Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Boy, eight, who died of SCURVY was ‘denied basic human rights’ by his parents who refused to let him see a doctor
What most readers will find in the story below is an account of fanatical or unbalanced parents trusting their own weird ideas right up until they unintentionally kill their child. But more context is needed.
The important context is the vicious social services of Britain and the fact that all doctors are obliged to report to them all instances of unexplained harm inflicted on a child.
Resulting from that have been many instances of innocent parents being accused of child abuse. Just the accusation is devastating enough but a substantial number of cases do result in the child being taken away from its family. So any family with unconventional beliefs or practices -- even belonging to a minor political party -- will rightly fear what will happen when they present an unwell child to a doctor. That would almost certainly have been involved below.
What is needed is strict judicial supervision of the social workers with full normal legal safeguards -- presumption of innocence, verdict beyond reasonable doubt, trial open to public scrutiny, and competent legal and medical representation for the parents. At present very little of that applies and some of it is expressly forbidden. Taking a child from its family is a most serious decision that should have all possible legal protections
Had such protections been in place already, the child below might have been presented to the doctors earlier -- and still be alive today. Vicious social workers can kill
An eight-year-old boy who died of scurvy was 'invisible' to the authorities after his parents refused to allow officials to see him from the age of 13 months.
Dylan Seabridge died aged eight at his family's isolated farmhouse in Pembrokeshire, Wales, and had no direct contact with doctors, nurses or teachers for seven years.
His parents Glynn, 47, and Julie, 46, who home-schooled him, initially believed he was suffering from growing pains but the true cause was revealed after he collapsed in December 2011 and later died in hospital.
Scurvy is caused by a deficiency of vitamin C and was once common among sailors due to a lack of access to fruits and vegetables, but is almost unheard of now in modern society.
An independent report into his death commissioned by the Welsh Government found that he may have been denied 'basic human rights' by being withheld from mainstream services and was 'not given the right to appropriate health care'.
The report accepts parents have the right to educate their child at home rather than at school - and that home education was not in itself a risk factor for abuse or neglect - but recommended creating a register of home-schooled children to keep tabs on them.
Author Gladys Rhodes White said that the current legislation is in 'stark contrast' to the Welsh Government's commitment to the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child.
In the report, she said: 'He was not routinely having access to play, leisure, sporting and cultural activities along with friendships and age appropriate socialisation.
'When he encountered health problems he was not given the right to appropriate health care.'
The review said it appeared that the child's emotional and physical well-being had been compromised.
It stated: 'His parents had parental responsibility and a duty to provide appropriate care, including the need to seek medical attention for his health needs. This did not happen.'
Ms Rhodes White added: 'It is particularly poignant that in conducting this review we have no sense whatsoever of this child. Who was he, what did he like, what were his thoughts and aspirations?.
'There is a total lack of information on him other than very limited glimpses gleaned from the information presented by the family. 'It is tragic that there are many references that the child was 'invisible'.'
Mr and Mrs Seabridge were charged with neglect after Dylan's death but the Crown Prosecution Service dropped the case in 2014, and not guilty verdicts were entered.
The parents also disputed an inquest ruling that their son died from scurvy, a rare condition caused by lack of vitamin C.
It emerged earlier this year that concerns were raised about Dylan more than a year before he died. Education officials visited the Seabridges but they were not allowed access to the home, and they had no power to see Dylan.
Welsh Government officials said the findings would be carefully considered. 'This is a very sad case and it is vital everyone working with children and adults learn lessons from the review,' a spokesman said.
'This will include us looking at our guidance across the public services and the third sector to see if there are areas we can change and improve.'
A previous inquest in Milford Haven heard how Mr Seabridge called 999 after his son collapsed and paramedics were rushed to the family home. They found Dylan unconscious and not breathing with bruising to his ankle and knee along with swollen legs.
He was rushed to hospital but suffered a heart attack and doctors were unable to save him.
Home Office pathologist Dr Deryck Simon Jones, who carried out the post mortem examination, concluded that Dylan's death was due to a vitamin C deficiency, commonly known as scurvy but the family reject this finding.
Their lawyer Katie Hanson told the inquest: 'The parents don't accept that Dylan died of scurvy.'
A specialist from Belgium, professor Joris Dlanghe, also questioned whether Dylan had scurvy claiming that other deficiencies such as folic acid would have been present too but were not.
When a Culture Unmans Itself
Men need to "be better.” —Michelle Obama in conversation with Oprah.
Western civilization is clearly coming part at the seams. There are so many destructive elements at work, they are almost impossible to list. But one of the most destructive of these elements, incited by a punitive feminist ideology, is the relentless campaign to delegitimize the very idea of manhood. And the most effective way to do that is to impugn male sexuality.
We are told constantly that we live in a virtual rape culture, a culture in which rape is widespread and condoned, victims are blamed, and rapists receive little or no punishment. There are rape cultures in the world. If one wants to see one in action, all one need do is look at the Muslim world or at Muslim enclaves and populations that have burrowed into Western nations, where atrocities and scandals continue to multiply. In the Western world, by contrast, rape and other forms of sexual misconduct—even mere allegations of sexual misconduct—are universally condemned and harshly punished.
No matter. Islamic culture gets a free pass while Western culture is said to be ravaged by gynophobia under the reign of male supremacism. In the new sexual paradigm that has clamped succubus-like upon the culture, the heterosexual male mainstream is under attack for the crime of harboring a normal sexual drive, which must be ruthlessly expunged in an offensive characterized by media propaganda, legislative bias and institutional practices. Respectable-seeming websites promote the total reform of masculinity using terms such as “mascupathy” to define masculine traits such as aggression and competitiveness as forms of disease needing to be cured. Western men are being progressively demasculanized, a deficiency which results, as Andrew Klavan argues, in “tremulous feminists who hysterically fear rape culture on college campuses where it is not, and Western leaders who don’t dare to see the rape culture inherent in invading Islam, where it is.”
What the Feminization of the West Has Wrought
The signs of anti-male bias are everywhere we look. The university, for example, has become a veritable minefield for male students, who may at any time be hauled before an administrative tribunal and their careers put in jeopardy for sexual misconduct, however trivial or ambiguous. A recent memo from my wife’s university mandates a statement against “sexual violence” in all course syllabi—mind you, nothing against harassing and lying about one’s professor for a better grade, shutting down conservative, Zionist, pro-Life or anti-feminist speakers, perpetrating racist hoaxes, denouncing the teaching of good English and male authors as forms of “microagression,” or any of the other violations of civil conduct that we have witnessed on university campuses recently. The only sexist harassment that takes place regularly in academia is feminist harassment of male students and staff—but that is considered not intimidation but enlightened practice.
Is it any wonder, then, that even our military is being insidiously weakened? Responding to a vehement attack on supposed martial dishonor by a former Supreme Court justice, it has turned from its primary task of defending the country to counseling its soldiers against what it regards as sexual delinquency by issuing wallet cards listing “inappropriate behaviors.” These include “sexual assault, sexual interference, sexual exploitation, offensive sexual remarks or unacceptable language or jokes, unwelcome requests of a sexual nature or verbal abuse of a sexual nature, voyeurism, indecent acts and publishing intimate images of a person without their consent.” The fact is, most men in the civilized West are not sexual predators or unreconstructed brutes but most men do tend to joke and flirt and make off-color remarks and otherwise show an interest in women, whether sexual or romantic, in virtue of being men. More to the point, if men are no longer permitted to be men, how then can they be soldiers?
When manliness is eliminated from a culture fixated on the supposedly corrupt and vicious nature of masculinity, while armies of apologetic White Knights and self-abnegating feminist allies (aka “manginas”) come to replace a diminishing platoon of alpha males—“We live in a world run by betas and their lady friends,” quips J.R. Dunn in a prescient article for American Thinker—the writing is on the wall. As Michael Ignatieff reminded us in The Lesser Evil, a culture, a nation or a civilization cannot expect to survive if it is defended by herbivores. It needs a Praetorian cohort of carnivores, determined men proud of their masculinity and unafraid to confront the enemies outside the gates as well as the fifth columnists, defeatists and appeasers within—i.e., politicians on both sides of the aisle, spineless university administrators, media abettors, tergiversating liberals, tenured academics who indoctrinate from the left rather than educate from the tradition of reputable scholarship, and the feminist Furies acting out their faux version of Lysistrata—if a culture is not only to survive but to flourish.
The feminist hordes in their anti-male animus, along with their Beta and Delta collaborators, have overrun a once-great and hardy civilization. As Klavan puts it, “The future goes where men go and does what men make it do. If men go down the drain, the future will follow.” The expression of male sexual desire in Western culture is hedged by rules of appropriate conduct and a code of chivalry, occasionally honored in the breach, yet relatively intact. But when male sexuality in its natural manifestations is regarded as an evil that must be controlled, reviled, prosecuted and ultimately bred out of men, societal collapse is inevitable. The irony is palpable. For a culture that targets men can neither defend nor reproduce itself and its days are numbered.
Pastor Says State Law Threatens His Right to Teach the Bible in His Church
An Iowa pastor, saying the government needs to stop “meddling in religious affairs,” is at odds with the state over a law focused on sexual orientation and gender identity that he says hinders his First Amendment right to teach on matters of sexuality.
“The state of Iowa is not the self-appointed pope of all churches,” Cary Gordon, pastor of Cornerstone World Outreach, a nondenominational church with around 900 members in Sioux City, Iowa, told The Daily Signal.
An Iowa Civil Rights Commission brochure on sexual orientation and gender identity says churches are places of public accommodation and generally are not exempt from the law, according to First Liberty Institute, a legal organization that defends religious freedom and represents Gordon’s church.
The brochure says the Iowa Civil Rights Act, Iowa Code Chapter 216, “was expanded to add sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of protected classes.” The change took effect in July 2007.
“It is now illegal in Iowa to discriminate against a person because of his/her sexual orientation or gender identity,” the brochure says.
Gordon told The Daily Signal:
As it reads, according to their interpretation of the Iowa code, if you discuss anything out of the Scripture that relates to sexuality or marriage … you’re not in compliance with the law and you can be sort of treated like a criminal.
Gordon, senior pastor of his church for over 21 years, said his greatest concern with the issue is the “flagrant disrespect for the First Amendment of the Constitution, where the state retains the power to correct or control what I say and teach out of the Bible.”
“It’s fundamentally wrong and I can’t comply with that,” Gordon added. “I’ve taken an oath to the Lord Jesus Christ, and I obey the Bible above all men. … I have to obey God, and that puts me in a precarious position.”
The state Civil Rights Commission’s brochure “also indicates that the government has the authority to force churches to allow men in women’s restrooms,” First Liberty Institute says in a case summary.
“The Iowa Civil Rights Commission has not made any changes in its interpretation of the law, nor does it intend to ignore the exemption for religious institutions when applicable,” Kristin Johnson, the commission’s executive director, wrote in an email to The Daily Signal. Johnson wrote:
"The Iowa Civil Rights Commission enforces Chapter 216 of the Iowa Code, which in part prohibits discrimination by public accommodations. The code also provides for an exemption for ‘Any bona fide religious institution with respect to any qualifications the institution may impose based on religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity when such qualifications are related to a bona fide religious purpose.’ This law was enacted in 2007 and has been consistently enforced, and the exemption consistently applied, since its enactment"
First Liberty Institute’s letter requests that the civil rights panel publically acknowledge that Gordon’s church will be exempt from enforcement action.
“I would hate to see a day when a pastor for doing his duties is arrested or something and taken to jail,” Gordon said, adding:
"What we’re facing right now is quite literally a pastor being drug into court and having to spend a lot of church money to defend himself for doing something that pastors have been doing faithfully for hundreds of years and that’s teaching orthodox, Christian doctrine"
A federal lawsuit was filed July 4 on behalf of Fort Des Moines Church of Christ in Des Moines, Iowa, against members of the state Civil Rights Commission over concerns similar to those expressed by Cornerstone World Outreach.
Gordon, the father of three girls and two boys, said the state doesn’t “have any right to tell us what to teach or how to teach it or how to apply our beliefs in real life.” “The state needs to stay out of our business,” he said.
Over the long term, the pastor said, this issue should affect all Christians:
The Bible teaches us to be modest and it teaches us certain roles that are honorable and beautiful about both sexes, male and female. You have to try to survive in a world that seems more and more hostile to what you believe whether you’re at church or at the shopping center.
Chelsey Youman, chief of staff and counsel for First Liberty Institute, told The Daily Signal it is hoping to avoid litigation. “We … wanted to give the state commission a chance to do the right thing here,” Youman said.
The Iowa Civil Rights Commission has by 10 a.m. Aug. 5 to respond.
“We think it’s an absolute wake-up call to churches across America that we’re now having a state government say what you can and cannot say about your own doctrinal beliefs within the confines of your church, let alone having to open your facilities up in a way that is against your doctrine,” Youman said.
Why Switzerland is one of the hardest countries to gain citizenship in
Once again Switzerland shows the way
LAST week, two young girls had their citizenship applications rejected by the Swiss government.
The girls, aged 12 and 14, were denied a Swiss passport because they refused to participate in school swimming lessons and camps, saying the proximity to men in these contexts was forbidden by their religion. Swimming lessons are compulsory in the Swiss city of Basel, where the incident took place.
Stefan Wehrle, president of the naturalisation committee, said that young people who wish to become citizens need to prove they’re meeting the requirements of the country’s education system. “Whoever doesn’t fulfil these conditions violates the law and therefore cannot be naturalised,” he told the Swiss TV station SRF.
It’s the first in a string of cases where individuals and families have seen their citizenship requests denied on the basis of not properly integrating into the country’s society and culture.
In Switzerland, the rules are stringent. Foreigners with no direct blood ties to Switzerland must live in the country for at least 12 years before they can apply for citizenship (although years spent in the country between ages 10 and 20 count for double).
Unlike in Australia or the United States, general knowledge of the country is considered less important than provenly integrating into society.
Authorities can and will do regular check-ups to determine whether or not a migrant is making genuine attempts to assimilate into their local neighbourhood, and adopting the national customs and traditions.
According to the Basellandschaftliche Zeitung, one of the country’s largest newspapers, it is very rare for a naturalisation application to be denied. But a string of recent cases suggest otherwise.
In an incident last month, a Bosnian Muslim father was fined for refusing to allow his daughters to take swimming lessons at school.
He also forbade them from going to camps and other school events, claiming such activities ran counter to his religious beliefs, the AFP reported.
He was ordered to pay 4000 Swiss francs (almost $5,000), and the prosecutor additionally requested he serve four months in jail, saying he had been living in Switzerland since 1990 and had made no attempts to integrate.
The Swiss government is not shy about threatening fines over a lack of integration. A case of this a few months ago sparked national outrage after two Muslim schoolboys refused to shake their female teacher’s hand, saying any physical contact with a non-related female was prohibited by Islam.
The incident largely sparked fury after the school agreed that the boys would no longer have to shake their female teachers’ hands, with the country’s Justice Minister insisting “shaking hands is part of our culture”.
The decision was later overturned, and replaced by a rule that stated a parent or guardian could be fined up to 5000 francs ($6,000) if their child refused to shake hands.
In 2015, a 76-year-old American immigrant abandoned his quest to become a Swiss citizen after living there for 43 years.
Local officials refused his naturalisation application, claiming the man — who lived there with his three children and German wife — had not sufficiently integrated.
They justified this by claiming, based on tests they conducted, that he wasn’t familiar with the local area and didn’t have any local friends.
In a comparatively stricter ruling, a family from Kosovo was denied citizenship because they wore tracksuit pants around town.
Initially, the family’s application process seemed solid: they knew the customs and geography of their region, and they could all speak German (there is a rule that citizens must speak one of the three national languages fluently — German, French or Italian).
But some panel members said the fact that they didn’t wear jeans was a hindrance, as was the fact that they didn’t greet people they passed in the street.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and DISSECTING LEFTISM. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.