*


Oslo, Norway
11 December 2014



Marianne Haslev Skånland:
Judgment in Poland: a nine-year-old girl NOT to be extradited to Norway


• • • •
The Norwegian original of this article is from 13-28 December 2011. An English version seems relevant in 2014 in the light of recent worries about Norwegian child protection (CPS) in Russia and the Czech Republic.

The translations from Norwegian newspapers are mine.
MHS
• • • •

In June of 2011 a Polish girl was rescued from a 'temporary foster-home' with the help of a Polish private investigator / actionist who is said to help people when the official police and the court system fail to do their job.

Norwegian child protection service has tried to insist that the girl has been abducted illegally and must therefore be handed over and taken back to Norway. Her parents have moved home to Poland, which suits Norwegian CPS down to the ground. The girl would then be quite alone here, completely in the hands of the CPS and the foster persons they would force on her, her Polish language would be suppressed and neglected, perhaps in the long run making fully satisfactory communication with her parents impossible, were she even to succeed in getting back to them after many years as a slave in the lucrative child protection industry in Norway.

But Norway has not succeeded so far in the court-case they brought in Poland. The court has passed judgment: The girl is not to be extradited by Norway. Common sense from a Polish court, in other words.

Bortført jente (9) blir ikke sendt tilbake fra Polen (Abducted girl (9) will not be sent back from Poland)
VG 12.12.2011

Norsk barnevern i retten i Polen (Norwegian CPS in court in Poland)
VG 02.12.2011

*

Among the dirty tricks which Norwegian authorities have tried to win through with, is to demand the case be tried as an abduction case under the Hague Convention. Its provisions, apparently, mostly concern cases in which one parent abducts a child from the other parent. But in Norway, the CPS is the plaintiff who is best served by the Convention, since it applies not only between parents, but also when a child is taken abroad without permission from whoever holds the legal guardianship or custody. In CPS cases, the CPS normally have all legal rights.

Poland has luckily not given in to Norway in this; they have treated the case as an ordinary child protection case, with submission of evidence, and have placed great emphasis on the fact that the girl was not happy in the 'temporary foster home' but wanted to be with her parents:

"The [Norwegian] municipality wanted the initial step to be for the court to judge as to the legality of the abduction. But Polish authorities chose to handle this as an ordinary child protection case, with extensive presentation of evidence and examination of witnesses.
   – The case has grown to somewhat larger proportions than what we had thought. But it is important on principle, in order to avoid further abductions, says the head of the CPS."

*


Norway is an eager champion of a system in which the state through the CPS shall practice full power over children, parents being considered trivial. It hardly suits Norwegian authorities that the
content of oppositional actions against the CPS is made public and is demonstrated through presentation of evidence. "– - many in Poland find it difficult to understand the reason why the girl was taken from her parents at all." Oh yes, I am certain many Poles found it difficult, because in truth no reason exists or existed to destroy the most valuable possession of this nine-year-old child: her family ties.

A statement from the same power-hungry CPS leader, Mona Thormodsrud:
" – There is simply a difference between what we in Norway think is ok to grow up with and what the Polish child protection agency thinks, says the Norwegian head of the CPS."

Comment: No, there is primarily a great difference in what the two agencies think it is all right to grow up
without. In Norway this powerful agency considers it to be fine to grow up without one's own parents, and without the freedom to flee from 'care persons' back to the parents. Family love is violated, and that is fine in Norway, regardless of how unhappy the girl becomes.

One understands from reading the statements from this Norwegian head of CPS Thormodsrud that 'they' (= Norwegian CPS administration and their lawyers, probably) will "read the judgment" before they decide on a possible appeal! Nobody ought to be surprised if they do appeal.

The Polish court holds that the girl would be harmed by being taken by force back to Norway – yes indeed, quite right. Is there any nine-year-old child who would not be harmed by effectively being turned into an orphan quite needlessly and kept in captivity? Ah, but Thormodsrud disagrees:
" – If we had thought the girl would be harmed by it, we would not have made this demand. We do not believe she would get better conditions for care in Poland, says the leader of the local CPS in Andebu in Vestfold, Mona Thormodsrud."
   This is the opinion of the Norwegian child protection service.

"conditions for care" . . . ? ! God have mercy on us all. And despite such revealing talk the Norwegian people does not understand that we
do not have a public service which protects children? We won't be having any such thing until the 'child experts' now employed are removed completely from anything to do with children and parents, until the present education and training of such 'experts' are abolished, until Norway starts building a totally new, sensible social service from rock bottom. We are without such a social service.

The so-called Rambo, who got the nine-year-old girl out, talks sensibly and wisely in interviews; what he says should call for respect, not ridicule and suspicion:
" - I believe they [the court] made the only right decision. The child was not happy in the temporary foster home, she wanted to be with her parents. If I had the possibility of doing so, I would fetch her from Norway once again, even if it meant prison for me, he says."

The consul from the Polish embassy who was sacked, Adrianne Warchol, deserves to be held in high esteem too. She has said that Norwegian child protection echoes Hitlerjugend.

- Kaster ut polsk konsul i Oslo (– Throws out Polish consul in Oslo)
NRK
(the national, public broadcasting company) 12.10.2011


This indeed is the welfare society of Norway. Incredible? Oh no.


* * * * * * * * * * * * *

28 December 2011

A small addition to the above illustrates perfectly the tragi-comic character of Norwegian child protection and all its enthusiastic helpers. It is once again an article on the website of NRK Vestfold (the county where the Polish girl was held captive), penned by one Trine Lejon Tjønnås, with the heading:

Bortført 9-åring må bli i Polen (Abducted girl must stay in Poland)
NRK Vestfold 12.12.2011

It is hardly surprising that this heading is copied without change onto the web site of Norsk Barnevernsamband (Norwegian Child Protection Association):

Bortført 9-åring må bli i Polen
Norsk Barnevernsamband 13.12.2011
(but the link has been removed.)


Must?

There are indeed other nuances of meaning to Norwegian "må" (must) than force against the nine-year-old child, such as "må få" ('must be allowed to'), or 'has to, in order to be protected from Norwegian child protection'. Or perhaps the author of the article is Swedish (cf her middle name) and believes that Norwegian "må" equals Danish "må", which however means 'may be allowed to' / 'is allowed to', which corresponds to the real situation here ?

Still, I suspect that the intended meaning is the central one, 'has to', and this is the meaning readers will without doubt base their reading on. With this meaning, then – 'poor little girl kidnapped away from the safe Norwegian child protection people and exposed to her terrible parents whom she hates', – one jumps, as is so often done in Norway, right into the messy soup of meaningless descriptions, distortions, concealments, and let us not forget: blatant lies, which are standard in all child protection cases, either served up by the CPS themselves, or by the press.

This leads once again to the everlasting question: What does the conduct of Norway and our CPS in this case indicate about all the
other cases handled or created by the CPS – I mean, when they have the time and resources, and give top priority to, taking this girl away from her parents, and then send people to Poland to bring action before a Polish court to have her perforce returned to Norway, completely against her wishes?



*