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/

so sorry to hear this, trippy

He surely cannot be allowed to remain in a position of power with this in the public domain. Surely?

trippy I am so sorry.

JH is a wanker.

He is a power hungry wanker.

He has an agenda which is all about ego and fuck all to do with helping families. He just 'picked' an issue and ran with it.

Now he has found another high profile issue so he can big himself up.

If I thought he really, properly cared about the families he spouts about, I would look at him differently.
I dont think he does.

If he DID his style of posting would be accessible. Its not. Its jargon dense and psuedo legal.
He never enters into debate. He never answers questions and he puts families at risk with his terrible 'advice'.

He should be ashamed. But he isnt.

I dont work for SS btw. I have adopted. But I am one of the families he reckons he works so hard to help. My adopted son is from within our family. I didnt see him helping whilst we fought to keep him in family. Kinship carers are not exciting enough for him. We are all part of the problem.

He would be better off putting all that time and energy into keeping children within their extended families and campaigning for better support.

Not headline grabbing enough for him though.

Thanks for sharing, Trippy. That was very honest of you, it takes a lot to admit to things that could cause feelings of guilt, such as admitting that you'd lost the bond with your baby.

I can see why the mentallity is dangerous, to have added fear of SS when you're already very vulnerable mentally.
I also went through losing my first child to SS, I feel that's because I made the mistake of trusting SS, rather than trying other forms of support.
You feel it was your trust in John Hemmings that caused the adoption.
Perhaps in both yours and my case the adoptions would have happened regardless.
Obviously you weren't in the right place mentally, I wish there were more support for young mothers in such situations.
Like some kind of sanctury where mothers can stay with help, with their new babies, that would be a dream.

The fact that your mental health has recovered and is not chronic I think shows that it was due to the circumstances, and it makes me feel very conflicted, that with appropriate support, you could have got through those hard times, WITH your child.
And I feel I could have too.

I've only just read the link in the OP.

I've always wondered why this has become his personal crusade and why he will never answer questions on MN threads about his own contact with SS.

Now I know.

Can I just ask Trippy, what was the judges reasoning for forcing the adoption through?
I could take a wild guess and assume it was 'possible future emotional distress, due to mother's depression'as the judge said in my case.
Yet here I am, like you, within the same decade, looking after another (2) children (in my case) with no current mental health problems.

Perhaps other mumsnetters can learn something, that babies aren't just taken from abusive people.
It's far more complex than that, and people who lose babies to SS are often vulnerable themselves, and could do with more help.

I agree with Mary.

Sorry for you also yukoncher.

I can feel a campaign coming on....

Maryz, you're a star, I'm so pleasantly surprised by how many adoptive parents are really understanding.

What a very interesting (and disturbing) thread this is.

Trippy and yukoncher I'm so sorry to hear of your awful experiences.

John Hemming wasn't known to me before I read the links on here, and some links from those links. I have, however heard about a few of the cases that he has championed (and was aware that there was an MP involved) especially Fran Lyon, for whom I felt intense sympathy and anger on her behalf. I know that media reporting can be very one sided, but I always felt so furious for these families whose babies or children seemed to be removed on the most spurious of reasons. I also know, however, that SS do a horrendously hard job, and that there are always two sides to every story.

I don't know the rights and wrongs of this, and I certainly don't know whether JH is a hero or a manipulative egotist. I do think, and have felt strongly for some time, that the family courts need to be much more transparent, as it seems grossly unfair to me that parents can be subject to such massive injustices, and not be able to tell anyone or publicise their plight. I'm not well informed about the pros and cons of this though, hence why this thread is so interesting to me - especially the experiences of those who work in SS.

BTW, for anyone else as interested in reading around this as I found myself to be; this was a balanced article giving the other side (as far as possible) of the Fran Lyon case.

www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2007/09/20/105839/Fran-Lyon-Case-The-hidden-agendas.htm

Well if courts were transparent, at least it wouldn't be assumed that people who lose their babies to SS 'must have been secretely beating said child in private', which is how attitudes can be.
Perhaps if these cases were more open and even the local community could be involved and know everything, people could come to the court hearing of the struggling parent could say 'wait a minute, I'll step up and help with this' or something, and we can all pull to do what they can.
Instead of it being so hush, and people say 'oh there must be something we don't know' and treat you with suspicion, if you lose your child.

Trippy. I am so sorry.

I am going to write to Nick Clegg and I will keep on writing until he responds.

Would it be helpful to send him a copy of this thread?

yukoncher - It would be great if the local community could be involved as a supportive force for good but I am afraid often in reality it is far from that and the reasons some of my clients are in such a mess is that they have no community support at all because they have alienated everyone around them.

Plus it is the children in such cases who say they want them to remain anonymous. I guess it can't be much fun at school if the local paper is full of stories about your parents dirty laundary.

I accept this wouldn't be the case with babies, maybe there could be some half way house where the parents could ask for greater publicity if the children concerned were too young to be affected?

I am all for as much transparency as possible, only if to stop people believing the awful crap spouted by JH and IJ et al and to stop what happened to Trippy happening to anyone else.

ILoveYouToo - brilliant link, thank you

I think that is the problem; there's no community alot of the time.
Grouping disadvantaged people, many with lots of social problems into one great heap, in city council estates, is a fantastic recipe for new mums to have no support around them, or respectable looking friends and family to take over when need be.

but he has been on here discussing his personal history with ss, as did the mother of his child. Think the thread was deleted though.

Trippy, the law has changed now so you can discuss matters with your partner or close family members - which is exactly as it should be, it was always a nonsense to say you couldn't talk to the very people who want to support you.

Please don't dread the day your child comes to find you. No one could read your story without feeling so sad for you. You were young and very vulnerable.

Trippy. I am concerned that 8 years ago Hemming was helping you as an MP, when he was only elected in 2005. A story like this is heartrending, but the dates don't work out.

I'm familar with Fran Lyon's story, and after reading ILoveYou's link, there's no new evidence, it still shows how she was treated was inhumane, and thank god she got away. I'm glad it was publicised, so that such zeolous behaviour from 'professionals' may be critisized openly and hopefully changed.

Hemming has been a Birmingham City Councillor since 1990 and has stood in various General Elections since 1983, so that might explain confusion over his status... but I agree, I am not sure that he had an agenda re social services until they wanted to intervene with his own child in 2005.

yulonkcher - I don't understand your post. If Fran Lyon doesn't think she was treated inhumanely why do you use her story as an example of inhumane treatment? Surely the only person who can reach that conclusion is Fran Lyon?