So we take a child "into care". Most often this is quite right and proper (although the secrecy behind the process makes it more-or-less impossible to know which taking of a child is good and which egregious) but then we put many of these youngsters in homes.
And quite frankly, three square meals aside, that's not much of an improvement:
The NSPCC has warned that children in residential homes are three times more likely to go missing than other youngsters as figures revealed that nearly 3,000 children repeatedly disappeared from care last year.
I'm sure that these are 3,000 differently tragic cases and that social workers are struggling under a mountain of paperwork and an avalanche of stupid rules - not to mention ideas such as being "non-judgemental" that damn children to not knowing what is good or bad behaviour. But yet again it indicates just how poor our care system has become as a result of the laissez faire parenting approach mandated by the law and by the ideology of social work.
But this doesn't excuse the person in charge of Bradford system saying this:
“Some of the ‘missing reports’ are in relation to young people staying out overnight – something that all teenagers can be prone to.”
Did your children ever stay out overnight without you knowing where they were, who they were with and that there were responsible adults present?
This attitude entirely sums up why we have a problem - it is not care, it is neglect.