nananina we are going by our personal experiences hence that some SW are baby snatchers so they think because of what has happened in the past and SW cant comment as they are gagged with what they can say which is very litle. They and I have had bad experiences and some of us good.

I for one dont believe everything that is written in the papers as most of it is lies to get you to read the story. I'll bet most on here dont believe 100% that the story is true.

What I find outlandish is that they think that the baby is being taken straight away why would they think this because they have read the reports and came up with this in their own minds. I'll bet it doesnt but SW are gagged and cant tell us anything.

So we get one side to a story of a lass with learning difficulties which the paper has put as mild. The question is what is mild to them then and can she cope with a baby and all that entails as he gets older.

In Scottish law she isnt a child she is an adult so her learning difficulties cant be mild if the SS can stop her wedding.

Also I would be worried over the age gap too but thats me as I do have 17 year old teens, Yes they are adults and can marry well where I live they can. I would hope they would wait and have a life first before all that.

I would think 2shoes there has been an assessment done in the past about her abilities to parent, but no she hasnt abused the baby cos he isnt here yet but why hasnt the father been figured into this as well. Now I would think that is another story there altogether.

The only folks that know the truth are them, the grandmother and SW and we will never know the true picture.

why are we talking about abuse, this mother to be hasn't even had the baby yet

Well, Mr Hemming, you would say that! Seriously, most SWs do a great job under trying circumstances. That's the truth but as Nananina says, if you have a different mindset, then what we say will not make any difference.

Regarding Local Authority care, I completely support Nananina's views here and I am angry that people seem to think that any poor child in care will not achieve any satisfactory outcome. A fair number do and they are RAGING that people think they're ill educated, antisocial crack using prostitutes. Children are not better off growing up with horrific abuse in their families than being in care.

nananina 'I have come to the conclusion from posts on here that there are many people who believe SSDs are merely "incompetent child snatchers"'

My belief is that there is a substantial amount of bad practise that is not checked by the checks and balances.

That does not mean that all social workers are bad. A number tell me what goes on.

Hence, it is wrong to paint me as someone who believes that Childrens Services Departments are merely "incompetent child snatchers". Some are, but not all.

have to ask..
how can ss be sure the baby is at risk? it hasn't been born and the mother hasn't been given a chance yet. that is what I don't understand.
and I have to by nature of my life deal with a sw and have always got on well with them(yes even the current one who is drivong me mad)

I haven't read all of this thread as it is so long but have been involved with debates on other threads about the "miscarriages of justice" perpetrateed by SSD. As an independent social worker with over 30 years experience working in child protection/fostering and adoption I have come to the conclusion from posts on here that there are many people who believe SSDs are merely "incompetent child snatchers" and NOTHING is going to change their minds. I for one have given up trying to explain how things work but it all falls on stoney ground. SO SPERO and others who feel the same way, I agree it is like banging your head against a brick wall, it's nice when you stop. I have noticed some familiar posters on here who will not be moved in their view and I suppose I have come to wonder exactly what it is that makes these people believe they are so right, when they do not have the knowledge of how SSD works, but their "evidence" is largely anecdotal and gathered from the tabloids, friends of friends or maybe an unfortunate personal experience. OK I KNOW I will now be accused of being a "know all" etc etc etc. Am used to it now so it's water off a ducks back.

The thing is you only can ever hear ONE side of these stories because SSD is bound by strict rules of confidentiality and that is now it should be, and even if the true facts were known, the SSD haters would not believe them.

Aramis - your figures are correct but can I invite you to consider that the damage done to children PRIOR to them being removed from parents and placed in care is the real problem here. Early life experiences of abuse and neglect will cause damage to a child through the lifespan and by the time they are removed from parents, the damage is done, and produces the kinds of results that you have given. YES I agree the state is not a "good parent" but this is because they do not have the resources (huge shortage of foster carers nationally) to help restore some trust in these damaged children who will be the underachievers in education and be over represented in the prison system etc etc.

Oh lord why am I bothering, because I think so many people on MN have far more invested in believing the worst of SSD for their own reasons. Maybe these people should train as social workers and show us all how to do it!! I can tell you they would be very very surprised, and that's putting it mildly.

PLEASE can you not believe everything you read/hear about - people who have had their children removed are NOT going to admit that it was necessary to protect their children. They are going to give their own version of events - that is just human nature, but can some of you on these posts try to look a littel further into these complex matters and try to understand that there are 2 sides to every story and you are only hearing 1 side.

Being in care is not a good long term option for any child, which is obviously a bad state of affairs. However if this baby is taken into care following a decision that the parents could never cope then it would be adopted very young, and then expectations would be in line with any other child.

www.intellectualdisability.info/lifestages/ds_parent.htm

Sorry to bring this up again but wanted to read the link Aramis put up as it wont show what it is on my pc if I dont do it this way.

I am worried for this lass out there on the run now. How are they managing. How are they actually living out there. Is she well fed and watered or are they living in squallor. I hope it isnt the latter.

http://www.intellectualdisability.info/lifestages/ds_parent.htm

I think Robertson is only doing what's best for her baby... let's look at the facts here:

- More than 75% of care leavers have no academic qualifications of any kind
- More than 50% of young people leaving care after 16 years are unemployed
- 17% of young girls leaving care are pregnant or already mothers
- 10% of 16-17 year old claimants of DSS hardship payments have been in care
- 71% of our homeless spent time in care
- 33% of adult prisoners and 38% of young prisoners have been in care
- 30% of young single homeless people have been in care
- 90% of all prostitutes on our streets who have been arrested at least once have come from the care system.

What parent would want to risk their child being put through that?