The Bonn Jugendamt: Or is It, How to Drive Children to Commit Suicide?

A father’s story to save his daughter

cash for kids

This is an explosive investigative story about the serious nature of the alleged abuse of two young girls under the authority and control of the decisions of the German government department known as the “Bonn Jugendamt” allegedly displaying gross negligence, ineptitude, while simultaneously endangering the lives of two young girls and exacerbating an intolerable situation for everyone involved.

728 x 90 (Super Banner) Goldbarren & -münzen günst

 

Personnel involved: The children are named: “Aileen” and “Sarah”

Current living conditions

At home both girls share two mothers and live in one house as a patchwork family of five with Aileen’s stepfather.

Filthy and substandard living conditions for children

In a written statement neighbors describes the sordid living conditions as extremely alarming. Outside the home there is a trash build-up that has not been attended to in possibly years. All the space around the house is littered and unkempt. Neighbors report rats have been seen.

Medical incapacity of Sarah’s mother

Sarah’s mother has had a severe stroke and was placed under judicial supervision for about one (1) year.

Mental health disorders and questions

In 2011, she was certified as suffering from a permanent personality disorder and further illnesses. In the same year she portrayed herself as incapable of education. The Bonn Jugendamt declared Aileen’s mother to be mentally ill as well. Teachers at Aileen’s school have on several occasions raised doubts about her mother’s educational abilities.

Parental shut-ins and isolation

Neither the two girls nor Sarah’s mother have been seen by neighbors for the last three years! The mothers and children seem to be completely isolated, in the otherwise lively and normal neighborhood.

The suicide attempts of Aileen

Police Report. According to a police report Aileen tried several times to commit suicide and suffers from numerous and non-specific fears and very deep, negative feelings of guilt. Teachers described the girl’s personal appearance as unkempt. On one occasion, Aileen came to school with burns on her body in which the teachers think she could not have inflicted upon herself.

One teacher was astonished that although having been informed, the Bonn Jugendamt never investigated the matter.

A psychologist close to the family assumed the abuse was caused by Aileen’s stepfather. Also, sexual assault was reported but, according to the Bonn Jugendamt it could not be confirmed. Aileen was placed in a psychiatric ward at least three times. After an attempted suicide and a stay in the closed ward of a psychiatric hospital for children and young adults, Aileen preferred to change to an open psychiatric ward instead of going home. Nonetheless she was sent back to her “family.”

Why wasn’t she provided residence in assisted living? Is it not well-known that abused children only speak about their experiences when they have grown up? It is clear, the situation is urgent and requires immediate attention and remedial alternatives to the living situation of both young girls.

The declining mental and physical situation of Sarah

According to her teacher and further witnesses, Sarah has become extremely unkempt since moving in with the patchwork family. Her school marks have deteriorated rapidly, and she has put on a lot of weight, becoming very overweight for her height and age. Consequently, her physician thinks she needs to be in therapy.

Unnecessary suffering New apartment.

Sarah’s father stepped into the situation by renting an apartment for both Sarah and her mother also providing assisted living for both of them. Although the mother had originally asked him to arrange this, she suddenly did not want to move in there anymore. The situation nearly went to court, although Sarah’s father only intended an amicable arrangement between the Jugendamt, mother, daughter, teachers and himself. As Sarah was already suffering from stress he thought a lawsuit would be too much for her.

Sarah’s teacher who had been teaching her for several years, said that the child’s situation at home had become unacceptable. The teacher stated that there needs to be a serious discussion about Sarah’s psychic strain, her state-of-mind and mental health, her isolation and the obvious neglect. During these attempts by the young child’s teacher, her mother could not be reached. In addition, the young girl’s education to continue at school had to be discussed urgently. There was a teacher’s conference about the situation and it was decided that the child needed help in other areas as well.

The teacher took it upon herself to contact the woman in charge of Sarah’s case, Ms. Wehler, Bonn Jugendamt.

Broken promises

The teacher was promised a private talk with her and a conversation with the parents. But, the Bonn Jugendamt did not keep their promise. The only person actively involved who can be counted upon, is Sarah’s father who is actively fighting for his daughter to get her out of the horrible situation and had meetings with the teacher.

The father tries to intervene

Sarah’s mother sued the father because she wanted him to lose the custody of his daughter. The Bonn Jugendamt with the advantage of power and trust before the Court stated their position.

In the court case, the father suffered slandered which was uncovered by a reporter from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ newspaper) who even referred that the Bonn Jugendamt had abused their position. Consequently, and due to this the father lost his right for deciding on his daughter’s place of residence.

Magazine exposes injustice

The magazine “Junge Welt” reported this case and spoke of the perversion in the course of justice, the false statements made by staff of the Bonn Jugendamt which had even been discovered by the Court. According to information from the FAZ, the Bonn Jugendamt did not even apologize for their false statements nor did they correct them. In the father’s opinion the girls were driven to commit suicide by the Jugendamt and the horrific and unsustainable living conditions they are forced to endure.

FAZ assert that the father’s position, his attempts to right the situation, and his helplessness in dealing with the Bonn beauracracy was nonchalantly ignored by the Jugendamt. The Bonn “General Anzeiger” newspaper quoted a former family judge, Herr Rudolph who called a proceeding of the Bonn Jugendamt “deliberately false.”

Remarks about suicide by Sarah and the ignorance of the Bonn Jugendamt

According to information from her school, Sarah later expressed thoughts of suicide.

The people who took these remarks seriously were:

a.) The professor of psychiatry and psychotherapy who had examined Sarah personally

b.) The child psychologist c.) The headmistress of Sarah’s school

d.) Sarah’s father

The negligence grows

Despite these horrific facts and the severity of their nature endangering Sarah’s life, therapy for Sarah is not mentioned at all in the schedule of help and assistance designed by the Bonn Jugendamt, although the child psychologist definitively called her “traumatized.” Apparently, the Bonn Jugend Amt did not even attempt to find out the reasons for her remarks about committing suicide.

Sarah loses her father and other important contacts

The contact between Sarah and her father whom Sarah loved very much, was destroyed. The magazine “Junge Welt” reported that he was constantly separated from him. Sarah was not even allowed by her mother to keep in contact with her cousins who are about the same age, confirmed by her uncle. Instead, it appears Sarah is being dominated by her own mother.

The childrens’ psychologist believes that the mother considers the father as a perpetrator and incredibly, Sarah tries to help her maintain this concept in order to stabilize her own mother. As a result, Professor Eikelmann says the father is demonized. According to the FAZ, the Bonn Jugendamt has not done anything to restore the relationship between father and daughter.

Bonn Jugend Amt tries to whitewash the situation

It is incredulous to know in the face of the open historical record and material fact that despite knowing about the previous judicial supervision and permanent psychological diagnoses of Sarah’s mother, Mr. Udo Stein, Director, Bonn Jugendamt declared that except for the descriptions by the father of the mother, there is no valid proof of the existence of a mental illness of Sarah’s mother. He also maintains that he does not detect any actions by the mother endangering the well-being of her child although she cut short the therapy urgently needed by Sarah.

In the meantime, the Bonn Jugendamt issued a so-called “risk assessment.” The lives of the children may literally depend on the correctness of such an assessment.

Several people who are heads of their respective departments have participated in its creation. Nonetheless it is riddled with faults and false claims. For instance the attempted suicide of Aileen has been trivialized and Sarah’s remarks about committing suicide have not been taken seriously.

Up until now, the strategy of the Bonn Jugendamt office seems to have been to identify only one person responsible for the situation: the father. Why? Because he is the one who has caused trouble for the “ideal family” because he informed the Bonn Jugendamt and asked for help.

New lawsuit of the Bonn Jugend Amt against the father

Instead of helping to change the bad situation into something good, the father was sued. He was suspected by the Bonn Jugendamt of having passed on information to the FAZ. It was feared that the whole case would receive more public attention. The Bonn Jugendamt requested that the District Court examine the information and then forbid it to be handed over to the FAZ. There are two theories as an explanation for this strategy: Either the Bonn Jugendamt believed that the FAZ simply printed false statements without checking-up on them, or they wanted to have the court issue a gag order on the father.

After it had emerged that Sarah’s father had not given the information in question to the FAZ the City of Bonn was compelled to withdraw the suit. And in a bizarre twist of logic, nonetheless the judge sentenced the father to pay all costs incurred on the grounds that from the Bonn Jugendamt’s point of view, he had left the impression that he had given the information to the FAZ. But, now adding insult to injury, the father has been ordered to pay several thousands of Euros because he seemed to have informed the press. The court apparently has been trying to silence him. He states that if he only mentions a minor detail of this scandalous case in public or even only threatens to do this, he can expect a new charge which in fact would completely destroy him. He believes the Court is one sided.

And that they will always attempt to find some apparently wrong expressions or opinions in his statements whereas the obviously false assertions of the Bonn Jugendamt are not even mentioned.

The renowned Professor in media studies, Johannes Ludwig, declares that there is every reason to believe that they will attempt to further silence the father. From the father’s point of view his daughter’s life as well as his own was destroyed, not only economically, by the Bonn Jugendamt. Politicians, the Prosecutor’s Office and the Committee on Petitions in Parliament (Landtag) – all of them do not see or do not want to see the necessity/possibility for intervention.

A dark conclusion. Is there an analogy to the case of Anna? Is there a parallel between the scandalous circumstances around the two girls Aileen and Sarah and the case of Anna which was brought to light in the neighboring town of Königswinter? Many friends, neighbors and teachers had informed the Königswinter Jugendamt repeatedly about the situation of the nine-year-old girl.

The Königswinter Jugendamt ignored all the clues and the girl died. Consistent with their behavior, the staff of the Jugendamt destroyed the girl’s file. An agreement was reached in Court resulting in a fine of €2,000 for the Bonn Jugendamt’s staff member who had been responsible for the case.

In comparison to this, just a small truthful, but unauthorized statement made by Sarah’s father could cost him up to € 250.000 or six months of jail in custody. The lives of the children are at stake.

Anzeige

für eine Banküberweisung finden Sie die Kontonummer im Impressum

Opposition 24 unterstuetzen
Ihre Email Adresse:

Hinweis zu den Kommentaren

Kommentare geben nicht die Meinung der Redaktion wieder!
Redaktion
Über Redaktion 6126 Artikel
Frisch aus der Redaktion