AIBU to feel betrayed after protecting my son’s secret for years?

Studies show that’s generally the case but not all kids who remain with their birth family do better than kids adopted by others. The poster is pointing out that there are signs that this family may be one of the cases where that would not be the case.

(I’m not necessarily agreeing with that poster, I don’t know enough to hazard an opinion either way. I’m just pointing out that studies don’t support the idea that kids always do better with their birth families.)

That’s not true, kinship carers do not have parental rights, if the parents are doing well and have kept to conditions they can have children back on their care. I worked with grandparents who were kinship carers and they had wanted the child to go to the nearest school to them and the mum refused, also refused for the child to have a haircut, parents still retain parental responsibility unless there is a court order otherwise

Studies have shown that children do way better if they remain with birth family

They don't just hand out kinship care then retract it especially not in the time frame you've stated.
I reckon you fostered your grandson or looked after him in what's considered a private arrangement whilst he was transitioned back to being with his parents. If you had been a signed off kinship carer then you would have legal parental responsibility for the child, and it would be very hard for them to cut you out. The courts wouldn't terminate your PR unless you had done something very wrong.
The police not no further action with your son so that's not your business. This isn't about that.
However believing his bullshit and covering for him might be how you all got your selves so far up shit creek.

And healthy babies are adopted like a shot. It's the kids with issues that float round the care system for years

I was being honest. As an adopter of multiple children, there are many cases where a child is genuinely not better off remaining within its birth family. This child's parents tried their hardest to give the child up for adoption. Maybe that was the right answer.

Given the OP is now herself raising questions about her son's suitability to raise children it strikes me as something she should have thought about earlier.

Yeah – if he didn’t know she was underage and police took no further action, it sounds like the picture was of a teenage girl within a couple years of his age. Not a young child who, physically, was clearly a child.

That really tough OP. I don’t have practical advice but really hope that things work out. The poor child needs you in his life.

There is so much I don't understand

However if you feel , truly feel, that your son , as a paedophile, should not be caring for a child, you must report this to SS

BUT.....think carefully about your motives

Informed consent I suppose? A 16 year old having sex with someone of a similar age within the confines of a consensual relationship is going to potentially cause less damage than an image being shared all over the internet until the end of time.

In any case, I’m not going to argue about the legalities and the correct terms and the maybes and the It could have beens any longer because it’s not what the OP is asking about and it’s derailing the thread massively.

Does your son’s girlfriend know he’s a nonce? Sorry, I’d be doing everything in my power to keep an innocent baby away from him, but I also question your motives and your judgement.

I merely find it strange that it's legal to have sex with a 16 year old but not have and indecent photo of a 17 year old

🤦‍♀️ I fucking know that there is a difference in the official terms used! I never suggested otherwise. But the fact remains that the general parlance for people who are making and sharing indecent images of children is paedophile, whether you like it or not. You were asking another poster why she was referring to him as a paedophile and there’s your answer.

And that’s lovely that you don’t think it’s a derogatory term. I didn’t realise you were the official spokesperson.

Just to reassure you as it is clearly causing you more anxiety, police do arrest people on having or sharing one image. Every day. I work closely with a police team who do exactly this. Part of the data that they can obtain before even arrest is knowing the type of device the image was sent to or from. The internet always leaves a footprint.
Arrest does not mean guilt, it means reasonable suspicion for an investigation. The reason the police make these arrests is to then access the persons devices to see if this is a person has a a sexual interest in children, or, as is very often, a person has possession of a single image or a very few images that were obtained not intentionally meaning to obtain child images. For example, a download of loads of legal adult porn contains an image of an underage child, the intention wasn’t to obtain the image of the child when downloading the folder of adult porn.
in these cases, although illegal to have the image, they don’t meet the public interest threshold to prosecute.

it sounds like you have a million other things to stress you out and be upset about, but if the police case was NFA after they examined his devices , they didn’t find anything to indicate he has a sexual interest in children of any age .

People can change and hopefully, for the sake of the child, the mother, OP's son and maternal GP's are providing love and care.
OP sounds utterly spiteful to want to - what, get the child taken away?

There is a difference between a minor and a pre pubescent child where CSA is concerned. The levels of abuse are categorised and like it or not, the term paedophilia is only appropriate to the latter. No-one here knows the content of the image, so it’s not a term people should be using.

The fact is that DS could easily have been viewing a teenager who is misrepresenting their age. He was 18 at the time, so it’s absolutely not beyond the bounds of possibility - and the police took no further action, so it’s quite likely. Unfortunately that doesn’t work for MN - better to lose your mind and shout ‘paedophile’ than engage in reasoned debate.

I’ve worked alongside social workers and police in my professional capacity and I’ve heard the term ‘eight is too late’ before. It’s not a derogatory term as you seem to think - it’s actually very salutory to think that there are those out there whose interest is very young children, and this term sums it up in a nutshell. No one is justifying these actions or belittling them.

I haven’t jumped to any conclusions that you haven’t also jumped to, but just the other end of the scale, so how about you carry on thinking what you think about me, and I’ll carry on thinking what I think about you, and we don’t engage with each other again?

Are you sure it was NFA’d? These types of offences tend not to hold a custodial sentence. More of a community order and sex offenders registry. Most courts try and keep it out of the paper. Unless you’ve seen the paperwork?

OP’s opening gambit drips with unspoken blackmail. A woman scorned etc.

My friend has been doing this dance for seven years with her grandchild. The mother didn't want the baby because she had a toddler it was too much. Later she wanted grandchild back. Again couldn't cope so father and child moved in with granny part time. Fast forward to now mother had a third baby couldn't cope, so grandchild came full time to father and granny.

Now and again the mother has the child back and it's not great. Seven year olds crave stability. To go to school every day. To have clean clothes, a proper bed to sleep in, enough food to eat at regular intervals.

What can a grandparent do. Nothing I'm told just hope you can see them again.

No I think you’re just showing how clueless you are

Yes they do is someone reports you

But he’s already KNOWN to Social Services. Or did you miss all the stuff about Social Services assessing all concerned and having case conferences and background checks and observed sessions… and coming to the conclusion that he & partner are able to provide an appropriate upbringing?

You don’t surely think that kinship carer situations don’t involve social workers / social services? 🤦🏼‍♀️

You want to completely derail the thread by getting pedantic about the difference between a minor and a pre pubescent child? You think that that’s the major point that needs to be made right now? The OP doesn’t know the age of the child, so whether it’s paedophilia, hebephilia or ephebophilia, you know no more than anyone else. The point is, it was a fucking child and the image was serious enough that the police came knocking on his door.

And what a lovely turn of phrase. I’m sure all the MNetters who have experienced CSA will be feeling great knowing that people like you and your colleagues were using phrases like that. What the fuck is wrong with you? I can only hope it’s vicarious trauma and a coping mechanism.

I don’t think you realise how common this is, many slightly underage girls are online in a sexually suggestive image which is shared by 18 plus males who are either mistaken, stupid or have a learning disability, as well as the ones who are attracted to young girls which is disgusting. The fact the police took nfa suggests it wasn’t serious. I work with cases like this and if it was a child a lot younger or he had been communicating etc he definitely would have been charged