Family missing with newborn....

[ChocChocYum]

www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/23233264.bolton-m61-appeal-help-finding-missing-family-newborn-baby/

Where are they? How can they go missing? Hope they are ok

I think being from a well off background and being accomplished is relevant, because it means they can afford to go on the run and are educated/ intelligent enough to try to plan and make it happen. If you are poor, can't read timetables, speak no other language, aren't used to sucessfully dealing with professionals, limited literacy or are rubbish at filling out forms and so on, you won't get far. I'm suprised more families don't "go on the run" when faced with their child being removed but if you lack the resources it isn't an option.

Judges do get reprimanded for going against SW reports/recommendations, they’re under a lot of pressure too and often have to go against what they feel is the right decision. New reports and a change of social worker can be ordered however, so there are options if the judge feels strongly enough and can explain why. There’s a lot of empathy/veiled apologies towards parents in courtrooms but hands are tied.

Yes I'd say due to her professional background she's certainly far more likely to be successful in disappearing than someone less educated who has disappeared in a panic with little to no funds (which is more normal). I guess it's not known if she is currently wealthy or has access to money though as her professional profile I can see all appears to be 10 years old. Her brothers (who is heir to the family fortune) wedding was featured in vogue and she was not pictured as being there so maybe not have access to family money

If anything I don't think babies are removed easily enough.

As someone who works with vulnerable children I have to agree.
I would say at least 50% of them should have been removed for serious neglect or SA.
Sometimes they are removed but then rightly or wrongly they go back with their parents.

We only have a small percentage who are in care permanently and I wonder what their parents did that was worse than what some of the other parents did.

This woman would have had to have done something pretty serious/neglectful if they thought the baby would be in immediate harm.
I don’t think the father’s issues would have this outcome and they would just have SS intervention until there was proof of a risk.

It sounds like she either gave birth in hospital and then ran or they knew that she was about to give birth and realised she’d done a runner.
This happens pretty frequently and women out of desperation will try and run away but that ends up just making it worse.

I do wonder if they have other children why they don’t try and get these back first (assuming they’ve been removed) to prove they are good parents.

Saw this a couple of days ago, a sad story, especially for the baby.

Just googled Napier Marten - what a bizarre situation?

I really hope the baby is OK.

Social workers can't just go to court to remove a child off their own bat. They will have needed to have sought agreement at a senior management level first and had legal advice. Most usually this will be done by the social worker and their manager presenting the case to a panel of people, often called Legal Gateway Mettings including legal and more senior management for discussion and all relevant assessments and paperwork being submitted beforehand for everyone to read.

In most cases the local authority would look to run Pre Proceedings first (used to be called PLO). This is where parents are advised to get legal representation and regular meetings are held with them and their legal rep to look at the concerns and review progress. Often there will have been a period on child protection prior. If Pre Proceedings don't work court is he last resort.

There are occasions where work can't be done before court, such as where the police have arrested parents and removed children or a single parent has been sectioned and there's no alternative but foster care. Or the pregnancy was concealed so no time ho work with the family. But on the whole there's a long journey before a case is presented to court.

Once it does get to court, parents have legal representation and a cafcass guardian is allocated to the child, who also has legal representation.

It's not just a lone social worker takes it into their head to pitch up at court asking to remove a child and the judge agreeing.

No you’re correct but factual errors aren’t rectified quick enough leading to proceedings being based on things that are either untrue or fabricated . That responsibility does lie with the sw

Or, understand that stuff you write on an open Facebook page is no different really to writing it on a public notice board.

Very bizarre. I just had a google of the Websleuths site someone up thread suggested but doesn't appear to be working

I don’t think the father’s issues would have this outcome and they would just have SS intervention until there was proof of a risk.

Babies and children are absolutely removed due to issues only with the father/ a partner of the mother in some circumstances

There is no privacy once your name is on the www

Quite. You can be the most loving parent, but if you e.g. insist to continue to live together with your domestic abuser, social services can remove the children.

Just googled Napier Marten - what a bizarre situation?

@Volkswagenitalia

Where have you read this and what was it about as I can’t see anything?

Babies and children are absolutely removed due to issues only with the father/ a partner of the mother in some circumstances

Yes I’ve had this happen in my family with SS telling my brother he has full custody because of his ex’s partner but that was temporary and once she proved that he was no longer in her life then they went back to sharing custody.

I’ve never heard of this happening with an unborn baby though.

My sister use to work on a contact centre (for parents who had had their children removed) and she said basically every woman that visited had their children removed because the father was violent and the woman had chosen to stay with the man so kids were removed. One woman was spotted out with the father after telling ss she had broken up with him so children were removed.

I’ve known families through my work where older children were taken into care due to neglect and abuse and the mother had further babies that she kept.

I know two families right now where the male in the household is abusive, police have been involved, and the children are still there. Even when the child has come to school with obvious injuries caused by the man and the police have been informed, they are still in that household.

I know one parent who has been frequently making up illnesses, including claiming her child had cancer, and lying to doctors. No one will take the concerns seriously.

Social workers can't just go to court to remove a child off their own bat. They will have needed to have sought agreement at a senior management level first and had legal advice.

And sometimes they make serious blunders off the back of contrived evidence. I don't know why they're upheld as the voice of reason when we know they're under immense pressure and often do things that reflect that. SW can go against the children's guardians and suggest things that are completely inappropriate.

Just in the interest of balance. There are plenty of documentaries in the public domain and the opinions of barristers.

@PriamFarrl

"Or, understand that stuff you write on an open Facebook page is no different really to writing it on a public notice board*"
*
It was more to do with the fact that a poster has done a search for the mothers social media and has become judge she jury because of a page the mother liked!

None of us know the full story and I doubt any of us ever will.

All of these preconceptions and assumptions are irrelevant to the fact that there is a family missing and the police are appealing for help in finding them. That is all!

A lot of people who have this blind faith (if a child is under SS watch, there must be good reason/no children are ever wrongly removed)...

Have never worked in family law or been involved personally with their family.

Sometimes they get it right. Sometimes times they also make the wrong decision, and they are overruled by a judge (and vice Verda, of course).

I do think sometimes SS aren't supportive. I'm on the other side of this as a HCP. I saw parents being given complicated documents which they don't understand with not much time to digest the information. Easy things like turning the documentation into easy read wasn't done. Complex terms were spoken about then the parent was accused of not engaging , how can someone engage if they don't understand what's being asked of them?

I get its probably cheaper for the LA to take babies into kinship care / foster care/adoption Vs providing the necessary interventions.

I believe that sadly the wrong decisions are sometimes made and that not all parents find the process accessible which means it doesn't work fairly, but I also don't agree with the extreme views often stated on social media that they swoop in and immediately take children for absolutely no reason.

Literally just google the name.

Literally just google the name.

@knittingaddict

I have but it comes up with lots of stories about someone with the same name and not the actual man in question.

I confused myself - I was searching Napier Marten thinking that was the baby’s dad but it’s not.