A few weeks ago I was reading some articles in the Irish Mirror about children in care. It was 'National Adoption Week' both in the UK and in Ireland and the Mirror gave extra attention to some children in foster care in an attempt to find them adoptive families.
Since the Children's referendum passed in 2012, lots has changed, but again it hasn't.

source: sott.net

What was the referendum about?

You can find the outline of this referendum here:
https://www.dcya.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/child_welfare_protection/childrensreferendum.htm

According to the media, there was a low turnout but 58% voted in favour, while 42% voted against.
Now, let's have a look at what was wrong with the referendum from the beginning.

This is an exert from an article posted on the Barnardos website.
About the Referendum
The Children’s Referendum, which was passed on November 10th, is a once in a generation opportunity to show how much Ireland values children by strengthening the protections for them in the heart of Irish law. This referendum is a beginning. It will lay the foundation on which we can continue to build better supports for families and children.

And here you can read the YES campaign, also found on the same website:

So what is wrong with this picture?

At first glance, most people would argue: nothing.

But let's have a closer look at what actually happened during this campaign.
Of course there was a NO campaign as well, however, the media gave a lot more attention to the YES campaign.
Booklets and brochures that were handed out and posted to people also revealed very little about the downsides of a yes vote, and therefore it was a very one-sided approach.
We all know that the majority of people tend to listen to what the mainstream media brainwashes them with, and this campaign was no exception.

And then, there is this:

Children have the right to be heard, when decisions are made about them.

Very noble indeed. It almost seems like they would actually listen to the children in question.
But this is hardly ever true.
Most of the people who ever had to deal with CPS know that they filter out information that is given to them. They hardly listen to the parents, because they already go in with their judgement ready.
They might listen or act like they do, but do they really hear what is said - or only what they want to hear?
Regarding children, I believe this would be even worse: so will the word of a child be truly heard, or just filtered into their own truths?
Besides this, cps workers have a long history of putting words into the mouths of children.
It is very easy to ask a homeschooled child for instance if they didn't like school to get an answer they like to hear.
If I only look at my own kids, my youngest daughter would answer that she in fact did like school, but the reasons for being homeschooled will never be heard.
It is very easy for a CPS worker to ask: "But don't you think that...?" and the response of a child would be "Yes."

In the following article, Ryan Fahey writes this:

One of the unintended consequences of the proposed amendment is that it may pit children against parents on some issues, and that the courts may be called upon to arbitrate these disputes.

In addition, Article 42.5 is to be replaced by Article 42A.2.1. The reasons for State intervention in exceptional cases will change from ‘for physical and moral reasons’ to ‘to such extent that the safety or welfare of any of their children is likely to be prejudicially affected’. This will change the role of the courts from one in which each case is evaluated to some degree with retrospective certainty to one in which ‘likely’ future outcomes become the yardstick. The consequence of this will be that children may be taken from parents simply on the say so of social workers in the District Courts, which are courts of ‘summary’ justice.

Finally our family courts are de facto secret courts. There are hundreds of cases going though these courts each year. How do we know whether the constitution and legislation is being adhered to in these secret courts? The simple answer is we don’t. There is no public accountability.

https://www.dcya.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/child_welfare_protection/childrensreferendum.htm

Let me put the microscope on these statements:

1. If a child has any kind of dispute with the parents, for whatever reason, this can have serious consequences.
   Parents of teenagers know how easy we can have a dispute with our teens and that in those cases any rational thinking on the side of the teen are nearly non-existent.
   I remember very vividly a 'dispute' I had with my parents when I was 15 years old about not being allowed to go to a party. I recall threatening to call the child help line, only to manipulate my parents into letting me go.
   My father, who was of the non blackmailing kind, responded by saying that if I pick up that phone that I better keep walking (I would have had to go to a phone booth) because if he'd catch up to me I wouldn't be able to with two broken legs...Would he actually have done this? *NO I wouldn't even have been able to leave the house.
   Would I have done what I threatened with? NO But just imagine, it could have been, I could have called that number and made up a story and besides that added that my dad had threatened to break my legs....In those days I doubt if this would have been taken very seriously if it came from an upset teen and they probably would have gotten the truth eventually.
   But nowadays, I'm not too sure...

2. Children can be taken from parents simply on the say so of social workers...
   So it basically means if the social worker doesn't like you, or doesn't like the way you live, you can lose your child.

3. Family courts are secret...
   This may well be the most disturbing one.

Bill will give High Court revised criteria to approve adoption without parental consent.
Hundreds of children currently in foster care will become eligible for adoption under proposed legislation before the Dáil, according to Minister for Children and Youth Affairs Dr Katherine Zappone.

Awe, isn't she just the loveliest woman?

Mr. Ryan Fahey highlights that this is absolutely not the case, nor a problem solver. He states that most families considering adoption want young children, so they can better bond with them. So the older children have very little chance, which rips families apart even more when a younger sibling is adopted and the older ones aren't.

So what about that dangerous trend I spoke about?

OK, sit back and I will explain. I only read two of the articles to see the similarities in both stories.
The titles were as follows:

Three adorable siblings at risk of being split up if they don't find their 'forever home' together

Little Demi and her three tiny brothers have lost both their parents - they must not lose each other

Upon reading through both of these, there was one similarity that jumped out right away.
I quote: “Bryan was very much the carer, which he had been at home, so he struggled a little bit to let go of that responsibility."

And: “Demi thought she was their ‘little mother’. She was like a mum to all of them."
“Now I have to keep telling her I’m here to keep them all safe. She must leave that to me now. I would put some food
out for her before I delivered the other plates and she would ask: ‘What’s Finley having?’

Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/three-adorable-siblings-risk-being-11372876
and: http://www.irishmirror.ie/lifestyle/family/little-demi-three-tiny-brothers-11353250

Now, let me explain what I feel is wrong with this picture.
Immediately, the writer plays with the heartstrings of the reader.
Anyone who reads this could possibly think: "Awe, poor children, had to be mother and father for their siblings at such a young age." Now, I'm not saying that there aren't actually situations like this, but I also know that these writers are trained and paid to make people believe these things. If we dig a bit deeper, we find out that the kids in these cases are the oldest siblings.

If I look around in any community, I will find families where the older siblings will boss their younger ones around a bit, will mother them a bit or will ask you what Finley is having for dinner.
Again, just looking at my own children: My eldest doesn't 'mother' but is very quick in bossing the others around.
My youngest daughter though, now 9 years old, was already the caring type from the moment she was walking.
Hell, she bosses me around! She's my walking and talking shopping list in the grocery store, anything I forget, she'll remind me to get.
Sometimes there are moments when I am busy doing other things, like cooking or working and she'll 'solve' a problem with the youngest for me, or tells me what's going on. Like when he climbs on the table...
Does this make me a bad parent? I don't think so. To be honest: I could never stop her from doing these things because that's just the way she is.
I don't think any parent has eyes everywhere. When the western world still had whole communities, it was quite normal for older siblings, or neighbours or aunts to lend a helping hand. Nowadays it seems like the parent is immediately stamped as being unfit.

Then, there is the second, and maybe most important issue I feel needs to be reviewed with these stories.

In one of these stories, the children have been in foster care for 1 year, in the other only 8 months!
In Ireland, now children can be adopted by their foster parents after 18 months.
But this doesn't seem to be the case in these stories since it now is a judge who decided that it is OK to put them up for adoption.
Of course, I don't know the full story. But I do know that in both sets of siblings there is at least one baby and/or young toddler. Just looking at this picture tells me that:

1. CPS hasn't tried really hard to help the family to stay together and for the parents to keep their children.
2. And even if the parents were somehow not coping with raising their own children (with help they barely had), they are now hardly given a chance to get themselves clean, back on their feet or whatever they need to do to get their kids back.
   I'm not sure about other people's opinion on this, but unless the parents were absolutely horribly abusing them, I find this kind of judgement and outcome very, very harsh.
   Don't forget: as soon as someone decides they want to adopt these kids, any contact with the birth parents will be ceased.

The other thing that I also find very disturbing - especially here in Ireland, is that there is a big difference when the parents are married. If a child is born out of wedlock, even if the father has established that he is the father on paper, it is still very much possible that a child is taken into care and given up for adoption without even hearing the father.
We constantly hear that the church has no influence in these cases anymore, but I just can't shake the feeling that they still very much have a say in these matters. That alone gives me the creeps - because you never know - there might just be a CPS worker who has a brother who is a priest....

@familyprotection is an initiative by @markwhittam and @canadian-coconut to help people tell their stories, raise awareness of these issues and funds are being raised to help families fight the system.
If you don't know them yet, please follow them and check the tag #familyprotection for many stories regarding similar subjects.