“The Role of Government Edicts in False Accusations of Child Abuse”.

Blue paragraphs and extracts may be cut through shortage of time.
Red italic items are reference materials not intended to be read out.

When Milburn resigned to spend more time with his family at the time of the Trupti Patel trial, some of us wondered if he was getting out of the way to avoid the flack when Meadow and Southall got their come- uppance and his role in promoting their Gospel was exposed. Sadly the media has taken no notice of the guidelines – the media don’t understand and the guidelines don’t have a human interest component to make a media-friendly story. Since Milburn’s return the normally reasonable Steven Twigg has become much more hard-line on unauthorised absence from school, which is particularly difficult for children with undiagnosed illness or unrecognised special educational needs. I foresee disaster ahead.

The Department of Health guidelines define the context in which all accusations of MSBP or FII take place. Social Services Departments, Local Education Authorities, Primary Care Trusts and independent training agencies are still providing in-service training to health and education professionals based on the Guidelines. By re-titling MSBP as FII they have cleverly sidestepped the furore in the wake of the Clark, Patel and Cannings legal cases and continue on the basis of “business as usual”.
The biggest concession which Earl Howe won from Lord Hunt was the removal of the supposed MSBP “profile” from the guidelines but this was a hollow victory as there is nothing to stop this profile being presented at training courses as an inventory of supposed symptoms. The leading lights in the paediatric and social work professions are in complete denial over the Clark, Patel and Canning cases, desperately trying to convince the world that it was all a media plot to discredit Professors Southall and Meadow and the wonderful work they did.

The Patel case post dated the DoH guidelines and would probably never have come to trial if the D o H had properly reviewed the guidelines in the light of the October 01 Lords Debate.

It is my firm belief that until and unless we persuade the media of the fundamental damage perpetuated by these guidelines and thereby force their withdrawal, all our efforts to secure help for families and all proposed reviews of whatever kind will fail. These Department of Health guidelines underpin all policy and practice

It is notable that after the Cannings judgement the NSPCC “full stop” campaign with its confusion of symptoms seemed to disappear. Sadly, now that we are finding that the anti parent view is once again in the ascendancy, it seems to have reared its ugly head once again. The television is now running NSPCC advertisements which say that abused children aren’t able to speak up for themselves. The National Autistic Society could and should borrow the same film footage to explain that Autistic and Asperger’s children can’t speak up for themselves either.

That brings me back full circle as it was my son’s inability to take part in class or group activities that forced me into the parallel world of victims of False Accusation and drew me from suburban London back into National political dogfights and frenzied media activity.

Previous Page   Next Page

© Jan Loxley Blount 05 11 04 London

This speech is also available to download from the documents section. Click here to goto the download page.