1,111 child benefit victims were not reunited with their parents

Harriet Dorfort

About six months ago, everyone was shocked by the rise in the number of children of benefit victims being evicted from their homes. At the time, the Central Statistics Office came up with a provisional and incomplete estimate for 1,115 children. It appears to have sparked a tentative debate about the youth protection system. The judges asked themselves whether they had judged carefully.

Has there always been child abuse? Or should they stand by their parents, who have been financially devastated by the government? Can other steps be taken if there has been neglect as a result of the extreme poverty and stress it has caused? But the discussion faded. The end result: 1,111 child benefit victims were not reunited with their parents.

So are the children of Karen van Opstall, to whom she spoke six months ago about her children being taken out of the house. It’s hard, she said, because she had hope for a moment. After she gathered the courage to come out with her story, she was invited to talk shows and allowed to visit Sander Decker. The care of the youth also allowed frequent contact with one of her daughters who had been placed outside the home, which was now much more difficult.

After a long while stomping on the water, I finally threw a lifebuoy. He hopes that I will be able to start life again. On vacation for the first time in 17 years. She wanted to get an education. She is now deeply disappointed that her case has not progressed.

She was compensated, but the family still had to receive 100 euros per week. She and her husband work full time. Like many other victims of subsidies, she has an official who has yet to release the money. She hopes to see her children after they turn 18.

This week, Legal Protection Minister Weerwind came up with very disappointing answers to questions from Pieter Omtzigt about the investigation, undertaken six months ago, into the out-of-home placement of children of benefit victims. Any sense of urgency appears to be missing. There is no evidence that he feels the deep human drama that underlies these numbers.

For now, we can sound the whistle for an in-depth independent investigation. Of grave concern to victims and juvenile justice lawyers alike, the Security and Justice Inspectorate and the Health Care and Youth Inspectorate will investigate the sheltering of 1,115 child benefit victims outside the home. These inspections had not seen anything happening in ten years, Peter Umtzegt rightly observed with disdain.

Moreover, the investigation is related to the analysis of the system and the investigation of the individual file will not be carried out. Juvenile attorneys Richard Korver, Mick Kroll and Jula Singers were convicted in general newspaper

Parents who have to deal with the situation of detention are faced with an internal system in which they have almost no rights and are sent from one column to another. Even in the somewhat exceptional case in which they are proven right, and therefore their imprisonment was not justified thereafter, they are left empty-handed.

The much-desired family reunion is also frustrating when the family rearranges life, for example because of “acceptable terminology”. This is only six months for young children: if the child is taken out of the house for a longer period, the acceptable period of return has been exceeded because it is assumed that this will cause harm to the child’s development.

Harm in development is also not allowed to return to your parents, who want to take care of you lovingly. The Minister seems to have failed to notice that there is a great social debate going on precisely around this accepted term.

Minister Weywind will have to recognize that it is necessary to conduct a thorough and independent investigation of (at least) 1,115 children removed from the home as a result of the benefit case. The case of allowances exposed the fundamental flaw in the rule of law to tens of thousands of citizens. Getting to the point of whether hiring outside the home is justified also affects the functioning of the rule of law. Legal protection for parents and children in youth protection cases is far below the standard. This puts pressure on the entire system and leads to unwanted fear and distrust of the young protectors.

It is not without reason that the Council for Criminal Justice and Youth Protection informed RSF that the legal situation of parents and children in places of detention should be structurally improved.

Harriet Dorfort It is propaganda. She writes an exchange column with Danka Stuiver every two weeks.

Leave a Comment