May 4, 2011

Data Protection Act 1998 Section 36 Domestic purposes. Personal data processed by an individual only for the purposes of that individual’s personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes) are exempt from the data protection principles.

I met with a new social worker today and the subject came up about me having recorded conversations in the past.

The lady told me i wasn’t allowed to do that without consent  until i reminded her of section 36 of the data protection act whereby you do not actually have to ask for consent if you are in your own property.

What amazes me is what social workers are so scared of ?

After all if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear , and if you adhere to your codes of conduct and work in an open and honest way whats your problem ?

As for recording in SS offices etc my advice is if there have been occasions where your social workers have lied or fabricated information then do it but hide your recording equipment on your body somewhere.


Maybe the below article can demonstrate why social workers are so fearful , maybe they are scared of being exposed for lying or for being vexatious .

Believe me they can be vexatious and are so protected by the state or by using’childs best interest’ as a smokescreen for hiding their true intentions behind their decisions that I question whether some of them have psychopathic disorders .

A social worker can take a dislike to you or maybe they have got into trouble over a complaint you have made or some other exposure of their behaviour and you have had it !!!!

Whats in the best interest of the child goes out the window as the social worker is then so biased  and intent to exact her/ his revenge that the child in their eyes becomes nothing more than a useful tool in which to utilise to cause you distress in the same way as a vexatious ex partner will use a child to get back at a partner by ceasing all contact, turning the child against the absent parent etc.

There certainly does need to be an independent body to look at the conduct of some of these social workers made up partly of parents and service users like the man below who will not be blinkered by the fact that social workers are ‘ professionals ‘ and do not behave like that.

In all professions their are bad eggs look at bent police officers , crooked lawyers , etc what makes social workers any different ? On this site there is a list of social workers that have been struck off quite a long list.

IT is a very powerful role they have . If you are a victim of a vexatious social worker the odds are stacked against you.

First you have to get someone to believe that such a professional has acted vexatiously which noone will lets face it who will believe your word over a social workers ?

secondly if you make an internal complaint the local authority will back the social worker up .

thirdly if you try to take the matter to an outside agengy the process will take so long you could have ended up losing a child to adoption or foster care and had contact etc stopped . All based on the decisions and reports written by this vexatious person.

The poor child is used as a weapon to exact their twisted revenge on you.

Anyway back to the article below shows why you should record social workers and far from them saying you are not supposed to remember this judge did not have a problem with it being used as evidence !

and i say it again to social workers ‘ IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR ‘

Dictaphone saves man from prison

Secret tape recording clears him of charges brought by social services

A MAN who was cleared of all charges after secretly recording a meeting with social workers on his dictaphone, has called for an independent team to monitor social workers.

Lovel Brian Dennis was accused of affray, threat to kill, assault and criminal damage, stemming from two separate encounters with social workers from Hackney Council’s Learning and Disability department as he tried to get social services to let him take care of his brother, who has Downs Syndrome.

Dennis was accused of swearing and threatening council officials in the first encounter, while in the second he was alleged to have pushed a social worker against a wall.

However, due to evidence from his recordings and conflicting testimony from a prosecution witness, Dennis was found not guilty last month at Snaresbrook Crown Court in east London.

A relieved Dennis told The Voice: “This is the wisest £50 I’ve ever spent in my life, because if I didn’t spend this £50, as the barrister said in the court, I would’ve got three to six years. I would hope that there would be a body that can monitor social services and see that they’re conducting their duties properly.”

The problems for 46-year-old Dennis, from Hackney, started in April 2009 as he attempted to obtain responsibility for his brother Kenneth Plummer’s wellbeing, because his former foster carer could no longer be responsible for him.

Dennis had met officials during a discharge meeting at Goodmayes Hospital, as his brother had been suffering from mental illness at the time.

After the meeting, Dennis said he was accused of using abusive language and threatening a social worker. However, unbeknownst to them, Dennis had recorded the meeting on his dictaphone, which was later used in court as evidence to show he had not behaved as alleged.

After the discharge meeting, Dennis said he was banned from seeing Plummer for four months. When the ban was over, Dennis went to visit his brother but faced another accusation from the same social worker.

“…She made the allegation that I attacked her,” said Dennis, who was found not guilty of assault.

Dennis also claims that the council ‘invented’ a non-existent brother and implied he had designs on his brother’s money.

Hackney Council documents obtained by The Voice, make reference to two brothers.

A Hackney Council review on Plummer’s health when he was under his foster carer’s supervision, stated: ‘One brother, Brian, visits regularly, and Kenny enjoys these visits… However, other members visit more sporadically, which can leave Kenny feeling confused. Additional problems have developed due to the inheritance. There is concern about one brother, Lowell (sic), who is keen to manage Kenny’s money.’

Dennis later formally complained to the Ombudsman, who considers complaints of service failure and maladministration causing injustice. The Ombudsman upheld some of Dennis’ claims, ruling on January 26, that Dennis ‘was the subject of false allegations by his brother’s care manager regarding his behaviour at a meeting in a hospital.’

The Ombudsman added: ‘The foster carer has signed a statement confirming that the complainant has never asked or bothered her for his brother’s money and that she had never given the social worker the impression that he had been behaving in this manner.’

Hackney Council reportedly offered Dennis an apology and a total of £1,600 compensation, but said in a statement: ‘The Council will be making no comment due to legal reasons.’



  1. Urban Dictionary: psychopsema

    Urban Dictionary: psychopsema

    1. psychopsema
    buy psychopsema mugs, tshirts and magnets
    Psychopsema psy-cho-pse-ma is a system of questionable actions that a Social Service agency or a Child Protection Service agency might utilize to achieve profit, through fraudulent means.

    Psychopsema is mainly categorized as an orchestrated assault, utilizing several methods of fraud, psychological operations, psychological intimidation and other similar premeditated offense based systems, against a parent, a child or a family.

    A malicious social worker or other malicious social service professionals (usually, employed by a Child Protection Service (CPS) agency or a similar social service agency) are commonly identified as utilizing this system or methodology to achieve profit.

    Psychopsema is usually implemented to deflect attention, away from crimes committed by said workers against children. As, those children are sometimes canvased for the purpose of profit.

    The term and description were created by Canadian and American social service crime researchers Nicolas Stathopoulos and Felicita Luna in early 2011. Both researchers are part of SSEC Social Service Economic Crimes (research)
    1 – A false report of child abuse is authored by a group of social workers against a single parent or parents. The colluding workers then, utilize the methodology of psychopsema to profit from the crime.

    2 – A malicious social service worker colludes with her peers to fabricate evidence and to practice psychopsema.

    3 – The system of psychopsema subjects a victim into the social service system without merit or justification.

    4 – Psychopsema is mainly categorized as an orchestrated assault against a parent, a child or a family by a social service worker, seeking to profit from a crime.
    social worker malicious social worker fraud social service fraud abduction child kidnapping cps child protection service child protection service fraud evidence witness crimes criminal act crooked lawyers fraudulent act social service worker psychopsema phychopsema cps fraud child farming

    Comment by nojusticeforparents — May 4, 2011 @ 1:10 am | Reply



      Thursday June 16 2011
      Laura Laroche Brown / Queens, New York.

      This is the single most comprehensive description I have ever had the privilege of discovering then reading about regarding an act of a “planned or coordinated assault “as executed by social service workers against a targeted family or targeted child for profit, through the incorporation of fraud.

      We must make a coordinated effort to promote the knowledge of PSYCHOPSEMA for the purpose of informing as many people throughout the general public as possible.

      We have an obligation to inform all parents and all citizen of a free country (especially, those parents and children) about to be targeted by criminal social service agencies, where the mainstream media will not reveal what is repentantly clear to be massive corruption within all social services.

      I support help all victimized children and parents of SS crimes by promoting unique and empowering information such as that of the description of PSYCHOPSEMA

      “We must empower all victims of social service worker crimes against children, by continually promoting revealing information such as PSYCHOPSEMA and the implication of it’s value as a weapon of information against SS corruption”

      ALL “CHILD ACTIVIST ORGANIZATIONS” SHOULD COORDINATE to MASS PROMOTE this definition of PSYCHOPSEMA. Because, it “appears to be more of a clear “formula” revealing “the particular act” of an assault” generally inflicted against a family by social services.

      I USED THE DEFINITION OF “PSYCHOPSEMA” IN OUR COURT CASE AND WE WON. I cannot stop shaking as I write this entry to describe how horrific the assault against my family was perpetrated against us, by a group of SS workers, who created a fraudulent scenario {out of thin air} in order to illegally fast track an adoption to a family in waiting… ready to take my child.

      The INCENTIVE for the MASSIVE PROFITS that the SS workers were about to be rewarded with, as a result of the theft of my child {to be sold to another family} were an irresistible booty, to be distributed by a very corrupt system.

      Thanks to the information in the description of PSYCHOPSEMA we were able to describe the exact assault used against us, to the sitting judge and prove the evidence acquired against those involved.

      The description as defined within PSYCHOPSEMA was the EXACT FORMULA the SS workers incorporated to launch an assault against us.

      Our lawyer had no idea how to proceed to prove criminal intention against them, until she read the description for the act as outlined in PSYCHOPSEMA.

      My family owes a debt of gratitude to the organization and researchers at [SSEC] Social Service Economic Crimes (research unit) who authored and created the information we found online. Because of their comprehensive description of this particular assault {which was exactly how it happened to my family} we were able to save our child from irreparable harm.

      Presently, prosecutors are looking at charging those service service workers with a multitude of crimes regarding their role to obtain profit through fraud, at the expense of the assaults committed against my child and our family.

      Thank you, for posting this and please continue to promote the work of [SSEC] Social Service Economic Crimes (research unit) and particularly their description for the term of PSYCHOPSEMA that helped safe guard my child and my family from further harm.

      Information of this sort is truly a weapon against the corrupt social service agencies prevalent throughout North America. We must unite and work together to permanently shut them down.

      God Bless

      Laura Laroche Brown
      Queens, New York.
      Residing in Vancouver, BC CA,
      Software Engineer and developer for major IT company AND FORMER VICTIM OF SOCIAL SERVICE CRIME.

      Comment by Laura Laroche Brown — June 17, 2011 @ 12:15 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: