Mum kept baby hidden in drawer for nearly 3 years !!

[benjaminjamesandgraham]

Even Christmas day she was kept in a drawer - oh how can someone be so cruel
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gz1dv8ly2o

Yes because the USA has no child neglect or abuse cases at all. What a bizarre comment.

Tbf, you don't have to read it 🙄

Do men who abuse and neglect their children also need to be in hospital and not prison?

Yes I have, and I've had days where I've been a crappy mum, but are people so wilfully thick that they can't see the difference between being an imperfect parent due to abuse and MH issues, and keeping a baby in a drawer for three years? Even at my lowest when I couldn't even speak I wouldn't have been capable of doing that. And she clearly WASN'T in that state anyway given she was going to work and caring for her other children.

I think its some sort of disassociation. On a major scale.

Eh? Birth mothers are venerated in the US? They don’t even have paid maternity leave across all states. How have you reached that conclusion.

She couldn't crawl or smile at 3. I don't think it's unfair to assume she spent most of her 'life' in the drawer and wasn't really spending much time doing things like tummy time and interacting with her mother. It doesn't sound like she never even saw a smile or had a word spoken to her. Babies often smile when a matter of weeks old.

I feel angry about so much but the fact this little girl was prevented - by her mother of all people - from life-changing surgery for her cleft really gets to me. As do many other parts of course so please don't think I'm downplaying the rest! But we live in a country where the surgery in this field is miraculous. Yes, this is obviously a complex case but she was capable enough to hold down a job, get a new partner, look after other children... There was no mention of social services involvement with them. Why didn't she just leave the baby in the drawer and blankets somewhere she could be quickly found when a day old, before being adopted to a loving and deserving family and going on to make a life for herself?! Still very sad but so, so much kinder. Instead, she tortured her and these three years will have resounding and numerous effects for the rest of her life.

I wonder if the sentencing remarks will be available to the public.

I doubt it. Unless I've missed it most remarks of the case have been kept secret. What did the defence say to explain this prolonged torture and abuse?

I can understand anonymity for the sake of her other children but can't think why the rest is shrouded in mystery. Just don't release an outline of the case at all if we only get a horrific half a story.

To announce that a woman has kept a child in a drawer for 3 years without any kind of explanation is questionable to say the least.

As Pp have said, there was no mitigating plea that the woman was mentally ill , so I think we can safely assume that her defence team would have thought of that before you.

It may be correct that the woman is just monstrous and cruel and hid her baby with a hare lip as though she were an animal. Or the woman had a primitive belief that the child was cursed. Or, the woman is a child abuser, who picked out this one of her children as a scapegoat to abuse for fun because she enjoys the feeling of power or she has a right to do so because she thinks her daughter is evil and deformed.
Not withstanding that she fed her milk and cereal with a syringe to keep her alive, this could have been the better to prolong the abuse.

But I do not agree that anyone can assume the defence team or the judge would have known that there can in rare circumstances be certain mental effects of giving birth, specifically after denied/concealed pregnancies, that are associated with infanticide (which the woman’s actions in this case possibly echoes in its apparent dissociativeness).

Courts have already shown they do not know anything about this. Infanticide as a discrete charge is somewhat known more widely, but not the links it has to concealed/denied pregnancies. You have to have seen the research to know about it.
As this consideration has apparently not been mentioned it could well be it was not considered.

If this were the by any chance the case, prison per se will do nothing to help, and if this woman were to have another baby when she gets out of prison after the seven years, that baby might be in danger. Alternatively, she could be held and treated in a psychiatric hospital.

Courts do not always have awareness of factors involved in a case. Often for example it is well known they frequently have no idea about what constitutes the behaviours of a rape victim.

This can’t be serious? She’s had all her kids removed, you can’t possibly think if she had another baby it wouldn’t be removed immediately on birth? The baby wouldn’t be in danger unless the mother did a runner and they couldn’t find her, the woman will never be allowed to be near children again.

There was an article in the guardian that had a bit more about the sentencing.

“The motive behind the mother’s behaviour is still not clear, but that is not the role of the Crown Prosecution Service.

(From the Crown Prosecution Service’s officer Rachel Worthington’s statement.)

I'm interested to understand (from a sentencing perspective) where is the line between child abuse and torture.

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protects people from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, or punishment.

There is an absolute dearth of research, I found one recent research article from USA talking about how the states differ on definitions. In the article in the torture cases reviewed it was noted it is incredibly rare I.e. less than 1%-2% of abuse cases. Also that in 57% of cases the perpetrator of torture is the mother.

I wonder if the European Court of Human Rights has ever reviewed a case like this.

Absolutely shocking read. That poor child. It really is heartbreaking. And the child's siblings aswell, age depending they must be so confused why they can't be with their mommy.
It would've been kinder to wrap her up and leave her in a shop door or something to be found.

Thank you for saying this. That poor poor little girl could not speak, could not stand, was not toilet trained, had nappy rash, did not know her name, was not given nourishing food so her physical development would be profoundly affected at a crucial age. had no stimulation, no social interaction, was not cuddled, never went outside, did not know she had siblings.The effect on her emotional and psychological heath will be profound I could go on but it makes me want to sob and rage.

This isn't a sentencing question. It is about the charges the defendant can face.

In UK law, the crime of torture can only be committed by a public official, someone acting in an official capacity, or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or someone acting in an official capacity. The mother in this case cannot be convicted of torture.

The European Court can only get involved if the state violates your protection against torture. So if the police torture you, for example, that would be a violation that could go to the ECHR if the courts failed to deal with it. But they cannot get involved in a criminal case like this. They have never reviewed a case like this and, unless there is a fundamental change in the Convention, they never will.

Given that the mother pleaded guilty, I doubt the defence would have attempted to explain what happened. They would simply have highlighted any mitigating factors that could reduce the sentence such as the lack of previous relevant convictions and her co-operation with the investigation. There may have been other mitigating factors advanced, but we don't know.

I'm not sure what explanation you want but, given the requirement for anonymity to protect the children, there is very little that could be said without risking her identity becoming public knowledge. Even telling us what the defence argued in mitigation may be enough to identify her.

'I'm not sure what explanation you want '

I'd like to know her reasons/excuses. Was she aware she was torturing and abusing a child, was she disconnected, what? Yes she pleaded guilty but other than there being a pandemic <as if that is relevant> still don't know why she did it.

I have no words for the 'mother,' but that poor baby, I can't begin to imagine the hell she was put through.

Probably. My thought was “why run to a bunch of other mums and upset them all with this?”

Hey ho.

She didn't want the bay and claims the man who fathered the child was abusive to her. She could have disguised herself and left the infant in a hospital or a church.

Instead she chose to be deliberately cruel and make the child suffer intentionally.

She had other children who were cared foe so she absolutely knew right from wrong and what she was doing.

The punishment is nowhere near severe enough and she'll be back out in a few years.

It's heartening that despite the awful start, the child is doing well in the care of her foster family.

I absolutely believe that the perpetrator of such a wicked crime should be publicly named.

Ah I see thank you for clarifying.

She says the baby was gathered by a man who she claims was abusive to her and she didn't want him to know about the baby and use the child as a means to be in her life.

I don't believe that. I think she hated the man for whatever reason and deliberately inflicted cruelty on the baby.

Indeed Lifeomars. I keep thinking about nappy changes and the amount of time between each. Unbearably horrific