Advanced search

Child taken by from womb by forced C/S for social services!

(1000 Posts)
StarlightMcKenzie Sat 30-Nov-13 22:38:47

Could there ever be a justifiable reason for this?

RandomMess Sat 30-Nov-13 22:41:40

Perhaps she was a very high suicide risk at the time?

Rummikub Sat 30-Nov-13 22:43:37

That's the most frightening horrific thing I have read.

TooTiredToBeCreative Sat 30-Nov-13 22:44:46

Bloody hell, that is awful! I thought it was going to be a drug dependant mother who had refused to stop using & child was delivered as it's life was in danger.

BouncingJellyfish Sat 30-Nov-13 22:45:58

I wish this was a joke! How horrible!

scaevola Sat 30-Nov-13 22:47:18

She had been sectioned under the mental health act at the time of the operation. That won't have been an SS decision.

It's the subsequent actions, concerning the care of the infant, that would be their responsibility.

TheWomanTheyCallJayne Sat 30-Nov-13 22:49:37

How utterly terrifying

johnhemming Sat 30-Nov-13 22:50:27

The decisions are the decisions of the state (specifically the judicial estate) of the UK - delegated to the jurisdiction of England and Wales.

StarlightMcKenzie Sat 30-Nov-13 22:51:07

So who would have made the decision to cut her open then? And on what grounds?

DeepThought Sat 30-Nov-13 22:53:53

A judge

Not SS

UpTheFRIGGinDuff Sat 30-Nov-13 22:55:15

Holy fucking shit that's terrifying.
As a pregnant mother,with existing (but under control) mental health problems,that is the most frightening thing I've ever heard.

She called for help after suffering a panic attack,was sectioned,sedated,operated on and had her child taken away,all without her consent or even Knowledge.

Just awful.

VivaLeBeaver Sat 30-Nov-13 22:55:23

I'm amazed this could happen America maybe but not in the uk!

trikken Sat 30-Nov-13 22:56:16

Thats disgusting behaviour.

RedLondonBus Sat 30-Nov-13 22:57:36

was interested until i got to the 'john hemming' bit hmm

weepingvipers Sat 30-Nov-13 22:58:44

Sounds like there's an awful lot more to the case than we will probably ever know. It's telling though that the decision being challenged is not the delivery of the child but the placement of the child after delivery. Given that the woman's legal team don't see fit to question that and an expert only comment was it was unusual I don't think leaping to conclusions based on a single newspaper article is going to be sensible tbh.

Sirzy Sat 30-Nov-13 23:00:55

I agree weeping. As awful as it sounds I am guessing there is an awful lot more to the story than we are being told

StarlightMcKenzie Sat 30-Nov-13 23:01:20

So how would a Judge know about this then, and who would present the case to a judge for ruling?

StarlightMcKenzie Sat 30-Nov-13 23:03:28

There's always more to a story than a newspaper can report, but even the bare bones are imo unjustifiable.

If you come onto the SN boards however, you'll see that there is quite a substantial amount of abuse families can suffer at the hands of professionals paid to help them, and the whole 'there must be more to the story' attitude is what allows them to get away with it.

InTheRedCorner Sat 30-Nov-13 23:13:31

That article doesn't give you much background. It is very unusual and the decision wouldn't have been taken lightly.

Devora Sat 30-Nov-13 23:25:02

It's impossible to understand what went on here - it does seem very bizarre and there must be a lot to it that we don't know. For example, if the mother has HIV then an elective CS would reduce the risk to the baby.

I am not defending SS - I'm sure awful things happen sometimes. But Christopher Booker and John Hemming are on a massive crusade and are very far from being objective commentators.

morethanpotatoprints Sat 30-Nov-13 23:25:25

This is disgusting whether there is more to it or not.
I still feel very strongly that SS are given too much autonomy and children are taken from parents unnecessarily.
That child could be adopted without the consent of its mother and that is not right.

NiceTabard Sun 01-Dec-13 00:30:42

WTAF? That is simply appalling.

Also why the hell was this ITALIAN child placed in care in the UK, with UK SW not talking to Italian equivalents? That is just utterly wrong. What about the rest of the child's family, presumably all in Italy? Did the UK SS decide unilaterally and before any proceedings that the child was never going to be returned to the mother or other relatives and that it would be adopted immediately else otherwise what justification do they have for keeping it in the UK?

Really disturbing story.

Blistory Sun 01-Dec-13 00:34:06

So she didn't have a CS without consent but without knowledge ? That sends shivers down my spine - I really hope that there was a damn good reason for cutting a woman's body without her even being aware of it, MH issues or not.

StarlightMcKenzie Sun 01-Dec-13 00:37:20

I bet they took a kidney at the same time too.....

fuckwittery Sun 01-Dec-13 00:43:03

The mother will have been deemed incapable of making the decision by the court of protection after a mental health assessment.
The local authority or the hospital will have made an application to the court.
The care proceedings should be temporary emergency protective proceedings due to the presence of the child in the jurisdiction; I would expect all avenues to be explored during the proceedings to return the child as appropriate to Italy and to be liaising with the Italian authorities.

This thread is not accepting new messages.