to think that John Hemming is a dangerous man?

[Spero]

For all the Hemming apologists - please read this.

www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/2011/04/27/hemming-an-abuse-of-privilege/

He was on here as john hemming.

Yes, then he was banned (maybe?) and came back as MC and ThatGuy or ThatGusSays or something like that.

I've missed all of this. How do we know it's the actual chap posting?

I too, think he's couragous. From knowing personally of a fair few cases involving SS. There needs to be more people speaking up about how damaging it is for babies to be wrongly taken on flimsy evidence.
SS should be striving to keep babies with parents, unless there's abuse.

"helped several women keep their babies" what you mean is that he helped women flea the country; assisted them financially; and then gloated about it on mumsnet. Because of course he was 100% certain that none of those babies were at risk, what with him being an mp and all-knowing and all.

If he had used his authority as an mp to liaise with ss in order to facilitate a positive outcome for those women I might agree that his actions were worthy of respect. But using under-handed tactics is a shocking abuse of power and we as the electorate would not tolerate it in any other circumstance, so why should we do so in these instances?

I have no respect for him. i don't care if he has "helped" some women, the means by which he has done so are an abuse of his position and for that alone he deserves nothing but contempt.

Maybe not the same person though, but a very similar posting style and normally on adoption threads implying that the women who post there (about their much loved adopted children) are complicit in those children being stolen from birth parents. Or something. It's quite odd.

yes, I've seen him there. very nasty.

Yes, wannabe, he helped several women escape from SS. There was one in particular whose unborn baby was going to be taken away because she had depression in the past.

You people must know that this kind of (mis)use of powers is extremely unusual in the western world.

I'm sure social workers have the will to help peolle 100% of the time.

However, last year, m a pegnant woman who was due to give birth, she had learning difficulties (still entirely functional looking after herself, mind. The SS said they're not sure she'll cope, so they'll help.
She was booked into a mother and baby unit, which is great, right? Except there wasn't any space in the mother and baby unit until 4 days after her due date, and if she gave birth before then, the baby would be taken from the hospital and put straight into fostercare until the mother and baby vacancy came up. So she was willing herself to death not to give birth to that baby until then.
A woman with no history of child neglect or abuse, quite possibly having her baby taken at birth 'just incase' because they didn't have the space they needed to meet mother and child's needs.

That is horrendous in my opinion, and if I was more involved I would have quite happily 'hidden her' until the mother and baby unit vacancy came up. Don't they have any idea about the detrimental effects of taking the baby at birth? That's 'safegaurding' gone mad. Safegaurding to the point of causing damage to mother and child.

and whose money do you think paid for that? Given he is paid by the taxpayer.

If you believe in something then stand up for what you believe in by all means. But as a public figure, to essentially help a woman flea from social services is an abuse of power.

Who knew whether that baby was at risk or not. Just because someone comes on to mn and goes on this morning and the like and says her baby isn't at risk and social services are pursuing her wrongly doesn't mean that she's right and is being unfairly treated.

We assume that these women he's helped flea the country never harmed their babies but how can we be sure? How can you know he didn't get it wrong? Once they flea the country we never hear from them again and there's no chance he'd come back and admit that he'd got it wrong is there?

Because it's far too easy to report when ss screw up and take a baby wrongly, like the baby that was removed "unlawfully" a few years ago and judge ordered it be returned among cries of "the evil system screwed up" only for that same baby to be taken into care some weeks later because the mother threw it against a wall, yet we didn't get the front page spread of how ss had been right all along did we?

Did she already have children?
If not, then the whole no-history-of-child-neglect is a bit spurious no?

I would rather a million babies were taken "just in case" than have to hear about just one who should have been taken but because of people like JH, wasn't.

When I say I have had no connection with SS, it's not entirely true, though it's a step removed. My half sister abandoned her 3 children (youngest 18mths) to run off with her 19 yr old boyfriend. She left them in the house on their own for 5 days. She had no history of child neglect either. Her 4th child, born earlier this year, was removed from her at 3 days. And I'm glad. Because that child will hopefully be adopted, and grow up with decent parents unlike the one that gave birth to him. Her other 3 children, especially the older girl, unfortunately are going to remember what a waste of space their mother was. This little one, in never knowing her, has more of a chance of growing up without baggage.

The thing is, each SS case where children are removed is different. I'm not doubting for a second that mistakes are sometimes made. But people like JH help only themselves and dress it up as concern for vulnerable women. SS are damned if they do and damned if they don't. That's the nature of the thing unfortunately.

wannaBe, do you have any kids?
Shall we take them, just incase? because we can't really be sure you're not abusive, you did have depression as a teenager after all, and you have a low IQ (for arguments sake).
I think we should just take your kids into care, because we're not 100% that you're good enough.

bucharest, would you like to be a volunteer, for one of these million babies you think should be taken 'just in case'. Are you gonna offer your child up?
Or if you were innocent and someone with power wanted to help you, would you take it?

It's not going to happen to me. Because I am good enough. And then some. (or the SS wouldn't have been asking me if I wanted to adopt my 3 half-nieces and nephews, would they?)

I find Gideon far more dangerous.

But, if there were any doubt that I wasn't good enough, then because the welfare of my child is more important than my own ends, then yes, I would let her go. Because she is more important than my desire to have her with me is.

bucharest sorry about that awful situation, you speak of.

Being damned if you do, damned if you don't is part of being a social worker, I'm afraid. When you're given godly powers, but are just a mere human being, things are gonna go wrong.

maryz and given he himself had a secret love child with a long term mistress hardly makes him a paragon of morality does it?

yukoncher if you think that every woman who has suffered depression as a teen has their children automatically removed or are even referred to ss you are very wrong. The problem is that due to the laws ss are not allowed to report the full facts and so it is much easier for someone to come out and say that they are the victims because ss cannot offer a defence.

I have a friend who has had severe depression. She was sectioned on a number of occasions as a teen, yet ss were never even informed when she had a baby.

Ss do not wade in and just take peoples' kids on a wim, whatever the daily mail would have you believe.

YANU! He is indeed a pubicity / fame hungry twatbag! (I dont work for SS nor am I a fan of super injunctions)

I have no wish to feed any of those with differing opinions so I shall leave it as this - he is a twat!

well the situation was rediculouis and it was going to be moved on by one mean or another,

How do we know it's the actual John Hemming though? It could be any old random nut job using that name. Has is been confirmed?

Wannabe - JH is independently wealthy and my understanding is that he has on numerous occasions personally financed the legal help to parents fighting to keep their babies.

The woman I was referring to is Fran Lyon. Google her name and you will see that she now lives in Sweden with her daughter, whom she clearly was not a danger to.

It is an outrage that Fran Lyon and others like her have had to leave their own countries to keep their babies. You should direct your anger to where it belongs and away from the person who has helped them escape this indefensible persecution.

It's flee not flea!

Sorry but that's the thing that's upsetting me most.

It definitely was him posting. I emailed his MP's office once and told him that some windbag idiot was impersonating him on Mumsnet. I received a reply from him telling me that it was indeed him