One of the biggest problems is that we were not taught to speak 'legalese'. This is why lawyers spend years getting their degree, because it literally is an entirely different language-or I should say the definitions are entirely different then what we've been taught. A small example of this comes from the famous Clinton trial- when Bill was asked a question and he came back with "That depends on what the definition of IS is." The reason he said that, is in law there are nine different definitions for that word. It was this that prompted my husband to start studying law where he learned that about the only word you could safely use in court when you don't know the language is No.
And while I'm sure there are lawyers who do try and serve the people, I have difficulty trusting them since they know this and do not disclose it. Of course they have taken an oath that prevents them from telling 'lay' people or 'civilians' certain information, but the way I see it, the courts and all of the officials are not there to serve the people, but legislators and their legislation.
I wouldn't discourage people from obtaining lawyers simply because they are the only real bridge in the gap, but what i would do is encourage people to do their own studying, so they have some idea of what to ask their lawyers and some comprehension of what's happening. (understand in law means to stand under. So when they say 'do you understand these charges' they are not asking you if you comprehend them, they are asking if you stand under them...which the obvious answer always would be no)
As always, I am grateful for the courage it is taking to tell this tale. Thank you Anna and Linda.
Thank-you! You have made many good points here.
It is sad thought that a mother who simply wants to be with and raise her own dearly loved child, should need to understand legalese and all myriad of other complicated social structures,
just to be allowed to stay with her own child.
And I've found, in my dealings with my own local authority, they are acting unlawfully much of the time because the law has become a mythical mishmash to them. Someone at some point misinterpreted it and then passed on the misinterpretation. This happened multiple times until the whole scene was strewn with people who are convinced they are acting lawfully. So, even the officers that could be well-meaning are blinkered and operating in ignorance of the law. This in itself can create a massive problem, even if you don't then factor in deliberacy like the sort you are reporting here.
I think a massive problem exists wherever there is a disconnect between the 'customer' and the 'service provider'. Hell! These people are supposed to be service providers. They 'work for us', I was told by a county councillor during our work with Staffordshire County Council [who were issuing school orders to home schooled kids who happened to be on holiday when they made their unlawful house visits]. We were also told we can't just sit back and rely on them to do their job lawfully; we had to be engaged!
I think the disconnect brought about by these people & departments being paid via taxes enables these people and departments to arrogantly act upon people rather than offer a service to them. Tax paid services are often very poor and often corrupted, as you are reporting.
Oh, I agree, it is beyond sad, just another way the system fails to care for the people.
Lawyers are actually officers of the court by extension. Part of the oath that they take is to uphold the court interests BEFORE the interests of the client when the two conflict. After I learned that, I saw it all for what it really was:
A pyramid, "legal" powered corporation funneling money from false accusations, slow and manipulative processes -- all while causing harm to families in the mean time. The system IS stacked against the parents.
It's stacked against the truth for the sake of almighty $$$.