Constance Marten & Mark Gordon - Baby A case

[SportMum1982]

What have I just read? What the actual fuck is wrong with the world. That poor baby. These utter idiots. Sorry I’m so so angry.

Constance Marten and partner ‘killed baby to keep her out of care’

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/24e56090-f175-4bf8-ac07-380621d9954f?shareToken=186074e86c05c4df704ef1889186acdc

A video from cctv?

Presumably; they were in a McDonald's or similar.

Constance is presenting a very sympathetic picture of herself, I can see why she is the one testifying and MG. I think he was probably rightly advised to just let her testify.

I never knew that a pregnant woman isn't compelled to register her pregnancy with her GP or midwife.

There is a grey area with pregnant women. Until the baby is born they aren't a legal person. The mother can refuse any and all interventions she chooses, and cannot be compelled to have pregnancy related medical care (unless perhaps she was sectioned, but she would have to be a risk to herself or others, not including the baby)
Social care can get involved pre birth and can gather info on the parents under section 47 even though the child isn't born - but they can't do anything legally until after the birth.
Concealed pregnancy is a red flag and will lead to a social care assessment. the alternative to this would be to give unborn babies legal personhood which is a route we really don't want to go down.

I never thought I'd find myself on the same side as Constance Marten on anything, but... Really? How would that work, as a law? It's only last century that women even got to see doctors and midwives and give birth in hospital. And believe me, I was very happy to see all the doctors and midwives and insides of hospitals that I could! But surely if I had preferred to go it alone and take those risks, how could I be compelled otherwise? I'm as compliant as they come and even I think that sounds like massive overstepping. Imagine a world where women are punished by law for not registering their pregnancy.

Social services will get involved if you don’t

With a middle-class mother living a normal life, no prior issues, just some (hypothetical) hippyish ideas?

I can totally see why most people concealing a pregnancy have issues and will require social services intervention for one reason or another. So it's a red flag, yes, but surely only if you're on the radar? I can't imagine anyone I know reporting me to social services (not that I would forego antenatal care anyway, but if I did, I can imagine reactions from those I know might range from a raised eyebrow to an awkward concerned chat).

I meant if/ when you go to the hospital yes they will inform social services if you haven’t seen a MW throughout your pregnancy as it’s a concern and no not just if you are on their radar. Not random people you know reporting you.

If you don't what? Tell the GP of your pregnancy?

Marten had got care from the NHS initially during her second pregnancy but ended up going private, including a private midwife for a home birth which was classed as a normal birth - this was when Marten lived in a flat in Ilford.

Her family seem toxic as well.

Marten also acknowledged that scans are necessary during the pregnancy and my question is did she do that with Victoria?

Not really sure about what care she did or didn’t have I thought she had none at all with Victoria? Not speaking on the other children, Maybe I’m wrong but this last pregnancy was totally hidden? Either way yes if you don’t have any antenatal care or see a midwife in your pregnant then yes you will be referred to social services.

I'm following the live trial updates as Constance Marten is being cross examined by the prosecution. I don't think she's doing herself any favours and I would be fascinated to know how the jury are reacting.

'Joel Smith, prosecuting, has asked Marten if she stands by her statement that she gave Victoria the best care and showed her "nothing but love".
"Yes," said Constance.
Mr Smith asks if it is "fair" to say that taking a new born child into a tent in cold temperatures was a "very bad decision".
"We're looking at it at a very western perspective," said Constance.
"A lot of children grow up in tents."
She said she was pushed into the decision and would have preferred a house instead of a tent.'

I agree. Not doing herself any favours at all.

It seems that her family wanted to adopt the 4 children that has come out this week it sounds as if they wanted them to be within the family what a mess.

I questioned before if the family had been complicit in their cross country escapade by not stopping the tens of thousands of pounds she was getting while on the run. The consensus was the family could not prevent the trust paying out, but today we learn the family did exactly that and rescinded on allowing the trust to buy her a property when she refused to live in London. So it appears they could have paused the trust fund if they wanted to? I still think they enabled them by not stopping the payments while she was on the run.

She said the complete opposite actually. The family refused to take the children in.

Wasn't it the case that she ran and then they stopped the trust fund when they realised there was an issue?

She got around £50K in the months before they went on the run made up of a monthly allowance of between £2500 and 3500 and then several large "one off" payments that on the surface seemed reasonable, for the car and a computer etc, but became concerning once they went missing.

There was a statement early in the trial that the lawyers who administered the trust fund became concerned when unable to contact her.

They didn't take any money out after they went on the run, until the day they were arrested. The lack of money is kind of a key point in this whole situation.

CM’s talking about the baby with extravagant declarations of love so many defendants in this position do.

Every empty cliche on the standard list used except ‘she’s my world’ which she’s poss saving for a chat show. Cos she might well think she’ll be on one.

Thing is, CM does or did love Victoria. Just not enough to do anything to keep her alive. In that, she’s not as unusual as she appears.

The case is such an insight into what SS deal with every day. And for the rest of us, the big Why?

You know what, had they had that baby in a snowsuit, hat gloves and other necessary clothing then the case could be made that she was warm and safe. Many nordic countries leave their babies outside in the cold while they go I to cafes for a coffee. The children are well insulated and just sleep.

But I have never seen any evidence of proper insulating clothing for this newborn. It may be a western perspective but many more newborns pass if the basic western standard of shelter is not met in other less fortunate countries.

I sympathise with some of Constances struggle but there comes a point when your stuffing your clothing that you must know your baby would be better off elsewhere.

Also, the reason she died (if she died as described) is because of dangerous co-sleeping brought about by CM being dangerously sleep deprived and under nourished, and falling asleep accidentally because of these reasons and smothering her. If they were living in a tent in Siberia and prepared for that life and living safely that's one thing. They were not.

She seems confused. They didn’t have passports so the planned to give the baby to a caregiver who would look after the baby and then take it to them abroad?

She’s very inconsistent. One minute it’s the tent ‘travelling is my passion’, the next it’s a flat in Ilford that didn’t happen and then the car ‘until it blew up’.

Inconsistent yes, not mentally ill. It’s interesting that she and MG were able to prioritise their own warmth and nutrition (to the point she repeated he was starving).

It seems there were lots of cars, she made it sound like a conspiracy that her family were making them breakdown.

She has alluded to abuse within her wider family too.