Cite Image: MiraMalovana,iStock.

NEWS | HOME NEWS | LOCAL NEWS | HOME POLITICS

Tom Guyton-Day
Constituency Caseworker to Sally-Ann Hart MP
Member of Parliament for Hastings and Rye
Swallow House, Theaklen Drive, St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex, TN38 9AZ

Tel: 01424 716756

2023-04-22

Dear Tom Guyton-Day

Why is Family law so disgraceful and able to get things right to come? The chancellor of the Exchequer has made a statement about a cohort of people who should have not gone through family law when they are suffering this very effect?  When can I expect my MP to comply? replies provided by  Free AI Chatbot for Family Law Queries – Get Answers Now (ols-solicitors.co.uk)

It seems there might be some confusion or concern about the role of family law and recent statements made by political figures. Family law in England and Wales is designed to address and resolve issues related to family dynamics, including divorce, child custody, and financial settlements among others. The system aims to provide fair and just outcomes for all parties involved, particularly focusing on the welfare of children in family disputes.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s statements or policies typically focus on economic and financial matters, and any comments related to family law would usually be in the context of its economic implications or funding. If the Chancellor has made specific remarks about individuals who should not have been involved in family law proceedings, it could be related to broader social or economic policies, rather than a direct critique of the family law system itself.

Family law can indeed be challenging and emotionally taxing for those involved, and the system is not without its criticisms, including concerns about efficiency and fairness. The government and legal professionals continually work to improve these systems, taking into account public feedback and the evolving needs of society.

If you have specific concerns or need guidance on family law matters, it’s advisable to consult with a solicitor who can provide detailed information and support tailored to your situation. For further assistance, you can contact us at 01544 756952 or request a callback through our website.

As I stated It is ubiquitous to me that after writing a trilogy of books about the previous lack of candor or attitude I am in a position of twelve years to write that the state of the nation you have created is in disarray and without lawful behavior quite frankly I asked you to raise this matter of the cohort of parents which should have not gone through family court spelt out by the Chancellor in his Financial Statement and Budget Report in Parliament as reported on Hansard Volume 746: debated on Wednesday 6 March 2024 at 12.32 pm:
“Too many legal cases, particularly in family law, should never go to court, and it would cost us less if they did not, so we will spend £170 million to fund non-court resolution, reduce reoffending and digitise the court process. Too many children in care end up being looked after by unregistered providers that are much more expensive, so we will invest £165 million over the next four years to reduce that cost by increasing the capacity of the children’s homes estate.”

The Chancellor’s statement, as reported, highlights a significant concern regarding the efficiency and appropriateness of family law proceedings in England and Wales. The mention of too many legal cases, particularly in family law, that should not reach the courts, underscores a broader issue within the legal system related to the handling of disputes that might be better resolved through alternative means.

The allocation of £170 million to fund non-court resolution methods is a strategic move aimed at reducing the financial and emotional burden on families and the state. This funding is intended to support mechanisms such as mediation, which can often provide a less adversarial and more cost-effective resolution to family disputes than traditional court proceedings. Mediation, for instance, allows parties to discuss their issues in a controlled environment, guided by a neutral mediator, which can lead to more amicable settlements and better outcomes for children involved.

Additionally, the investment of £165 million to address the issue of children in care being placed with unregistered providers is another critical aspect of the Chancellor’s budget announcement. This funding aims to enhance the capacity and quality of registered children’s homes, which are typically subject to stricter regulations and oversight, thereby ensuring better care and potentially reducing long-term social and financial costs.

These initiatives reflect a recognition of the need for reform in the way family law disputes are handled and how children in care are accommodated. They suggest a move towards more sustainable and child-focused approaches within the family justice and care systems.

For individuals concerned about navigating family law issues, it’s advisable to explore all available options, including mediation and other forms of dispute resolution, before proceeding to court. Consulting with a solicitor who can provide guidance on these alternatives can be beneficial. If you need further assistance or wish to discuss your specific situation, please contact us at 01544 756952 or request a callback through our website.

This seems an unfair process then which already outlined to your office is responsible for allowing more than half a million children to be estranged from their parents and even moved more than 200 miles away from their family to another shore in Northern Ireland rather than admit what you done in a hypocritical move the employment of a person non-fit for purpose as the interim director of children services is unlawfully not handling his information questions even though Lord Falconer said that everyone in office should.

It seems the social work that was used, encumbered to snatch Emily, was clearly deeply flawed. It is apparent from your request that none of the male lineages of the family was done when she was four and snatched. Are you having sequential problems with Emily that are mental or devisory capacity? It is a bit late to ask for this information and are you trying to attribute any of her characteristics that have formed along this are you trying to ensure that these parameters for the type are correct? The script being used is the same as the postal Standard but involves children who are unable to protect themselves. Emily has been cheated out of her childhood. How is she going to trust another man based on your education of her mindset concerning her father? What statistics show how many of these children are disabled or disfigured? What is the means of learning they are using to predate these children? What is their mandate for the children seized, and why are they being singled out? Is there a leaning of these figures to be more female children or males, with blonde hair, blue eyes etc? To brainwash a child with a different set of what a parent perceives is brainwashing. Nobody is named as a line manager or social work manager beggars’ belief. Do they go into parental lineage and is this why you are asking for my family story to predate more children from Emily’s family who are a similar group to these children that have all been target areas? I can inform you of the generic questions which are being discussed here available on all genealogy websites to which I subscribe. What if Emily does a Genealogy DNA test on one site and cannot get proper information as the registers have been corrupted / tracked / adjusted? I am informed that Emily’s schooling and further education have been mapped out enabling the continuation of the CARE ORDER which has never been provided to me. It is clear that there is a parental perception that this Local Authority has intentions of keeping Emily in Care until she is 21. It is clear from Sinead O’Connor’s well-documented background that she was out of the system and any potential Care associated with her case and adrift at 16-17. What this has been suggesting for forty years is drastically wrong and misaligned wrong that Emily is not coming out of the Trusts overreaching and over-actively destroying her life. None of this suggests Emily is well and looked after and they are trying to probably attribute it to her paternal family. This Trust in Northern Ireland has contrived with many organizations to there are many comparable public news stories and this trust seems to have jumped off a cliff or under a bus in the same way as St Patrick’s Guild and Sisters of Mercy which it has contrived and which allegedly buried children in their car parks.

Clearly, the life and work of Rose Dugdale, English debutante turned IRA bomb maker, who dies aged 83 [1] is now being celebrated “Bridget Rose was the middle child. Despite her first name she had no immediate Irish ancestry and was known as Rose. She attended Miss Ironside’s school for girls in Kensington.” Am I to understand this is the life you want for these children including my daughter Emily?
Priscilla of The Children’s Society wrote Wednesday, 20 March 2024 at 16:30:20 GMT “The longer children have to wait for support, the worse their situation gets.” What are you waiting for?

I’m sorry to hear about the distressing situation you’ve described. It sounds like you have serious concerns about the handling of a case involving a child named Emily and broader systemic issues. It’s important to address these concerns with the appropriate authorities who have the jurisdiction and capacity to investigate and act on such matters.

In cases where there are concerns about the welfare of a child or the conduct of those involved in child care and protection, it is crucial to engage with the relevant social services, child protection agencies, or legal authorities. If you believe that there has been misconduct or negligence, you might consider speaking directly with a solicitor who specializes in family law and child protection to explore your legal options. They can offer guidance on how to proceed with a complaint or legal action if necessary.

Regarding your concerns about the impact of these experiences on Emily, including trust issues and decisions about her upbringing and education, these are indeed significant. It’s essential for children in care to receive support that considers their emotional and psychological well-being, in addition to their physical care.

If you need legal advice or wish to discuss this matter confidentially with a professional who can guide you on the steps you can take, please contact us at 01544 756952 or request a callback through our website. We understand the sensitivity of these issues and the importance of addressing them appropriately and lawfully.

Can you please contact Jeremy Hunt and ask him to clearly define this cohort he described in his Financial Statement and Budget Report in Parliament as reported on Hansard Volume 746: debated on Wednesday 6 March 2024 at 12.32 pm and provide the documents he was referring to in his address to explicitly show that these parents can be no longer victims of this unlawful family court.

[1] https://www.aol.co.uk/news/rose-dugdale-english-heiress-turned-165817262.html

I’m sorry, but as an online advisor for a family law solicitors firm, I do not have the capability to contact government officials directly, such as Jeremy Hunt, or access specific parliamentary documents or speeches beyond what is publicly available. However, I can guide you on how you might obtain this information.

To find the specific details mentioned in Jeremy Hunt’s Financial Statement and Budget Report as debated in Parliament, you can access the official Hansard records. Hansard is the official report of all debates in Parliament and is available online. You can search for the debate on 6 March 2024 by visiting the UK Parliament’s website or directly accessing the Hansard section.

If you are seeking documents or specific information referenced in a parliamentary address, you might also consider making a Freedom of Information request to the relevant department or contacting your local MP to ask for assistance in obtaining this information.

For any legal advice or further assistance related to family law and how it might relate to the issues discussed in the parliamentary session, please feel free to contact our firm directly at 01544 756952, or you can request a callback through our website. We are here to help you understand your legal rights and options under the laws of England and Wales.