http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/nsw-election-2011/coalition-plan-for-kids-in-care-to-return-to-their-families/story-fn7q4q9f-1226014979888

Gemma Jones From:The Daily Telegraph March 03, 2011 12:00AM
“Under the plan, most of the more than 16,000 NSW children in foster care would be looked after by charities and the private sector.”

Way to make me dry vomit NSW.

I wasn't talking to you, Suze. And constructive? Like this thread? Yeah, fantastic, they should teach it in schools.

Jewely,
The reason: “Under the plan, most of the more than 16,000 NSW children in foster care would be looked after by charities and the private sector.”

They are better organised to deal with fostering children than DOCS.

Philo:”They are better organised to deal with fostering children than DOCS.”

No they are not, but they are better organized to take money from DoCS without the burden of working under any threat of a child returning to demand compensation for years of abuse later since DoCS is the lead agency. It’s all really all very nicely packaged for them with the all cash no risk franchises.

They are not Charities; they are massive million dollar orgs that profit from pain.

Govt fault lies in the fact that they allowed the not-for-profits anywhere near children who should only have ever been placed and monitored in supervised govt recruited households. Children are spread between multiple companies, sibling groups divided amongst them.

If a child is abused in one of their homes they are not likely to nark on themselves since when a child is removed due to their failure it means a drop in their income.

Now Pru supports them doing more early intervention work so that they own both ends of the business, now they can find their own clients, suggest removals, place them and benefit without responsibility or repercussion for not protecting them.

Even the most moderate Christians (with extremely rare exceptions) have deeply negative feelings in this respect. The only thing that changes, is how willing and able they are to hide it.

AJ, you obviously do not know many Christian people who are gay. I know many through relatives of mine who are gay, and quite a few come from a 'Christian background'. Many christian adults swing both ways and/or are gay.

Those Christian people you mentioned were in all probability people in their 60's and 70's who are catholics, anglicans, presbyterians and so forth attending Church on Sundays, some of them may never have said a genuine prayer in their lives and only attended Church as a social item on their agendas out of loneliness or boredom, along with massaging their egos to point score among their cronies.

Love thy neighbour, and I've loved all my neighbours with the exception of one, who was a catholic regular church goer in her late 60's, and to the outside world, a 'do gooder' holding high society get togethers at her place while abusing and victimising all of her neighbours over past years hardly knowing them. I know the feelings of hypocrisy well.

It is intriguing to me, why you felt uncomfortable for your brother-in-law though, as a result of your family's emotions towards people who are gay. You are an intelligent 'individual/separate identity' AJ, regardless of your family, a free thinking spirited person who in my opinion, should never take responsibility for your adult siblings, parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents' viewpoints.

Ditto with any spouse.

[Deleted for abuse.]