The law is not the problem

Just what we need, another expert employed by the States of Guernsey (at great expense to the taxpayer), to agree with the States that our Children's Laws are adequate and in line with human rights and incorporate no sexual discrimination, they include parental rights and responsibilities and the rights and voices of children to be heard, as well as to investigate if there is adequate legislation to protect our children from abuse.

I, as I am sure everyone else who has looked at these laws, can tell you they are adequate.

This is not the problem. The problem is, these children's laws are not being upheld by the very people supposed to be protecting our children. I will not expand on this as the Guernsey Press has a habit of refusing to print any criticisms of the family courts. I will, however, quote Action for Children's website:

'What is child neglect?

Child neglect is an ongoing failure to provide the right care and attention to a child's needs, including food and a safe environment, or to a child's emotional needs, including warmth, security and love. A lack of these things is likely to result in serious damage to the child's health or development.'

I note it is written at the end of the Guernsey Press article that 'A call for evidence will be issued next year when interested parties, including members of the public, will be invited to give submissions on the areas in the review's terms of reference'.

Call me a sceptic if you like, but even if any submissions fall into the 'terms of reference', I can see the outcome now: 'We have identified various issues that have arisen in the last four or five years, there will always be teething problems when new laws come into effect, we unfortunately cannot publish any details due to the sensitive nature of these reports, we are happy that these areas have been addressed and improved upon and we are continually scrutinising the system to improve the service. It is the opinion of the committee the Children's Law is adequate.'

In conclusion, I was under the impression that the law is absolute, irrespective of closed or open court?

Perhaps what needs to be scrutinised is the use of the law, attitudes, and as to whether certain people and individuals are adhering to these laws. As quite rightly stated in the article, Lester and Laurie Queripel chaired a meeting for concerned parents who had started a petition for an investigation into child protection and the role of the Safeguarder Service – the law itself was not criticised.

The big question is, then, when these areas are identified as at fault, and it will if the job is done correctly, are those wrongs going to be put right or will they just be swept under the carpet?

I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it. I have seen this too many times. The outcome is already a foregone conclusion – it's just a matter of how many experts they are going to employ to agree with these States members so they can all give themselves a pat on the back and a perception of a job well done when in reality the fault is still there and our children still have to suffer.

RICHARD PRICE,

Address withheld.