To think this mother should not have been arrested?

[KeinBock]

Apologies if this has been posted before, but this story is just so heartbreaking. The baby is seemingly being adopted against her mother's wishes. Surely any mother would kidnap their own child to prevent this from happening?

@NickNacki

Emotional abuse is not a crime but together with other abuses it is part of the DV range.
I can tell you for sure because in my statement emotional and psychological abuse were part of the report and I was asked to give evidence for that.

I think the problem is that emotional abuse isn't a crime in the sense that there isn't a specific part of a specific statute that says 'emotional abuse is a crime' - for example the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 deals with assault, Theft Act with stealing etc, etc.

So, as far as I know, there is no way of charging someone with the crime of emotional abuse - but knowing about the circumstances and the degree of emotional abuse could be very relevant when it comes to sentencing someone for a charged offence or considering whether or not to issue someone with a warning about harassment for eg.

I think that is right? But would be grateful for any correction/clarification.

Errr yeah Anywhere, that's what I said. And all statements that I take always include emotional impact on the witnesses. It's important for submission of the case but it's not obviously the offence. Speedo has it bang on in the above reply (as always!)

Spero, not speedo!!

@NickNacky

Might I add that all abuse is criminal but not criminally prosecuted.
And as someone else said in one post, the conviction rate for abuse and rape is not that much anyway in UK, 6-7%. Think of how many abusers, rapists and child molesters are let free.

Very often the abuser/rapist/paedo goes back to normal life. My ex went back to work in a learning centre for children after my report. Police was fine with that, like it was normal to send back a serial rapist and an abuser with allegations of molestation against youngsters to a place where children were involved. They said no conviction, no loss of the job.

Of course, I couldn't do anything but I did come across a mother who used to send her child there and after I told her my story (by chance, she was my tutor at school and I was having problems in my learning process, due to ptsd after everything had happened) she refused to let her child go there again. But nor me or her either could do anything about the rest of children and mothers, if we didn't want to get arrested ourselves (for libel and slander).

That is the reality of what happens to abusers/rapists in UK, unfortunately.
The blame always lies with the victim and you can't even speak out about anyone if you don't want to be in trouble yourself.

@Spero

You nailed it, as usual! :)

Anywhere, I'm really trying not to split hairs but if something is criminal then it is criminally prosecutable. And no, not all abuse is criminal.

And you can't be arrested for slander/ libel in Britain as it is not a criminal offence.

I do fear we are straying off topic now!

Anywhere, why are you disagreeing with me but agreeing with spero? We are saying the same thing, albeit she is maybe explaining it better!

Well NickNacki, I was lazy and I didn't include you in my post about Spero. Hope this settles the issue.

Secondly, criminal can also mean 'deplorable and shocking', therefore your post in the other page sounded like an abuse apology and not in the meaning "criminally prosecuted". Sorry for the misunderstanding.

About libel and slander, that is what I was told by police (in Scotland, mind you). If it is true or not, well I never checked to be honest. Last thing I wanted to do was to be connected with that monster ever again, so I was not fussed about talking about it publicly in any way.

Anywhere, abuse apology?? Where on earth did you read that in my post?

And I am also in Scotland, it's still not an offence here.

You can not prosecute someone for doing something "despicable and shocking" if it's not a crime. Where have you read that?

Sorry, "deplorable" not despicable.

As someone who works in the criminal justice system, the idea of not removing children without a criminal conviction horrifies me.

Plenty of crimes are committed without a conviction. DV - something which many children witness/suffer - has a very poor prosecution/conviction rate, because so many abused women withdraw their statements or decline to co-operate with the prosecution. I've seen plenty of women write statements saying they no longer want to have anything to do with the partner who has been arrested multiple times for serious assaults on them - often witnessed by their children - and then go back to that partner within hours.

I once sat with a very young woman and a social worker and support worker, as arrangements were put in place for her to go to a secure placement, away from the partner who'd broken more than one of her bones, and who was taking drugs around her toddler, and who she herself had been arrested for assaulting. It was made very clear to her that this placement was her last chance to avoid losing her child. She cried and made promises and was angry that people couldn't see how much she loved her child.

And then she popped outside for a cigarette, rang her partner who came and collected her from court and disappeared with him.

At that point in time, neither party had any convictions relating to the child or to violence against each other, because neither would co-operate - they just kept going back to each other, battering the hell out of one another, getting arrested, dropping the case and starting again.

DV convictions are increasing slowly, due to various changes in the process, and proactive policies in local police forces. But it is still spectacularly hard to convict someone, when the victim is flatly refusing to engage.

Spero - you are right. You can't be arrested for emotional abuse, although it can be used as part of the bigger picture where there has been violence/harassment.

It would be something that would be almost impossible to legislate for because it can be such a subtle thing, and varies so much from situation to situation.

I like speedo. Time for a name change.

I think this is always part of the problem - there are things people do to one another which are awful but we can only prosecute or initiate care proceedings within the law, otherwise it is going to be trial by angry neighbours, and we have all seen how badly that plays out.

I am angry beyond measure with people like Joseph and Hemming who continually want to confine debate to whether or not you should only remove a child if a crime has been committed. This is purely because it gives them access to super sound bites 'punished - for no crime!' and again and again ignores the impact on children and on society as a whole when families are left to flounder.

It is not sadly uncommon for me to encounter parents who are part of three generations of sexual abuse/incest/drugs. But no one has been convicted of anything. That does NOT mean awful things are not happening. Just that awful things have not been prosecuted.

If we are going to criminally prosecute all parents in care proceedings we are going to need probably five times as many courts, lawyers and judges. Who is paying for all this?

I feel incredibly sorry for the mother she must have been desperate to do what she did but I have to agree with pps that we dont know what happened and her actions have proved that she can't put her child and her child's need first.

I also found it shocking that posters on the dm thought the mother must be innocent and a good mother because she's attractive.

Out of interest will this incident make it harder to place the little girl for adoption? I know I would feel like I was looking over my shoulder if I was the adoptive parents

Yes, it probably will.

That is part of the reason why the courts are so against identifying children - I remember one poster got quite snotty with me when talking about Alessandra Pacchieri and why her baby needed privacy, basically saying that the baby wouldn't know what is happening!

Yes, that is true, but the child will grow up and maybe have access to lots of disturbing newspaper reports. And there is a real fear that adopters will be put off by the potential of more media intrusion or knowledge that a birth family is prepared to abduct a child.

I agree it is shocking that some people think a pretty person is a better person. But I think that is quite common sadly.

I've almost had my life in tatters thanks to the word of a health care "professional" - I use that term very loosely. I also have domestic violence on my medical record even though I have never caused intentional harm to my husband due to something that was said during a CBT session (which my husband was present at). I don't know how you can go from "physically waking" (DH can sleep through a nuclear blast) to "violently hitting".

If neither you nor your husband accept the recording as accurate, i would complain and get it changed.

But if he and you disagree about what happened, then you may be stuck with that.

That's so sad for the poor baby she's been removed from the only family she knows and taken somewhere she doesn't know by someone she doesn't know that well and now her longtime stability is at risk

Spero we have complained but it is still on my medical records, not sure what else there is I can do?

To be honest, I don't know what the procedure is, but I would have thought that if you dispute an entry on your medical records and say it is factually inaccurate, either this has to be changed or it should be clearly noted that you dispute it and why. Otherwise this could be very dangerous, if false information is accepted as true.

Who have you complained to? Can you take it on to the Health Services Ombudsman.

I spoke to the practice manager at the time and he said it couldn't be changed as it was accurate (even though DH & I said it wasnt)

Auroras, I think at the very least you can provide a statement of what actually happened and insist that it be placed on the file with the original record.

I don't want to hijack the thread at all but a lot of people seem to be in the know about this so advice would be very appreciated; I've been worrying about social services and whether my baby will be taken away since getting pregnant (unexpected pregnancy, I'm still a student), and now it looks like my baby may have codeine withdrawal when it's born as I'm taking prescription cocodamol for pain relief (it has been prescribed by my obstretric consultant if that makes a difference).

Will I be in trouble/will SS get involved because my baby may have codeine withdrawal? I desperately want to cut down because I hate the thought of what the baby might go through but the pain is too much at the moment to handle, but it's likely to go away once the baby has been born and I'll be able to manage on ibuprofen.

I can't see how you can be blamed for taking medication you need for pain. Speak to your doctor and get advice on what you can take safely and how you can withdraw from your current drug if it isn't advised during pregnancy.

You won't be crticised for asking for help and support - you will be criticised for ignoring problems or minimising them.

A child can only be taken from you if a court finds sufficient evidence of significant harm having happened or likely to happen.

Have a look at www.childprotectionresource.org.uk - the general legal principals we set out there might give you some reassurance.