undercover police fathering children with women they're spying on is treachery beyond belief.

[alicethehorse]

Story here Undercover police had children with activists

"Two undercover police officers secretly fathered children with political campaigners they had been sent to spy on and later disappeared completely from the lives of their offspring ...

"In both cases, the children have grown up not knowing that their biological fathers ? whom they have not seen in decades ? were police officers who had adopted fake identities to infiltrate activist groups. Both men have concealed their true identities from the children's mothers for many years"

What a monumental abuse of trust

Yanbu, tis shit. As are many of the attitudes on this thread.

If I had posted on the relationships board saying my partner of a year and i had decided to have a baby, and since we had them I had discovered that he was in fact leading a secret life...married or whatever leaving me deceived and heartbroken there would be sympathy. This is what happened, with the added complication of the man in question doing it as part of a job, having known from the start he couldn't and wouldn't continue the relationship with me or our child and abusing all sorts of trusts. Being paid to lie his way into my life and take on my beliefs, using sex to do so.

Yet according to some women on here that isn't beyond the pale, and the women played an equal role despite thinking they were in a real relationship with a real person who felt the same about them? I'm horrified!

I'm having trouble believing that women on MN are resorting to calling other women 'skanks' to undermine the seriousness of what has been going on - nasty mysogynistic hate speech

I was also saddened by the complete lack of compassions from certain hairy truckers posters last night.

Lovely to "meet" some of the others though, some interesting points.

I had a horrible thought this morning, what if the mums involved come across this thread?

So, a message for them - if you are reading this, please be assured that any decent person can understand how shockingly you've been betrayed. I suspect the people posting vile comments on this thread were mainly doing it to wind the rest of us up, and really shouldn't be paid much attention to.

It's actually astonishing the lengths some people will go to and the knots they'll tie themselves in to justify or minimise men's abuse of women isn't it? Astonishing and very revealing.

Imagine if one of these women posted here with this story? Would she be called a skank to her face?

Agreed, QueenofFeckingEverything.

And honestly, setting aside the moral issues, how stupid would you have to be to think this is sensible? If anyone seriously thinks it's conducive to national security for surveillance police to compromise themselves by having children with people they're watching, they're deluded.

I doubt the fathering of children was done out of any need to keep their cover going, more like they couldn't be bothered to have the slightest courtesy and respect in any way, shape or form for the women they were being paid to lie to.

Exactly, which makes it even more disgusting.

I have read the whole of the Guardian article today.

The men involved broke their own departmental rules, were dishonest, irresponsible, and were doing all this whilst being paid to be police officers. The consequences of all this have been pretty bloody grim.

Someone senior - probably very senior - must have known that undercover police officers were shagging women they were spying on. As ever, it will be the scale of the cover-up that starts the heads rolling, rather than the original misconduct.

That there are children involved is bloody sad. I wonder if these men can ever make amends.

Personally I don't understand how anyone can read the article and still be of the belief that it is the women's fault as they shouldn't have 'opened their legs'. Appalling and amazing in equal measure.

I just can't imagine what the poor children will find out when they investigate their dads.. it's inevitable at some point, even if the mother tries to hid it, that the children will find out that their father lied to their mother and never loved her, that the father never wanted a child or the mother and that he shagged her for 'his job' and got her pregnant to get deeper into her trust.

HOW can a child get over that? it's awful. far far worse than being the child of a one night stand, or proper relationship that broke down.

If they were raised with the beliefs their mothers held it will be horrible for them. Well, more horrible. Cue nasty identity issues.

The people who thought the end of the article made it better? using Police resources to spy on his child (illegal as well I suppose) and feeling all sad. Except that means he has morals and knows right from wrong and did it anyway.

Do you not think the same thing goes on in espionage all over the world?

Do you disagree with the concept entirely or just think it shouldn't have been used in this instance?

This wasn't espionage. It was a Police investigation. In times of legal, not the Gulf war there may be a need to use methods that are more like this. Spies also know that they do not come under the normal, combatant rules and will be shot if caught. These were Police Officers investigating a crime. No one had been convicted and no one was at war. Completely different.

But animals rights activists have killed people in the past. Sometimes the police have to take a pro-active approach in order to save lives.

Exactly what kind of 'pro-active approach' involves entering long term relationships and fathering children?

And there are British men who have blown themselves and others up in the name of Islam. Would that justify having police officers feign conversion to Islam and father children with muslim women to give themselves a good cover story when trying to infiltrate extremists?

Some animal rights and environmental activists may be dangerous. The vast majority are people who use their (increasingly erroded) right to protest things that contradict their beliefs. If they have criminal convictions they tend to be for trespass or any of the other offences used by the police to remove peaceful protesters. If the women in question were in any way considered 'targets' of the investigations they wouldn't have been used in this way. They were used because they had credibility as protesters.

HungryHelga, You're looking a bit silly, now.

You are confusing extremely different circumstances, and trying to force a lousy end to justify a bullshit means.

How about this? "Hey hippy partner! I believe that the worst thing for the environment is having children. I will never be a father because I am so committed to the cause." Or, if it was all about the job, enter into a gay relationship. Thought not.

I certainly became suspicious that my partners were infiltrating my oganisation undercover when they insisted we use contraception.

Oh no wait, the other one.

Yes, that time when my then husband pondered about contraception, I immediately suspected him of espionage.