Baby P witch hunt

I only referred to middle class people in my comment. I said nothing about working class people. Of course I don't believe that being working class means you have no executive functioning skills. I grew up in a council house.

Just because someone is working class does not mean they have ‘poor executive functioning’. That’s deterministic and inaccurate and insulting to people who are working class.

In truth, people who commit horrible crimes are often a mix of personality disorder, psychosis, psychopathy …Abuse and neglect contribute to the way an individual functions, feels empathy etc. That is not determined by class. Class does impact life chances obviously but being working class doesn’t always mean poverty and neglect does it? My Dad was a postman. Definitely we. We were a bit skint as a family but never neglected or abused.

Of course poverty and neglect are significant but the poster said ‘working class people don’t have good executive function. That’s a reach and a bit insulting tbh.

This article with baby p's grandmother gives a good explanation for how vulnerable his mother was I think.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2009/aug/16/baby-p-family

Obviously I'm not claiming that all female abusers are the same. We are talking here about the baby p set up - as an adopter, our children weren't killed so their stories are not in the media. But so many of the other adopters I know have children from exactly this set up. Vulnerable woman has kids, gets house, is targeted by man who abuses her and the kids. We could anticipate this could be a problem when maybe we can't anticipate a Lucy Letby.

Of course it's class related, because the people with poor executive functioning, asd etc don't do well and can't create good lives. It is a self perpetuating cycle as their children go on to repeat.

The idea that you eradicate poverty and everyone lives nice comfortable lives is wishful thinking. They put so many initiatives in to lift people from poverty in the post war period and still some families were not able to benefit.

I usedvto be all for nurture over nature - I adopted two children from the care system. But it's not that easy. Genetics play a huge part imo.

And it's not just exec functioning. It's asd, adhd, genetic deletions, learning disabilities - my girls have a genetic deletion which is associated with learning disabilities. You could give their birth mother millions and she still wouldn't be able to look after her kids, keep her house tidy, stop hanging out with paedophiles...

@Arran2024

This is really interesting as in cases such as Victoria Climbie for example, her aunt was found to be an instigator and had no special needs or disabilities. In the case of Isabella her mother Chelsea Gleason-Mitchell, had no known disabilities and was a nursery nurse.

Lucy Letby acted alone and had no known vulnerabilities or male manipulator. The mother of baby P had no known disabilities, she knew right from wrong.

You seem to be suggesting that female child abusers are all vulnerable and have no agency. That they are all victims to male scum bags but that isn't the case. If they were so affected that they didn't know right from wrong, then I doubt they'd go to prison.

Rose West had a very low IQ and was severely abused as a child (as was Fred) but she knew what she was doing was wrong.

exactly so it cant be that bad in there if she keeps going back in.

all she has to do is stick to the licence conditions.

yes definetely a soft touch, should have been given a longer sentence to start with or put down.
An animal would be if it did that to a human?

With respect that is classist nonsense. Yes executive function exists but it’s not class related. It is related to poverty, neglect and deprivation. Of course more working class folk are in that position. but their exec function isn’t determined by class.

She's on licence.

You breach your licence conditions and you go back in.

Rinse and repeat for the rest of her life.

Men with huge vulnerabilities are often victims too. They are often at home, too scared to go out.

This isn't the group of men involved here. These guys know exactly what they are doing. They take over the lives of vulnerable women with purpose - they take their money, abuse their kids. This isn't asd.

And Social Services are completely overwhelmed, with caseloads too high and not enough staff. Social Services is in crisis and has been for a long time.

Self-preservation.

Either the child or them.

They either have never had a parent as a young child put them first and so don't know how to do so, or in a few cases have a personality disorder.

Agree it's awful and very hard to understand or explain. Thankfully these cases are very rare

Do you think prison is a soft touch then? She has not actually reoffended. She has not met licence conditions. Of course people with learning difficulties don’t make the best decisions and might have impaired judgement. Hence they go back in if their sentence requires this. Hers does. Prison is there to reeducate them but some people find this very difficult. What would you prefer? Life? Death? No parole ever? 200,000 in prison?

how, it cant be much of a punishment baby ps mother keeps going back in!!!

No they are just out and out scumbags.
Mostly these people are having babys to get benefits and houses, they rarely work.
Some women should be forcibly sterilised.

50% of the prison and young offender population has learning difficulties and personality disorders. They do get punished! Men or women.

@Arran2024 I agree. That’s taken into account with sentencing. Hence you get “swanning around after 5 years” comments. It’s complex and not black and white. Sentencing guidelines matter as does background and personality disorders. Definitely SEN.

Of course not all who are abused repeat this but we aren’t able to monitor everyone.

Are the nasty men also undiagnosed and with learning disabilities or personality disorders?

how about its just down to scummy people.

@the7Vabo You repeatedly say the sentence was too light but won’t acknowledge it met criteria at the time. I’m not intending to lecture but you use words like “swanning around in 5 years” and that clearly shows you didn’t understand the sentence or the role of the parole board or the recall system. So if you want a sensible discussion instead of just banging your drum, I think it’s a better strategy to engage.

Lots of people don’t agree the doctor was not at fault. Many individuals and systems were at fault. All the subsequent enquiries showed this. Undoubtedly for the mother, poor judgement by the Parole Board has complicated matters but you don’t recognise their input or that of other advisers. You stick to your stated view, don’t see any other explanation as plausible and then accuse me of being patronising. I do agree the press were crap but there had to be some consequences for this and, had the doctor taken a different view, and SS been more inquisitive they could have prevented a death. Obviously there are professional consequences but I agree trial by the press is unsavoury and helps no one to improve.

many do not go on to abuse who were abused as children?

Some of these mothers have significant learning disabilities, undiagnosed autism. It isn't as straightforward as knowing what to do.

My girls used to be under a paediatrician (they are both adopted). She was interested in why some parents basically fall off a cliff when it comes to parenting. These are the ones with houses like tips, taking drugs in front of the kids, having sex in front of the kids, lending kids to paedophiles etc. She said poverty doesn't explain it - you can have a really disadvantaged estate, but most people will try their best and won't have their children removed even if it's not ideal.

She was convinced it was down to undiagnosed autism, adhd, learning disabilities, personality disorders. And nasty men identifying vulnerable women and moving in.