Not an AIBU, more of a 'what do you think'

[chaosisawayoflife]

Wasn't sure where the best place to put this was, so stuck it in here as I have a feeling it may create a bit of a debate. I was reading on another forum(NM) about a woman who had created an anonymous post to seek advice about her violent relationship. She is pregnant. The forum administrators contacted her midwife about her situation, without informing her, and she is now being seen by SS.

What is your opinion on this? Should they have contacted her midwife? Should they have told her that they were going to do so? Do forum owners have a duty of care to their users or should they simply offer advice as to the avenues of rl support?

I think it depends on safety, especially when a child involved. If they had a real reason to believe the person in question was in serious danger then can understand why.

Can be very easy to track someone, years ago when I was preg I was on nm and someone with a history of mental health issues posted saying she was going to kill herself now, was 3am or something. She was a long standing poster and I "knew" her fromj the site, I ended up phoning her local police station (knew it from her area on profile) and gave link to thread, her name and how many kids and that she was under MH team. They managed to find her frm that, and police phoned me back to let me know. Week later lady emailed me to thank me.

Not read the whole thread, but it's all to do with Lord Lamings report that says " every child matters ".

There is a duty of care to protect children regardless of born or not. Each child has a right to 5 particular outcomes, 1 being to " stay safe ".

The site had every right and were correct in their decision to report the disclosure of domestic abuse. It would have been appropriate for them to tell her, but not necessary as the primmary concern is the unborn child.

It's part of my job, so if anyone wants to question that, bring it on.

I think its quite heartening, actually, that nm took this action.
Totally disagree that it's made her situation worse. The problem is the violence - at least now it's known.
She was clearly in a bad situation, there were real concerns for her safety and nm took what action they could. All good imo.
Seems a shame she is still with him after all that but at least - for the baby's sake - ss are aware of the reality, she's likely to have hidden the dv from them.

can't argue with that bb
I can totally agree with the idea that the safety of the child is the most important thing and overrules everything else

She moved back into her old home, but she said he no longer lives there.

From what I know unborn children dont have any legal rights so to place their rights over a woman's right to privacy is shaky legal ground.

Well then foreverastudent you have summed up your nickname. What you know is clearly not up to date.

Unborn babies have no legal rights in th uk.

Believe it is different in America?

Very difficult one.

I have been a victim of DV (ex-bf, not dh), and if this had happened to me I dont think it would have helped.

You have to be "ready" to leave and if its thrust upon you I think the risk is that you arent prepared and therefore there's more chance of you going back.

This really will put posters off asking for help/advice.

I havent read the thread in question but think it should have only been reported if there was immediate risk of harm to the children.

I wasn't talking about legal rights, I was talking about duty of care to an unborn child. I for one, couldn't live with myself if someone disclosed potential harm to a child ( born or unborn ) and i decided not to act on it.

My comments have nothing to do with the choices a victim of domestic abuse chooses to make for herself, but only to do with the child that is born or unborn.

It should have been reported, simple as.

It's very important that all posters realise that the duty of care was to the unborn child and in no way meant to undermine any decisions the mother may make.

I'm not talking about my own opinion. My role is that of senior safeguarding children practitioner for South Yorkshire.

I'm not being rude, I'm talking about safe practise and guidelines.

The whole thread is heartbreaking.

I'm glad NM's management deleted the original thread and pushed towards some kind of support for the OP.

SS are often portrayed as an enemy. I don't believe that this is always the case, I believe that their remit is to support those in need, and this poster appeared to be in a dire situation.

The internet is not so anonymous these days, you can shut yourself right down, but in times of trouble we reach out, and we reach to those most likely to help...it's a dilemma

Believe me, there are many many parents/carers out there who stay within the actual law in the way they decide to treat their children. Doesn't make it right though. I suggest you enlighten yourself with Lord Lamings report, educate yourself with the 5 outcomes of every child matters and then come spouting the " legal guidelines " at me.

'duty of care' is specific legal terminology which (according to my legal textbook of 2009) does not apply to unborn children.

So unless you know of any major changes in the law in the last year you are incorrect. It may be 'policy' but it is not 'law'.

So if it's ONLY policy and not law lets leave the poor unborn child to be punched to death eh. Domestic abuse increases dramatically during pregnancy, fact. That's probably not in your legal textbook of 2009, which i imagine means it's not happenining.

If it had been a man on the site ...seeking advice on his compulsion to fiddle with or abuse kids...would you complain if the site had repoorted him to police? Doubt it. To stay in a violent relationship when pregnant or as a parent already is not on and sometimes SS do need to intervene as the victim may have no confidence...so it was perfectly correct

The internet needs policing...and some people need to have things taken out of their hands becuse they're not doing anything to better their situation.

Unborn or not...that baby is more than likely going to be born...better that it is not born into a screwed up household...but to a supported Mother in a safe place.

My role at work is to care for children, everything else comes second. For that I am proud and everyone can spout whatever they like about law/policy and rights of mothers/parents. For me it's about the child, simple as.

She lives in Edinburgh. I know homelessness workers there, the temporary accommodation she would be likely put in wouldn't be what I'd call 'safe'.(Have you never seen trainspotting?)

FWIW I am well aware that a preganat women is more likely to be killed by her partner than die in childbirth. But putting unborn babies rights over mothers opens a whole kettle of fish I think 90+% of British women would be opposed to. There are horrid examples from the states of pregnant women actually being killed (legally) to 'save' their babies.

I just read it and it is ver, very sad. But I also feel angry that the woman went back to the house with him still in it! And that she is considering him being present at the birth....I mean she has had tons of advice and support...and she is still havinghim in her life? Why?

She probably think she can change him. Maybe he can change- there are organisations who 'rehabilitate' abusive men.

She did originally want a homebirth.