a parent, home-schooling is the only option left.

To my knowledge, UKIP are the only political party who are committed to making sex education optional (apart from in the context of biology) and cutting it out altogether for under-10's. Good on them! As for the NSPCC spokesperson saying: “The NSPCC wants to see a society where all children are loved, valued and able to fulfill their potential. Our Royal Charter of 1895 requires that we ‘undertake and carry out publicity and educational work of all descriptions for making known the objects of the Society’.
“We also support the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child which says that children should be protected from all forms of discrimination.” It has consistently opposed the idea that both parents have an automatic right to access to children, regardless of the wishes of the child, which may explain today’s statement from the NSCFC and rightly so Mr.Dodds for as you will see from that very same Convention that the NSPCC claims to support in full reads the following which they without question from the quote above appose!! Herein lay the Convention as breached to date by the NSPCC.

.Article 5; UN Convention clearly States:

Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognised in the present Convention.

Article 18; States:

Parental responsibilities

Parents have joint primary responsibility for raising the child, and the State shall support them in this. The State shall provide appropriate assistance to parents in child-raising.

Article 9; States:

Separation from parents

The child has a right to live with his or her parents unless this is deemed to be incompatible with the child’s best interests. The child also has the right to maintain contact with both parents if separated from one or both.

Article 12 ; States

The right of the child to express an opinion and to have that opinion taken into account, in any matter or procedure affecting the child. States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.

2. For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law.


The NSPCC by non compliance in full of said UN Convention as sited above need and must be challenged as to its true agenda, for to seemingly perpetuate a gender war be it for political or social gain is not conducive to family life.

In conclusion I would only add this, neither the NSCFC or its Chairman can in anyway shape or form be branded homophobic as can be clearly seen from the following NSCFC website link www.nscfc.com/linksother3.htm

 

Post a Comment

<< Home