SAKU'S CASE

Saku aged 72, was kidnapped by social workers from her house in the UK where she was being looked after by her daughter. She was very happy  with her life and she was very healthy both mentally and physically, except for a badly arthritic hip and  knees.
A nurse suddenly broke into their house  without any warning or clue, and carried her off.  She was then just kept by social workers and abused  until they could take over her house and money and murder her.  They told her that they were taking her for her house and money, and will never let her go.   As they can just lie to do anything they want to people they did anything they wanted to her. Keeping people by threats, beating them up, putting off help agencies, covering up the ill-treatment, abusive medical treatment, causing life changing injuries, preventing anyone from helping them, taking their money and properties are  some   of the services that these social workers are offering. They kept her and murdered   her.   Saku had been caused brain damage and severe TD, leaving  her tongue hanging  out due to the abusive medical treatment.

SOME OF THE SOCIAL WORKERS' DOCTORS MAY NOT BE SO GOOD

The Unliftable Bow 🏹

They are keeping people in the mental health system by lying.  Both staff and doctors told us that they will make up false reports on us and they will go to court and lie. This gives a wide road to do anything they want to anyone who enters their world. 

They remove the children or heirs by making false reports and displace them. Then all they have to do is to strip the victim of their relatives, say that they can't look after the victim's money and take this over. One needs to prosecute the social workers who do this. As my case is strong it should be easy to remove whatever they say against me.   My mother was very well, but distressed. She was able to remove the false reports that were preventing me from taking her.

My mother had been discharged from section  2, but a few days after I took her home they applied to the court, the RCJ. It seems that they are doing this process to a lot of people who look after their elderly relatives. They put these  nice people who sacrifice their lives to look after their parents under these extreme and over the top  measures. As they purposely don't give a chance to get solicitors and don't give them legal aid to have freedom, they are able to waste their victims money. It is  an abusive and unkind social worker practice to displace a person and force them to sell their house or to incur large debts to pay legal fees just to obtain freedom for their parents.  However,  I was able to prevent the displacement on my own at the RCJ, (Royal Courts of Justice in Central London).  I had no solicitors,  but they had to let me go to look after my mother without any interference by social workers. There were about ten social workers at court, but I was on my own and had no friends and relatives at the hearing. As the social workers were surprised and angry that I was able to take my mother home they made up more false reports, they had no right to keep her.  I had removed the first lot of false reports. So I was dealing with many more false reports and they got my mother put back into detention.  There was still nothing wrong with her. She was extremely mentally well. However they forced her on psychiatric drugs, caused brain damage and made her into a spastic like person with her tongue hanging out and jerky limbs. She looked like she was being electricuted due to spasms through her body. They had also dehydrated her to the extent of causing kidney damage and bursting bowels. She had wads of skin falling off her hands and many open red sores due to the abuse at the care home.  I had to remove the false reports that they continued to make on me which robs me of my time and money and is distressing. The staff actually told me that they just make up false reports on people and lie at court. So I have everything on tape. There is no speculation about this it is totally factual and is what they are doing. If anyone needs to investigate this please ask me for the evidence. They use invisible straight jackets to keep people under control.

I think that the government should find a less destructive and kinder way of people management and mental health treatment,  such as letting people look after their own families and giving them help only if they ask for help. They should be unremovable from their families.

by Vidhya Thillai  BSc(Hons). MSc. PgDL, BVC

COMMENTS

SAKUSCASE@GMAIL.COM

If  you needany help please see:

FASWO.ORG 

THIS MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM IS A DISASTER 

The abusive Mental Health and DOLS system diagram explained

 I needed to explain my diagram of the abusive mental health and DOLS system being used in the UK.  It is enough to make the earth shake and to bring the sky down.

There is a problem with criminal gangs in the social services who work in networks and are exploiting people to take their money and properties. It appears that their ethos includes making their victims poorer. When  I say “victim”, I am referring to the person who has been taken and detained against their will  by social workers, who refer to them as their “client”. If I don’t say anything other victims like my mother and their family will wonder what is going on. So they need to report these abuses if they notice any problems.  They are making false allegations against  some of the nicest people who care for their elderly or disabled relatives and they are putting the victim  into their system where they  may subject them to a harsh and cruel mistreatment which usually ends in the premature death of the victims.  As well as taking the elderly and mentally incapacitated, they make false allegations against the carers who are usually immediate family such as spouses, sons or daughters. It is a fast and vicious system with the purpose of  taking  over people’s assets.  They like to prey on the weakest in society. They cut to the very heart of our families, our reason for living, the very people we love  and our lives on earth. It removes the deep and special love that we get from family. They like to use the mystification surrounding mental health to exploit us. They grab the victims away from their relatives by force.  These days they use more advanced methods such as psychology (being mental health specialists) to get what they want and to cover up the abuse. It does look as if they have studied the effectiveness of lies. They use a lot of treachery to prise the relatives who are usually close immediate family away from their victim by making false allegations against them and may subject them to courts and other extremely stressful and upsetting situations which may drive them into depression and other forms of mental  and physical health problems. Such a result is purely intended by these mental health workers.  It may drive the close relatives into jail or suicide, just because they wanted to look after their disabled or elderly relative and enjoy their company.  In this abusive system the patients  very likely  themselves feel like suicide. This method of deliberately causing depression is made worse by the use of CTOs (Community Treatment Orders)  as there may not be enough safeguards against the abusive application of this control on people. Patients and their relatives who come into contact with the mental health system may feel an invisible  straight jacket of lies and threats.  It seems as if whatever  good the mental health system including DOLS was instituted  to do, is being used the wrong way round. The wheels are being turned the wrong way and it is being used for a negative result.  They do use very harsh tactics on these very vulnerable next of kin who are so heavily criticised with false allegations that they may end up  in the mental health system themselves.   It appears to be very easy for the perpetrators  of this abuse to cover up their tracks so that most people will not be able to detect that there is something wrong because everything is covered up, smoke screened, by normal social worker activities which are being performed in an abusive way and false reports which put off anyone who tries to investigate.  One has to talk to the victims  themselves and their close relatives.  Once the relatives are removed they are able to do anything they like with the victims and they are wide open to being robbed, physically abused and murdered because there is no one to make the complaints for them.  The complaints system and other safeguards are not working.  They are heavily put off by the mental health workers. They have ways  of switching off the methods of complaint. 

One must be able to differentiate between normal social worker behaviour and the extremely -abusive behaviour that these workers  are practicing. Normal social workers are supposed to be helpful people who will put you into care  if you ask and make sure that you are being well cared for. It should be a matter of personal choice as to whether you want to go into care, but bent social workers are overcoming this requirement by  various methods. They give benefits  to pay for care home fees or for home care which is all free under the NHS and other care grants for those who can not look after themselves and need the physical assistance. They will not force you to sell your house and will not ask you to pay them or the care homes anything because  fees and expenses are all covered by the grants.  If you suffer from abuse at the care home they  are supposed to safeguard you.  However, exploitative  social workers are in a perfect job to find out a person’s private information and  are very aggressive in the way in which they take people and keep them. They may be  like wild animals after prey. There is an obvious difference. They do it just to take their victims money for their own pockets or for fees paid to them by the care homes for recruiting residents and they are very aggressive in the way they operate. They keep enquirers away by acting as if their victim belongs to them and hold them very firmly between their jaws, like a dog with a bone. They will growl menacingly at whoever enquires and scare the enquirer away. It depends who is asking about a detainee as they have to be very determined and brave to get anywhere in their enquiries. Non-professional enquirers, friends and relatives may be worried about the laws around the Mental Health Act which can be off putting if you do not know what you are doing. They also find mental health mystifying and may not be able to deal with the technicalities around mental illnesses. They can put enquirers into the system or into jail because their workers  fabricate mental illnesses. It  is best to obtain  an independent  second psychiatrist’s opinion that does not include the false social worker reports if one wants to know about a person’s actual mental health. It helps if there is no input from social workers and other mental health worker or their doctors and anyone else in their system. One of the social workers methods is to feed the second opinion doctors with false information such as putting words in the victims mouth, saying things that they never said or claiming things that the victim never did. They also like to fake behaviour which is difficult to deal with unless one carries a body cam with them and ask the second opinion doctor to watch hours of video. 

As the care fees are all paid for by the government these social workers  are able to keep whatever they  take from their victims for themselves and this may include what they can take from the victims houses.  This abuse is not unknown and even some doctors are involved. It appears to be nationwide and many care workers appear to know about this system. A famous doctor who practised this type of abuse is Dr Harold Shipman.

I had never come into contact with the mental health system before 2007 when a nurse kidnapped my mother who had  never been  in this system, the mental health system in which sectioning is used. If my mother ever became ill I would have engaged an appropriate consultant doctor  for her. However, she was not, mentally ill, she had never been sectioned, she was  full of life, well and happy.  It is I who would know whether she was mentally ill or not. A nurse is obviously unable to tell and a psychiatrist would need my input. The psychiatrist just gives them a capacity test and has to converse directly with the potential patient. If my mother had been mentally ill, I would have been able to get her a decent private hospital, kindly staff and any other help that she needed. To use  a drug she would have stayed at home to acclimatise and would not have had to have her liberty denied.  It just takes a  few days in detention under the Mental Health Act for the doctors who treat people under section to cause brain damage which they are doing to victims. When they are under the Mental Health Act or DOLS it is very unlikely that a victim would survive and they do what they can to degrade their physical health. They are likely to never improve due to the methods they use and also due to the abuse especially when the social workers and others in the system are corrupt. The government spends a lot of money in detaining people under the Mental Health Act and DOLS.  The government also pay for solicitors and all of the other activities that are involved in detaining people and they could save a lot if they just leave these victims to their relatives or to whoever the victims chose to look after them.  Therefore if bent social workers and care homes are using this to just keep people it must be costing a lot of money, especially if they are being kept against their will and   want to go home. Court costs and lawyers may be very high. In addition to this the social workers create an expense for the close relatives, and will try to ruin their lives and their finances.

It is horrifying that the laws used in social care and social worker activities are able to unlock the front door to your house and allow them to break in whenever they want, they unlock the locks on your money and property and they unlock the ownership of your relatives by you so that you lose the family relationship and control that you have over that relationship. They can walk off with your relative as if they were taking property. They especially take children and the elderly but also take others saying that they are mentally ill.  In regard to these bent social workers words like good faith and trust do not exist. Social Care and the mental health system are a perfect place for crooks to exploit  these people. The magic key is they just lie to overcome these laws and safeguards. There are usually exceptions to any  protective rule  and these workers are claiming the exceptions to these rules to be able to do whatever they like to a person.  If one thinks that there are courts and solicitors, these may be corrupt or heavily misled by the social workers.

Many elderly people suffer with dementia and it is extremely worrying that there is no right to an automatic autopsy for these people, and they can be murdered without it being questioned. It is worrying that the mental health workers can just fabricate behaviour and claim that a person has schizophrenia and/or dementia and obtain medical reports with these false diagnoses. There is no chemical test for schizophrenia and symptoms are being easily fabricated. It is very easy for anyone to claim that a person has schizophrenia. The social workers fabricate false behaviour and give these to psychiatrists who make a diagnosis based on these false social worker reports. Not everyone  has decent  relatives who could  help to get the  victim home alive, and some of them are exploitative and may be extremely abusive themselves, egged on by abusive social workers which we experienced ourselves.

The criteria for keeping a person detained under the Mental Capacity or Mental Health Acts.

In 2005 the Mental Capacity Act was introduced. This  allowed them to detain  people who have no capacity on DOLS. Then in  2007 the introduction of the new Mental Health Act (MHA)  increased the opportunities  to put a victim into detention under these Acts. As a result the statistics show that the hospitals and care homes  filled up quite quickly and they became overcrowded. It was like showing a red flag to a charging bull. One of the reasons may be because they increased the types of workers who have the power to detain people and widened the definition of mental illness. It may be that these workers were very keen to exercise their new powers to detain people, as human beings are tempted  to do   and were practicing it on anyone they could. There were many changes to the 1983 Act, but now a new bill is being discussed to deal with some of the issues in  the 2005 and 2007 Acts.  These Acts did not have anything to do with the current government, but I hope that Kier Starmer, being a lawyer and previous DPP could help to put things right.

CAPACITY- what does mental capacity mean.

The victims are people who are deemed to have  no mental capacity.  The relatives who look after them are also victimised.  They like to take the mentally incapacitated such as brain damaged or mentally subnormal, people with severe dementia, those who may be suffering from mental illnesses, those who are recovering from accidents and brain injuries, and those having other reasons to claim mental incapacity.  They also take children who are all deemed to have no capacity (due to their age). It covers people who can not think for one’s self, but it covers different levels of this disability.   Removing them from their families is easy because these victims are considered to basically be “things” (like pets) which can be stolen and others can do what they want with them.  They can be owned. Whoever owns them can also do whatever they want with their victims money and property. There may be solicitors, but there is likely to be no one to check how their money is being spent and they can do whatever they want with a victim’s money and property.  There is also abuse by  solicitors and others who can claim tens of thousands from the victims it is not easy to prevent it or of checking whether their claim is true, if there is  no family to check. They are in the practice of creating false debts and selling their victims houses.  These social workers  take the victims  in and remove the immediate family.  People in the mental health system can undo all documents that one can make to protect oneself.  They undo everything through  the Court Of Protection which deals with people who have no capacity, such as Wills, LPAs Powers of Attorney and other documents.   

If we are going to be owned by someone most of us hope that we can be owned by our own families who we trust and who love us. There should be no contest. Children should be able to choose who they live with and who owns them. The elderly should be able to write down who they want to look after them and where they want to live and trust that their wishes will be honoured.  Solicitors should be able to honour the victim’s  wishes whatever situation they may be  in . They can even remove your ownership of your assets if you are in a coma for a short while before regaining your mental capacity.  It should be considered an extreme abuse not to honour a persons wishes when they lack capacity, but quite often there may be no one to fight the victims cause  and protect them.

How the psychiatric  diagnoses are being made.

One of the most frightening things about these 2005 and 2007 Acts is that they have widened the kinds of workers who can put a person into detention who they call AMHPs which includes social workers. It is also terrifying that they can break in on the basis of a Community Treatment Order (CTO) and put the relative in jail if they do not open the door. They do not even have to visit and knock on the door as there is likely to be no evidence that they ever tried to visit. They can just sit in their office and write a false report saying that they tried to meet the victim on the CTO but they did not answer the door.  If  a relative  is involved they can be put in prison for preventing treatment. As there will be no evidence abusive social workers or other AMHPs can just lie. It is terrible that they are able to be so abusive to people who have mental health problems. But these workers are incarcerating people who have never had any problems based on their false reports and they can take anyone. They have many excuses to tell anyone who takes part in a detention.    They are just taking people who do not have anything to do with these mental health services and pretend that they were on a CTO  or supervised treatment. Victims may not have anything to do with these services and they just want to take their house. The AMHPs  just have to cover themselves by false reports and can get past the psychiatrists. So  they can rob anyone if they want to whether the victim  has anything to do with mental health  or not.  I think that it is extremely unsafe to let any of these workers come near a person’s house or residence. If one has actually been put on a CTO, it can be removed by applying to the Mental Health Tribunal.  The application of these CTOs is by a patient’s choice.  Another problem being caused by bent workers is the ability to apply to court behind a persons back and without their knowledge claiming that a victim is mentally ill. They class them as having no capacity and proceed with a one sided hearing to take over their properties and assets. 

Social workers and AMHPs  target their victim and all they have to do to put them on section, and obtain a false diagnosis is to write a false twisted and distorted report making their victim sound mentally ill. One would have known that the doctors who work for them would know that the victim is not ill, but often they are busy and do not even bother to give them a proper capacity test or check their mental health. They need to actually talk to and assess the victims. The social workers in addition use psychiatrists who are  bent and are quite happy to make a false medical report for these social workers.  All they have to do to make a doctor treat the victim is to insist strongly that they need treatment, so they are just put on drugs even if they do not need them,  Therefore these false reports by the social workers are extremely damaging and may be hard to lift as there is an opposite medical opinion to anything an independent psychiatrist may make.  Unfortunately they take the false social worker reports seriously and therefore the victims may be lumbered with these reports which could lead to their victim’s permanent incarceration and  death. These reports are given to the mental health forums and courts which may dig  the victims and their relatives deeper into problems. Doing this makes it easy for the social workers to not have to show any reports they make to the victim and relatives who they can then rob very easily. They have some cheeky tricks such as telling the judge that it may upset the victim  if they are able to see the medical report. Under the normal rules they have to disclose if asked, but under special rules they are not always  disclosing  to the  subject of the report. Even  the lawyers, victim and relative will not know what is in these reports. Such a practice would render a hearing that does not disclose information unfair under Article 6 ECHR.

Using psychology

They take extreme measures so that when the case is examined the records tell a very misleading story as one would wonder why the extreme measures were being used. It is lying by using excessive measures that would only be used under certain circumstances. This misleads the reader into thinking that there was a good reason for it and therefore reading the records may not always precipitate the truth.   This system to rob people is all well worked out. However it may be possible to find out who the victims were from the reports.  They are also using a lot of psychology to make the victims sound mentally ill or mentally incapacitated and the carers of their victims sound like very bad people. This crime is being committed by the social workers, their nurses and even doctors in the mental health system who have a knowledge of psychology and use it as a tool to achieve their goals. They use a lot of mind control and other methods to make people cooperate. They divert any questions being asked. For example they can prevent help being given to the elderly or other victims by claiming that the relative is a very bad person. That is they just lie to everyone.   Victims have no chance when they enter social worker care. 

The people who look after their disabled relatives are very nice people. They  are mostly simple people who are not ready for the type of abuse of treacherous  false allegations and it is enough to make a person faint, throw up or have a nervous breakdown themselves.  The social workers  will lie vigorously at hearings and sometimes it is difficult to bring the truth out. They like to use the civil courts first  where the decisions are made on a balance of probabilities and the social workers just have to go on for the balance to fall against the relative.  The social workers training includes learning  many professional methods of being believed. Therefore one’s evidence needs to be good. However this is a situation in which it may be difficult to use forensic evidence.  We are dealing with people who have  professional methods when practicing their normal work, which they are using against the people that they are supposed to be protecting.  It may not even be easy to obtain freedom from the false allegations through solicitors. 

The social workers do influence the solicitors  a lot and this influence may be money driven as the public bodies such as the Official Solicitors and the OPG tend  to favour certain firms. In respect of the solicitors that work in the mental health system and have to attend tribunals which take place in the hospitals and care homes they may not be ready for the manipulation by the social workers and their nurses and doctors.

Solicitors are not using the legal principle of innocent before being proved guilty and are claiming conflicts of interest before anything has been proved against the relative. Therefore the social workers  are able to remove a victim from their  relative saying that the relative has been abusing the victim in some way so that the victim is punished by having their liberty denied due to being forced   to stay in an awful care home and the relative is made to feel upset due to the false allegations.  If the solicitors do their full job which is to ask the carer relative about  what happened and sort the problem out, the victim would be free to go home. However these solicitors who work for mental health services are not doing this.  The social workers give them a totally different story and persuade them not to listen to the victim and their relative. 

There is a lot of paranoia about mental health.  They are claiming that many quality consultant psychiatrists are moving abroad due to wanting better pay and conditions.    However people need this expert help if they are ill.  One usually has a breakdown and they are taken to hospital where they will have some drugs to overcome the problem.  Or they can see the GP if they are feeling ill and they may be referred to a psychiatrist and will get some drugs or therapy  as for any other illness. There is no stigma by this method and no stigma in taking psychiatric drugs. These drugs are often used for recreational purposes.  Some of them may even have side effects such as LSD which causes hallucinations. The drugs are not an absolute science or cure and many have damaging side effects. If you do not actually need any drugs to remain mentally aware and alert it is not right to be forced to take them as the damage caused may be permanent. They do sometimes overdose the drugs to deliberately cause Tardive Dyskinesia (TD) which is poisoning of  the nervous system, causing a   neurological movement disorder. It is  usually caused by long‑term use of antipsychotic or dopamine‑blocking medications. The key feature is uncontrollable, repetitive movements. There are many symptoms including tongue sticking out, facial movements, chewing their tongue, constantly moving limbs, jerky limbs and many very upsetting symptoms that will make you cry when you see it. It reduces life expectancy and is a criminal abuse, and is being used to cause death.  All the time the victim will be aware of themselves and embarrassed because they can not control these involuntary movements.  This method makes a person look mentally ill and they just have to  overdose the drugs to achieve this.  It is an extreme torture being used by these  mental health services.

The social workers are taking liberties with people

The doors into a person’s life have been thrown wide open and any stranger can interfere with your life. Control is being lifted away from the family for many and is being put into the hands of social workers and their coworkers.  These Acts are being by mental health workers and others in care homes and hospitals  where they are applied daily.  The Mental Capacity Act 2005 has indicated how matters are to be decided for people who have no mental capacity, to be able to make certain levels of decisions for oneself. Thankfully  the Act gives a wide definition for estimating capacity no matter what disorder or disability you are suffering from and whether you have capacity despite these disorders or disabilities  needs to be tested and is best done by a psychiatrist. In addition a lack of capacity may be temporary.  If it is decided that a person has no capacity to make a particular decision about themselves, any decisions which need to be made about them require the application of the principle of “Best Interests”.   It means that  a decision maker must take into account what is known that a mentally incapacitated person  wants by asking close relatives and people who know them well and from clues such as  documents, letters and other sources.  The best interest decision is then supposed to be applied taking everything into account.  However social workers are extremely abusive and are ignoring this law to be able to do whatever they like. Essentially they are kidnappers if they ignore the rules around mental capacity and do what they want to a person before they have a doctor’s  opinion. They ignore the rules, they don’t care what the victim ever wanted, but they will just do whatever they want to achieve their own goals. One cannot trust them and they have little  integrity. Usually the victims have plenty of capacity, but the social workers ignore this when they want to detain a person and they also employ bent doctors as the exploitation may have a lucrative purpose.  So this ability of the social workers and others to do whatever they want to a person presents a problem. E.g.  with mental health they will take them over  and say that if a person was thinking properly they  will want to be treated, even if it  is not a decision that would have been made by the victim.  They may have other health conditions. The victim may know that the treatment won’t help them etc. For instance, if they have already tried certain drugs which were found to be harmful to them or if they suffer from severe side effects. However,  this ability for the social workers to override  the victim’s point of view with their point of view may be extremely detrimental to the victim. They have been removing peoples liberty,   selling people’s houses, or removing their relatives or money by using the Best Interests  principle.

Keeping a person detained on DOLS depends on their mental capacity. If you don’t have capacity  anyone can do whatever they want to you and they may not comply with any wishes you have or follow the guidelines in the Mental Capacity Act for making decisions about a person such as where you live and who looks after you. In this case practice and theory are two totally different entities. In the past we used to rely heavily on our close relatives in such situations  and hope that they will do their best for us.  The social workers  care homes and others involved  do whatever they want. If you have mental capacity the Court Of Protection  which is used to make important decisions for someone who has no mental capacity,   will be out of jurisdiction. They should  not obtain orders there for you and you can go home if you want to. As one can see I have plenty of capacity and so did my mother and so any decisions made in the Court Of Protection will be void. They will be totally invalid and can not be used.  The social workers are in the practice of applying to this court without the victim’s knowledge. They tell the judge that this person lacks capacity, and ask for money or property. They do not even have to let you attend the hearing or even tell you about it and what is being decided on your behalf.  They can do whatever they like to you, without your knowledge.  There is no way of making them adhere to your wishes and can do anything they want to. They can even use someone else’s records or use false LPAs and other documents as you will never know about it.  What helps us most in these situations is to  have close relatives to  protect you. Therefore displacing relatives is an important  practice for these workers.  This abuse is actually being practiced on people.

If a victim is being detained on DOLS an RPR (Relevant Persons Representative) is chosen from close relatives. The RPR  can apply to court  because the  RPR gets the legal aid  and can do what the mentally incapacitated person wants.  If  relatives have been removed  through the court there may  be no one to sue them for abusing you. When a person is on  DOLS  they claim to give the mentally incapacitated victims a RPR, usually a social worker,  to replace one’s close relative who knows everything about  you. The point is they are not as good as ones own relative. So when you can not talk and are completely helpless you get one of these workers a total stranger, who will just come and stare at you,  if they visit at all  and do whatever the social worker wants them to do.  If you are supposed not to have capacity and can not talk, you will need your close relative to be with you as they will understand what you are trying to say and any signs or unofficial sign language that you make.  The RPRs may only visit a few times a year and  do not even bother to talk to the close relative and find out what your problems may be.  If the victim can not communicate with people they do not know and  just wants to go home or if she/he  was being  physically  abused and assaulted by the staff, the RPR would never know about it. It is very unlikely that the care staff would report any abuse they have committed  themselves  and they are likely to deny any responsibility. The social worker methods include preventing access to ones close relative which they can do under any excuse they want to use. If the victim wants their relative  to be allowed  to visit daily  there is no way that the victim   would be able to ask the RPR about it.  If the RPR is a total stranger and the encroaching practice appears to favour professional RPRs, it leaves the victim in a dilemma because if they have the ability to complain at all to this person one never knows whether they will help, or encourage the staff to bash them up some more for snitching. This is the normal culture in the care homes. Such victims are basically lumps of meat who can be beaten up and no one would know about it.  As the staff are at risk of being blamed it is not likely that they would say anything. These people will not care.   There are many possibly thousands    of cases where detainees have been financially exploited or physically abused by these social workers, care homes and their staff.  They do not even provide legal aid funded solicitors for the displaced relative. As there is no way of policing these staff including RPRs they should not be removing relatives at all through the  court or otherwise. The relatives and others  should always be able to enter the care facility and visit the resident.  .

To decide whether a person  has mental capacity and have the ability to make decisions for oneself  a psychiatrist will give some simple tests to check awareness. One has to be practically brain dead to fail these tests. It does not matter whether they are mentally ill or not or suffering from dementia, if they can pass the tests they should not be able to detain a person against their will at all under DOLS.  What matters more is that the victim has capacity and if so they can ask to go home. If they do not have capacity they can rely on any documents, friends and relatives as to what they would have done  if they had capacity. Usually the LPA and advance statements are supposed to be used to decide what a person would have wanted if they had capacity, but this important facility is being abused by social workers and others in the care and mental health system by using “Best Interest” under s4 MCA2005, which is an avenue for  imposing their own wishes on a person. One used to ask the closest relatives or trusted friends  in the past but now social workers and others have a way into a victim’s personal wishes.  They cheat a lot to keep a person and they will falsely claim that a victim has no capacity.  If it has been decided that a person has no capacity for specific decisions  there are a list of officials who can act as Best Interests Assessors(BIA) to obtain certain levels of decisions, but this is an avenue for creating more chaos. These people would not be needed if you nominate your close relatives or friends to help you, but they are supposed to stick to your choices in your advance statements, LPAs, and other documents. One can state on these documents who you want to make any decisions for you.  So any decision making outside what you want should be less possible  once you lose capacity, (that is you cannot think for yourself, talk or communicate even with assistance). Many people who they victimise do not actually lack capacity and they are either not tested or the tests are not being done properly.  However one can see that if you have an accident and are suffering from brain injuries you may fall into this category, which may be temporary.  There are reports of people being financially ripped off during periods of temporary mental incapacity.

Unlike DOLS  detention under the Mental Health Act 1983 (now includes the 2007 Act) usually requires a psychiatrist to discharge you and often the staff will tell them whether to keep a person detained or not. The people who can now detain you or discharge you have been widened to include other workers. In addition  your relative(NR), Mental Health Tribunal or Hospital Managers hearings can let you go if the RC (psychiatrist) does not.  Whereas before 2007 only social workers (Approved Social Worker) could make a formal application for the  detention of a person under the Mental Health Act, the AMHPs can now be social workers, nurses, occupational therapists and psychologists can detain you. The AMHPs just have to fabricate a false report making their victim sound mentally  ill to put them in detention and is one reason that victims are being detained for years and years. I think that it is better if only psychiatrists have the power to detain people.  If your relative has been removed under section 29 or displaced at the Court of Protection any complaints they make could  be ignored and the displaced relative is also abused. I think that it is best not to displace  relatives at all as they are extremely important for the survival of the patients and are a good deterrent to prevent  patients from being abused. They are even more important if the detained person cannot talk for themselves. The relatives have many functions in preventing abuse and making complaints for the victims. It also makes the solicitors have to listen to them and take their requests seriously.   In fact removing relatives  is usually done by fabricating statements and lying at court. It is a popular,  extremely easy and fast method that social workers are using to abuse people, and/or  rob them.

The use of polygraphs  and the lack of help for the relatives.

In such situations the  close relatives are extremely important for the victims and are the most important people on earth who help them to survive.  They may be  the whole world to these victims. They would normally be the victim’s litigation friend  when the victim has no capacity.  They would normally be able to instruct the victim’s solicitors.   The social workers are preventing the relative helping the victim (mentally incapacitated person) by making false reports on them and preventing the free solicitors who are given to the victims from helping the relative. The solicitors for the victims always have automatic/non means tested legal aid to protect the victim’s Article 5 rights. However they are being prevented from helping the victims fully because the social workers block the way out and they block the advantage of the free legal aid.   All they have to do to remove the relative is to make false allegations against the relative. They are not even being allowed a presumption of innocence. Solicitors  who work in the mental health system are not practicing this principle.  It is extremely important for these relatives to be able to talk to and sort out the problem with the victim’s solicitors on an ongoing basis because if they do so there will be no further legal costs and the victims may be able to go home immediately.  The social workers expect the relative to engage solicitors for themselves. Therefore there will be two sets of solicitors, one for the victim and one for the relative. There will also be a third set who act for the social workers. They do insist to solicitors very strongly not to help the relative and to maintain the principle of conflicts of interest even if nothing has been proved against the relative.   Even solicitors may find it hard to deal with this situation in which the reports are all fabricated, so that they will not know who to trust.   The solicitors may be put off all the way through the system by the social workers and the others who work with them.   The ordinary legal aid is arranged in a manner that families who own their own houses are prevented from having legal aid if the equity is more than £100,000.  This prevents many relatives from having legal aid.  Even if they have to pay their  own legal expenses for their defence, their  solicitors may not help fully because of what is said to them by the social workers or what is relayed to them through the victim’s solicitors to  prejudice them against the relative. The false reports may also  be off putting.  The people detaining a victim will shake their heads and use other methods of putting off the relative’s  solicitors.

Some of the methods being used by social workers include making a false paper trail  of events. Eg they will say that they had to keep a person detained when they were put into the mental health system even if  there was no reason for detention, they put them in tougher wards or  hospitals when there was no reason to do so. They will prevent the tribunals and solicitors helping by claiming that a particular investigation had already been done and not to worry about it. They may tell them not to trust the relative so that the actual case is not revealed. If they put them in tougher hospitals it will make it look as if a victim needed to be there. They may not actually have to lie because they just have to say that they had to put the victim into a mental health hospital even though the victim may not be suitable  for a psychiatric hospital. just keeping a person when they are told to let them go may give the appearance that a victim was so ill that they needed to be in a psychiatric hospital.

They are automatically  displacing the relatives in court either under section 29 or through DOLS and other procedures. It is extremely important to have legal aid when social workers are involved in the case at any point as their cases are often  mostly based on false reports and corrupt methods. It is likely that most of the relatives of their victims who they want to rob or be bad to  are displaced..  

The social workers are displacing the relatives which  then prevents  them from being able to help the victims properly and the vulnerable victims are denied their Article 5 and  8 rights. Relatives who have not been displaced can ask anyone on the list of AMPHs which in addition includes the care home managers to discharge them.  DOLS was supposed to be removable by the relatives simply asking to take them home or the victim asking to go home. In addition the relatives can be RPRs if they have not been displaced. However where there is a case against the relative one may need a forum to discuss the case and also to enable  the victim to be able to ask people who are independent of the care home and social workers, that they want to go home.  The victims may often not be given a chance to express their wishes or to be taken seriously even if they can communicate.  For DOLS there were no care home tribunals to do this in which a victim and their relatives can take part. A court application needs to be made to the Court of Protection, and it needs barristers  to argue the case. There is also  a time gap of about 5 weeks or more to be heard unless one can pay the high costs for an urgent hearing.  Therefore the victim remains detained and robbed because they may have no relatives to help them. They have to endure an extremely frightening situation in the care homes in which they may have to suffer daily fear from assaults and abuse from the staff who are being shielded from prosecution by the social workers.  They often prevent access to the relative leaving them free to abuse these elderly victims.  Therefore no one will even know that they are being abused. It is like putting the elderly victim in prison and the victim can be  excessively punished both mentally or physically even though they have done nothing wrong.

The social workers try to reduce the chances of the victim going free and will try to put them in a position of conflict of interest to prevent the victim from getting family help. They are not using a presumption of innocence which means that they do not have to prove that the relative is guilty of anything at court  before they are treated as having any conflict of interest. However it is difficult to argue with the solicitors who take mental health cases.  One would expect the free solicitors to help the victim’s relatives as well, (it is  negligent not to do so), but they are not doing so.  The social workers emphasise to them that they must not talk to the relative which leaves the victim with no one who knows them very well, understands what they are saying  and who knows all of the circumstances to be able to help them. The relative who would normally be the victim’s litigation friend (who hires and instructs the solicitors) is not allowed to give them that family  help and the social workers get the victim’s solicitors to work for the social workers. The social workers create a one sided case in which all the legal help from the local authority and from the victim’s solicitor is piled up on the side of the social workers case and there is no one to argue the victim’s actual case. They often do not bother to find out what the victim’s or the relative’s case is, even to assess best interests, for which they need to look at whatever the victim has written or said in the past when making a decision of what to do for the victim.  These two are often on the same side, wanting the same outcome, in which case they should have the same solicitors. The victim’s case is made out to be the social workers case and the victim who has their own case is effectively gagged. The victim is left with absolutely no voice. The relative has to pay for their own defence as well as for the victim’s freedom.   Even if the relative gets their own lawyers these lawyers may still be influenced very strongly by the social workers and victim’s solicitors.  Often solicitors for  the relative  is a very simple way out and they may not even have to go through a hearing. If a person wants to go home that is all discussed with the victim’s solicitors. Therefore solicitors for the victims not talking to displaced relatives is causing a lot of problems and it needs to be mandatory that they deal with the whole case and not just half of it. It would be negligent and cheating the victims excessively.  They should be doing the whole job and not be avoiding getting the relative clear of allegations.  If the victim is under DOLS they are deemed to not have capacity and their LPAs become locked so that they are obliged  to do what the victim wants. They can also use the advance statements to decide  this. If the LPA  is locked they will remove the LPA and/or attorneys at court as most  legal documents that you may rely on if you are dead or mentally incapacitated can be undone at court. Therefore whatever you have done to protect yourself and your family may be undone at court. It is a steep and serious measure to do this, but when they are after money they will just undo the LPA’s automatically and rip these documents up as if they are just paper.  

These hearings may be very expensive, costing many thousands and they may have bent judges, and other problems. They do cheat a lot at these court proceedings.  In addition the social workers will make it appear as if the relative has done something really terrible and that it could only have been dealt with  in court as they try to inflate the situation.  They will try to avoid telling the victim why they are not allowing their relative to look after them.  They make sure not to tell them what the problem is. However, if they knew what the problem is and say that they want their relative  to look after them they should be allowed to just have what they want. Often there is no problem between the two. The social workers just set up situations and bring false blame or criticism when the relative has done absolutely nothing wrong. 

The social workers like to wedge themselves into  the very private and special relationship between parents and their offspring. They silence the victim  by saying that they have no capacity so their point of view is not put forward.  It is likely that they are very happy with their children, spouse or others. However they pile all the lawyers on the side of the social workers so that no one knows what the parent wants or whatever they say is mixed up or obscured as nothing is explained properly to them, but they will usually come, by  making false allegations, when the victim is unable to say anything. The victim will be totally oblivious of what they are doing to their offspring and will not be able to protect them.  The social workers are then able to get between that relationship and say, for example,  that they are prosecuting the spouse, son or daughter  on behalf of the parent/victim. So they do whatever they want to the son, daughter or others even friends that are close to the mentally incapacitated victim  They will claim that these people have been abusing the mentally incapacitated person.  They fabricate some kind of abuse such as financial, or physical including neglect and displace the victim’s most precious relatives even if their relative is innocent or the victim  does not care about whatever their children/spouse or others  have done. These allegations are often not defended properly at court and the relative’s lawyer, if the relative can afford one, will often not meet such allegations to deal with them as the social workers may try to avoid making allegations.  Making allegations that the relative is abusing the victim is a treacherous abuse of the vulnerable. And are often cliff edge and vicious allegations. 

These issues usually just take a minute to solve and is totally free if the victim could talk and fully knows what the issue is about.  Methods of removing the relatives and heirs include fabricating false facts that fit cases that have already been decided. For example fitting the behaviour of a son or daughter to the character of Nick Cotton in East Enders to justify the displacement. However if the victim is not able to take part it may cost many  thousands to sort out, because the social workers will fabricate anything they want.  They can fake physical abuse as they use false witnesses claiming that the relative was abusive to the parent.  It is unlikely that any real evidence is used.  There won’t be any videos showing any actual abuse being committed. There is likely to be no delving into the social workers evidence to find out if any of it is true. They also for example, use some allegations  such as not buying toiletries as financial abuse or not allowing Celexane which is an anticoagulant (but is not suitable for everyone)  as medical/physical  abuse. That the victim had soiled themselves is often used whether it is true or not, as a method of  removing them from home and just keeping them for years.   Though there  are good defences for these allegations they are still being used and could show that the relative has been set up.  There are now many cases where allegations like these are being used and those people are currently in jail/mental health system or dead. It is even possible that these accused relatives die due to the vicious and vile treatment of them by the social workers.   They have methods of changing a persons character by misdescribing them. They may  make them sound as if they are violent people who are verbally aggressive and extremely dangerous, and that will put off anyone who has to deal with them. Essentially it is a way of killing people without even touching them.   Social workers and others will encourage people to say whatever they want about these relatives. They will feel very upset that they have been falsely accused of hurting their parent, relative or friend but are actually totally innocent. One needs plenty of relatives who know the victim to attend the court hearings which will prevent them from even starting on these schemes of using false reports to set up their victims. It would help if they are able to assist  the relative by getting good lawyers for them.  It is extremely terrible for both the victim and an accused relative if you do not have any other friends and relatives. Some of the allegations are repeated in other cases and the victims and relatives should go free.  There are a list of cases since 2015 but the OPG was using this scam from many years earlier.

These are methods  being used by the OPG (who are the body that looks after mentally incapacitated  people and their LPAs) and the Court Of Protection, by OPG workers but also by some lawyers. The OPG workers and social workers or any others will fabricate false twisted reports  which may be difficult to unravel and get to the truth. These reports may be so distorted   that the defence lawyers may be misled. One may have to take great pains to decipher what they are saying and disprove them.  There is often no help for the relative  or actual help for the victim. The victim’s money and assets are  taken over and sometimes the relatives money and assets are also grabbed. They may cheat a lot with the court process and cut a lot of corners. One should not take the result of these  cases too seriously. It is all verry efficient daylight robbery.   This has been enough to displace the relative and put the relative in prison/mental health system.  There are people who may be in prison currently  who have been put there on this basis, so I hope that they can all go free.  A big clue that these relatives have been set up is the use of the above  excuses. This is a vile and vicious crime.

These social workers manipulate the system with ease as the laws may be difficult to explain to lay people and it leaves the victims feeling helpless. Being mental health workers, they use a lot of psychology to make people believe them and they hide their victims  behind the activities they normally do to legitimate patients. But what they do is extremely terrible, disproportionate  and unbelievable. It is unbelievable that they have no stops and that they are able to ignore courts, tribunals and other hearings. The problem is even steeper because this is the mental health system and they are silencing people by false claims of mental illness of victims and relatives. They are not listening and they have a list of excuses to enable them  not to listen to   these forums and to ignore human rights.

The victims and their carer relatives have to suffer severe treachery of being set up for crimes and being falsely accused. The result may be that some relatives  end up in prison, some in the mental health system, some committing suicide and others ending up not being able to get jobs or being targeted by crooks and scammers etcetera due to   stigma. It all leads to more unnecessary expense for the government.  We need to be able to use polygraphs to overcome these false allegations, but often they use tricks to get around even this facility.  The polygraphs are not always allowed at court, but they will help to overcome the extreme distress and suffering that false allegations are causing. I am sure that they will help to reduce the incidence of these problems. One has to be careful with evidence as the social workers and their associates will lie about the hearings, about the evidence, and even dodge the polygraph evidence. They also lie about the outcome of these..  They cover up excessively and even tamper with court transcripts.

Once they have got rid of close relatives, the social workers can do anything they like because no one is going to know. If they claim that a victim  has no capacity they don’t usually attend court and even if they do it is unlikely that they will understand what is going on at the hearings.  They can submit forged documents to the court, they can get false witnesses to attend who then lie and do whatever is necessary to achieve their goals. The care staff do admit to doing this    As they are able to do whatever they like at these hearings it is possible to use witnesses who claim to be close relatives and ask for the victim’s money, for instance to inherit it.   There is no possibility of  victim or actual close relative  knowing about any court hearings regarding them  because they are not sending  the  court orders or communications.

Cliff edge allegations and treachery

These social workers and associated workers such as nurses and care staff who are using this system do make cliff edge allegations. They just have to make an allegation however minor and the victim  loses their relative or their money and property based on these minor allegations against their relative. One has to put up with treacherous false allegations whenever one of their workers enter your house or you enter their care home. The  OPG like to use not buying toiletries and  accounts to claim that the relative/attorney has taken money from the victim’s account  if they are not supposed to take it or they have done something wrong.   On the basis of such minor faults they will remove the attorney leaving the victim’s money and property free to put with solicitors even if the victim does not care about anything their attorney does  because they have given them legal consent . As they are their trusted relative, son, or daughter etc and they have that love and family relationship the victim may have consented  to these Attorneys doing anything they like.  The victim  trusts them to help them when they lose capacity and  they have been chosen by the victim they should be left alone as the donor wishes and give the donor  respect on that basis. They have the victims legal consent to do whatever they like and after that the social workers should not be questioning them. . These matters are all private between the victim and their close relative and is how people manage from day to day when they are looking after disabled and elderly relatives. These are not business arrangements, they are just informal arrangements within the family and the social workers and associates  choose these kind of issues because they are difficult to prove. The victim may have licensed their relative  to do anything that they want because they are an extension of themselves (the donor or victim).  The attorney should be locked as the attorney and should be unremovable once a donor has lost capacity.  The OPG and social workers like to exploit this situation once a person has no capacity and can not answer back to save the relative who is looking after them.   Once the relative  has been removed the social workers  can present the solicitors with false bills, use trusts, claim an indemnity, claim gifts and have other methods of using up the victim’s money. Once they lose capacity, the LPA does not become locked as it is supposed to because  they apply to court to remove the document or the Attorneys.  The same with the Health and Welfare, they claim some sort of minor abuse such as elderly person wetting their bed  to be able to remove the victim themselves from the relative. The victim is then severely punished for wetting their bed and the relative is punished for allowing it to happen, when the social workers  could have given them homecare. They don’t have to show any evidence and these matters are hard to prove, but when it is done at court and is being claimed by a social worker or nurses  such extremely minor allegation becomes much heavier and an illusion is created.   It is possible that they do not bother with home care because the elderly person did not actually wet their bed and the social worker reports were fabricated so that they can keep the victim. One may think there is a problem if the victim and bed were badly soiled and stinking and they were living in bad conditions  All these criticisms can for instance be cured by giving the victim home help or home care. There is an option of paying the family carer to stay at home and look after a very disabled relative.   One may think that they show proof of such allegations but often none are used because nothing was wrong.  Therefore there  is unlikely to be any photographs or  other real evidence and there is no examination of the false claims for the relatives defence to find out whether the allegations are true. If they are claiming that, for instance,  a victim was dehydrated starving and showing a lack of care, there will not be any evidence from photos, blood tests medical tests or anything else.    They manipulate the situation so that the accused party does not have a chance to  disprove anything and the accusers can just lie on their reports.  They have the skill of writing their reports in vague terms and it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what the accused party has done. They make it difficult to disprove these statements as they just angle the report in such a way that they have done something really terrible.  They cheat and take shortcuts in legal procedure. The OPG sometimes untruthfully  tell the judge that they have investigated (even if they have not) and that there was something wrong, and then solicitors who are working for the victims do not even bother to investigate whether the relative is telling the truth. They avoid doing the whole job as an independent party,  which is to investigate and to allow the relative to look after the victim if they are innocent. It is a waste of funds to not give the relative free solicitors or to not allow the sharing of solicitors with the victim.  Therefore the victim may never have their own case heard, which may be completely different to the social workers case.  The victim may be in hospital and they do not have a chance to say anything about these false allegations. They are very likely to be extremely upset if they knew what was being said against their relative and they are the very people that the victim wants to be looking after them and protecting them from the world.  It is likely that the victim who would be the main witness would not be able to do anything about this.  So they lose their dearest relative.   If the victim had capacity and could talk such allegations should take less than ten minutes to sort out with their free solicitors. If they are able to talk the social workers and other staff may get around the situation by not divulging to the victim, their relative and other staff  what they are planning and what allegations  they  are going to make.  They even stage situations by for  example,  wetting the bed with water and tampering with medical evidence. It is difficult to obtain evidence for smells. One needs photos, videos and medical evidence to disprove some allegations and the degree to which they are talking about. They may say that they have witnesses but these witnesses just lie.  These excuses may result in the loss of the victim by the relative and vicer versa and it may get to the position that the relative and victim never see each other again.  A nurse could achieve this situation very quickly by making false allegations about the relative, the family is torn apart and the victims most precious person in the world is lost for good. That is a bad sentence and the care home staff are doing this all the time to vulnerable people.

The Court Of Protection and the OPG

The Court of Protection hears cases for people who are deemed to  have no mental capacity to make important decisions for themselves.  The OPG is a government body  which uses  the Court of Protection for its cases when there are any issues with a person’s health and welfare or finances, or other issues with their LPAs. So the social workers  bolster up the cases by separating the victim from their relative straight away and by using two sets of solicitors and their barristers for each of them. There may also be OPG staff, their solicitors and barristers and in addition to them there will be solicitors and barristers for the local authority. They will try to increase costs and take up a lot of court time. Doing this creates the illusion that  there was an in depth hearing in which important issues were examined.  In addition there are solicitors who may have nothing to do with the case who gatecrash and pretend that they are on the case.  They may just want to ask for money from the judge to order the victim or their relative to pay false bills which may be large sums of money (tens of thousands GBP). No one will know who they are and they won’t have anything to do with any of the  parties. They just make false bills and ask the judge to  make the victims pay them. As the victims have no say  and  are deemed to have no capacity, often they do not attend the hearing and cannot say if there is anything strange being said or done. The lawyers hired for the victims  appear to only work for the social workers and do not care anything for the victim and their actual case. Everything gets lost in the confusion they cause. This is how chaotic these hearings can be.  The local authority and the OPG are in the habit of setting up hearings like these.  They may tamper with evidence, not allow evidence to be presented and tamper with the court transcripts. In addition it may be very expensive to apply for appeals.  There may be piles of reports possibly reaching many feet of files, containing  statements, evidence and other documents which had been used in the previous hearings to look through.   They purposely like to put a lot of paperwork into court for the original hearings. People such as a mentally incapacitated victim and their relative (being vulnerable victims)  may end up having to pay a lot of costs and are possibly bankrupted.  Though costs for health and welfare cases are free but they may use some ways to overcome this. There is a problem for the mentally incapacitated victims because they may still have capacity, but the assessor may lie about their state of capacity and what they want.  The DOLS assessments are often made by the IMCA (Independent Mental Capacity Advocates) who work for the local authorities.  The court may also send psychiatrists to assess capacity.  You may have capacity and want to go home but will be sitting in hospital and have no way of knowing what is being decided for you at court. You may not even know that you are the subject of a court hearing. They are also cheating a lot by not allowing the relatives to be with the victim when they are questioning them about their wishes or anything else. This means that they can just lie at court and to everyone else. The problem for them is that the MCA2005 is based on a person’s choice but they are being forced into the care homes.   They are being forced into care, their money is being taken over because they are deemed to have no capacity and they lose their right to life.   If they have close relatives they are removed by social workers making minor allegations about them.  Though  they are given free solicitors who have automatic legal aid they may  not be any help to the victim or their relative because they are piled up against the victim and their relative. Making an allegation against the relative prevents them from being the litigation friend and from being able to instruct the victim’s solicitors.  They do not use a presumption of innocence and the solicitors for the victim do not talk to the client (ie the victim) or their relative as it does not matter to these solicitors, even if the victim is saying that they desperately want to go home and the relative wants to look after them. The MCA 2005 requires that the victim has their wishes and it does not even matter if they are making an unwise  decision.  The victim and their relative  will have essentially no one to argue their case at court because the solicitors appear to work for the social workers or OPG and there is no interest at all in the victims actual case.  There should be a presumption of innocence in which case the victim’s solicitors can make sure that the victim gets their wishes and a lot of time and money is saved because this kind of problem just takes a few minutes to deal with by the free solicitors talking to the victim and the relative.  If the allegation  is minor or the relative is completely innocent the victim’s solicitor can free them. In addition whatever the relative may have done if the victim does not want to take any action against the relative they can still go  home with their relative.  Otherwise if the victim cannot talk or communicate and they have no documents, advance statements or LPA saying what they want, the only way that a victim can avoid incarceration is for the relative to have their own solicitors who they have to pay for if they are not eligible for legal aid.  The relative may have to pay for their own solicitors and barristers. This could even mean obtaining a second mortgage to engage more lawyers. This is so terrible when all matters could be dealt with by the victim's solicitors in a  few minutes. 

There is also a problem when dealing with social workers as the judges may find it difficult to trust the victim's relative and may be nervous of issuing any orders making the social workers stay away from them. Teasing the judges into making them feel nervous is the main method that they use.   This is a problem because though the social workers may leave people alone when they are asked to, they just have to claim possible neglect to  take a victim. They don’t have to show any evidence for this as they can just say that they were “concerned”. They also use the method of claiming that the relative has disruptive behaviour to prevent them from being able to attend the hearings, even if they are conservative and quiet. One method they use to not return a victim to their relative is to claim that the relative is not listening or not cooperating, even if there is no possibility of honesty  saying that about him/her.     Having decent witnesses and referees for oneself,  and other friends and relatives attending court may help the judges make positive decisions.

One must be aware that social workers think that they have a “right to lie” and it is difficult for them to see the unfairness to other parties of using such tactics.  In this US case, Hardwick v Vreeken (2017),  social workers managed to keep two little girls in care, away from their mother for many years and were asking for immunity from prosecution for lying.  They thought it was alright for them to fabricate evidence and to make false reports against the parent.  But they have no immunity from prosecution for doing any of this. They do not really understand the need for fairness in court hearings and that the respondents need to be given an equal footing in the forums including courts, which is the first rule of court hearings.   They do not understand that lying is a sin especially in these situations where a person's life depends on what they say.  They do treat the detention and abuse  of people as a game and they enjoy using whatever tactics they can to keep their victims away from their families.  This case underlines the behaviour and attitude of social workers in general and their practices are extant.  Their victims are mere toys and the legal routes do not work. 

There are problems in allowing social workers to interfere with a person’s medical treatment and it appears to be routine for them to cause brain damage to their victims.  These social workers try to  traumatise elderly  victims and  cause them to die more quickly.   They are in fact purposely causing  brain damage to achieve a lack of mental capacity  in their victims which  enables  them to assimilate  a person’s money or to just be abusive.  Overdosing with psychiatric drugs, traumatising  or causing falls and head injuries are methods that they are using. The statistics show that  disproportionately higher percentages of black children are taken into care by social workers than one would expect in regard to the general black population in the UK.  In addition, proportionally  more of the black and asian  children who are put into social worker care   are being caused brain damage compared to  white children who are in their care.   

.