AIBU That Mumsnet won't allow any discussion on the Sally Roberts case?

[Zealey]

There's something about her that is media hungry - if she hasn't sold her story to a tabloid or glossy mag in the next week then I'll take it back. But more importantly, WHY is Mumsnet towers deleting any threads discussing the case?

Ignorant - what is the case?

I saw a thread deleted yesterday because it was more interested in slagging Sally Roberts off than actually discussing the case.

Pretty much the same as this one, and for that reason I will be reporting it.

Your question doesn't make sense.

Are You Being Unreasonable what?

Mum who's arguing that her son should not have radiotherapy for brain tumour, I believe, after having lost an argument against her son having a brain op for tumour regrowth.

Until today the court case was still ongoing, so maybe sub judice?

Also possible that the threads were libellous.

Redhelen - it is the case where the Mother doesn't want her son to have radiotherapy and is fighting his father and the hospital to try to stop treatment.

Is it a mistaken belief that the case is sub judice? Actually, the case was being determined by a judge with no jury and it may be safely assumed that a judge would not be influenced by tittle tattle in the press or even on MN meaning there is no legal reason not to discuss it (or so I understand the law).

Sally is the mum of that poor little boy, Neon, with the brain tumour. She did not want him to have radiotherapy but the medics did.....

I can't see the problem with the discussion of this case. It is a case that all Mothers would take an interest in I would have thought. And I just saw on the news that the court has given the go ahead for radiotherapy treatment.

Ah, if people were just being rude about that mother who was in a horrible place and surely doing what she thought best (even if others don't agree) then I understand why they were deleted.

do sod off now - Nazi is a horrible insult - abusing parents of dying children - also not nice

I apologise. My comment was for Sirzy, who apparently won't allow any debate he/she disagrees with.

Perhaps MNHQ would prefer not to host ill-informed and vindictive remarks about a mother who is facing something most of us cannot even begin to imagine?

Just a thought

But this sort of case is exactly the sort of thing a parenting website should be having a discussion about.

The other thread being deleted annoyed me too. If people think the O.P is wrong, they're perfectly entitled to tell her so (as many did on that thread) or hide the thread.

People were commenting on the Mail online site so not due to legal reasons. FWIW given that the drs & the boy's father are of one viewpoint I think she is being incredibly stubborn at the expense of her children in a similar vein to Jehovah's not allowing blood transfusions for their children. If alternative therapies worked, they would be a lot cheaper so everyone would choose them but the facts are scientifically they have not been proven. Her poor son though, all this fighting and a tumour to del with.

I love the fact the OP is doing the one thing it seems to be berating MNHQ for, allowing Sally Roberts to have a mind of her own and express her feelings.

I don't often go on Mumsnet, but I was just surprised that this case isn't being discussed as it goes to the heart of a mother's autonomy over her child, and the fact the estranged father and all the medical profession are in favour of the life-saving treatment. What could be more interesting to debate. But alas, I guess my thread will be deleted as it's too interesting.

Describing a mother who must be going through hell as media hungry is hardly about debate, it is simply looking to slag someone off.

I don't agree with her by the way BUT I have never been unfortunate enough to be in that situation so I certainly won't slag her off.

But imagine being in a situation where everyone disagrees with you but you are utterly convinced that your fears are grounded? It's her child's life and future on the line. She can't just say "oh well, I'll go along with it then"

I have no idea who is right, I'm not a medic. But the situation is horrific for all concerned. And I FULLY support MNHQ in deleting pig ignorant and malicious comments by people who ought to save it for watching jeremy kyle know better.

From what I gathered on the ITV1 news the judge seemed to be off the mind that she was pushing on with the case due to media obligations.

To me it seems that she is worrying about having radiotherapy in case it affects his brain function. But if he doesn't have it he might die. I can't get my head around the fact there is anything to choose between.

lmao at "my thread will be deleted as it is too interesting"

yeah innit though

Where do you get the idea from the father is estranged? The parents might have split up but it appears he is very much part of Neon and his twins sister's life.

Afternoon. Just to clarify, we have never at any point made it policy to delete any thread discussing the Sally Roberts case.

In fact, I'm not aware of us having deleted any thread about the Sally Roberts case (but I may not be completely up to date).

So we're a little puzzled by this OP.

I have some sympathy for Sally Roberts, it is a horrible thing to have to go through. But, had an op came on here and asked if they were be unreasonable to deny their child a life saving treatment against the advice of the medical profession, where the likelihood was that without it their child would certainly die without it, im pretty sure they would be (rightly) torn a new one.