The People’s Review of Prevent is an alternative review to the Government Shawcross Review.
This review provides a voice to the people most impacted by the Prevent Duty.
Prevent is described as ‘safeguarding’ children from harms. However, under Prevent, safeguarding is focused on protecting the wider public from children believed to be ‘risky’, rather than protecting children from harms.
Throughout our report we present case studies that show how real these harms can be and the distress they cause to children and their families and carers.
This report into child removal is essential reading for those concerned about the Prevent counter-extremism strategy in social care, as well as its impact in the courts and on families.
In 2015, advocacy group CAGE claimed that the CTS Bill would lead to children being removed from their families due to their beliefs and political views. As a result, the group was slammed, termed “Terrorism apologists” and accused of scaremongering.[1] CAGE has this week published a groundbreaking report in which it reveals chilling details of the reality of this occurrence. The report features several real stories titled “Human Voices” of parents who have faced such experiences. Read more
This is a report unlike any that CAGE has produced before, and it comes at a crucial time. In today’s global paradigm we have become acquainted with the images and stories of children being removed from their parents in countries that espouse “freedom and democracy”. This has happened under the guise of “immigration control and preventing terrorism”. We have seen this happening in the United States and, at a lower profile but no less significant extent, in Australia. Such policies have long roots in colonialism and empire, which we will not explore here but which deserve acknowledgement as a backdrop. Now, for the first time, CAGE is offering documentation that the removal of children, and the attempted removal of children, is taking place in the family courts of the United Kingdom. It is being done using an unreliable and highly subjective method of measuring “extremism” and “radicalisation”, themselves subjective terms
