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?

Who knows what happened at the supervised visits. But I disagree ss caused the mother distress, she managed that herself.

Nobody is saying they get it right every time, that would be almost impossible to achieve. Maybe this is one of the lives that has been saved by removing her from her birth mother? Who knows?

Really trying hard to bite my tongue here. The only ones who have caused distress are the mother and her family to that poor little baby. I hope it's not long until she's found a loving family to care for her properly. Going to leave this thread now as it makes me so angry when people who know nothing about the situation automatically put the 'rights' of the parent above the welfare of a defenceless baby.

Mamapain I can assure you that the decision to take a child away, not only into care but also to then be put up for adoption does not happen 'in such a short space of time'...
It can take months and months, even years sometimes to reach a decision and believe me it is not taken lightly. Many cases in fact begin from way before the child is born so please do not think that a social worker woke up one day and thought it would be a good idea to take that young lady's baby away

I'm sure she loves her child, the vast majority of parents do, but sadly love is not enough

Personally, ApocalypseCheeseToastie I think your suggestion is appalling and smacks of social cleansing. I'm on my phone so cant any write a lengthily response, and whilst I'm certainly not condoning taking your children to a fight let alone having them participate, you thinking that children should be removed due to the risk of them not becoming decent citizens seems very worrying to me.

Mama - I can see what Apocalypse is saying.

It's not about the children not growing up to be decent citizens.

It's the parents taking children along to fights where they are at risk of getting hurt and/or encouraged to join in.

That is worrying.

We should bear in mind the whole thing was probably quite frightening for the baby. Sudden removal and a chaotic time with a woman whom she knows but does not usually stay with and who might not have been in a position to look after her well.

It could be the desperate act of a caring mother or it could be an attention-seeking gambit from a self-absorbed and conniving person or something in between.

Social Services must be the most difficult job ever. You never hear about all the successful work they do to keep children safe, just the very difficult cases that can make a story in the Mail. I'm prepared to accept that the right decisions have been made based on the mother's previous record.
And the Mail can fuck off. I'm sick of their hypocrisy.

I do feel sorry for her, to have your baby put in foster care where someone else is watching all the first milestones, feeding changing picking clothes, playing with your baby and watching her grow up. It must be very hard emotionally.

In this case trying to get the mother and child back together is not working, the child comes first and this mother didn't put her child first when she kidnapped her child.

The police was right to arrest her and charge her with kidnapping.

If it was me I would have done the same if I was told my child was going to be adopted and I would never see them again.

What ay mother SHOULD do is what is best for their child.

A bit of a difference from maybe not getting things right all the time and making catastrophic mistakes tho. I agree with you tho in the fact I hope on this occasion its the right decision.

Whilst I have sympathy for anybody in this situation it's totally right that she should be arrested and if the criteria for charging is met then yes charging would be appropriate.

It's also right that she should go to court and be dealt with.

I only wish it was as easy to get a police response when other none resident parents decided to not return a child or to remove one,as in my experience the normal response to that is "it's a civil matter" and the max they will help with is a basic welfare check where the bar is set so low it's shocking.

HadabadDay, that was the point I was trying to make. No matter how inadequate a parent is it is unusual for them not to love their baby and most would want to run away with them given half a chance. ( and she was)

Of course it was wrong to snatch the child but the poor woman was probably demented. ( as anyone would be) and I think if anyone should be prosecuted its the fools who allowed this to happen under "supervision" because it should have been expected.

No one is in a position to judge the facts of the case from media reports.

It is likely that the mother might have failed to protect her child. It is also possible that SS have not got this one right.

There is a massive funding shortage for DV services, and I know of several cases where the women have only been offered accommodation in hostels for single people.

So the options are:

1). Staying, and hoping you don't have your children removed.
2). Leaving and putting your children in care (whilst hoping you will get them back).

It is not surprising that some are opting to stay, but then lose their kids anyway.

The problem is Needasock, it generally IS a civil matter unless court orders are in place. It's not for the police to decide where children live. How can they be expected to do that at 8pm on a Friday night, for example?

Suuure, they should just leave the baby with the mother so her boyfriend can murder it and that poor girl can become another statistic.

The young woman is already another statistic - they should of done more to support her and help her keep her baby. By all accounts to far (although we can never be sure) is that the birth mother did everything SS asked but still decided to place baby up for adoption. I would of done the same

Its a very sad story for all involved. No winners.

Hopefully Lola will have a good life and Stacy can get help for whatever it is that is lacking in her life.

I feel for the mother, who must be devastated

But she did something completely wrong, and it's right that she be arrested, although I think the punishment should reflect what she was going through at the time and not be overly harsh

And think about what that baby girl went through...she lived with her foster carers for about 9 months. In the life of a 13 months old, that's a very long time...her foster carers are all she really knows. To her, they are mummy and daddy (assuming a married couple, I don't know), they are her world. Her birth mum is someone she sees for a short amount of time 3 days a week, but the poor thing must have been terrified to have been snatched away from her "mummy and daddy" by this woman and then put through being on the run in strange and unfamiliar places, unable to understand what was going on and where her parents were.

I do feel enormous sympathy for the mother, but I also feel enormous sympathy for Lola and what she's just been through, and also for the foster carers who must have been worried sick and now have to deal with the fallout of this, I would imagine baby Lola is confused and struggling in the aftermath of this

I honestly believe SS are too keen to take children away sometimes and it makes me feel ill. I couldn't imagine being without my DD it would destroy me. Stacy probably feels devastated.

I assume most people realise that the baby being adopted wasn't ss decision but a court has decided this? It's not as simple as ss taking children away.

More children are left for far too long in horrible situations than are taken away too quickly

The actual amount of miscarriages of justice is very low

But leaving that aside, as much as we should (IMHO) have compassion for most people who lose their children, we can't let their devastation blind us to what was going on, or make us ignore what the right thing to do is for the child. Childs interests first, everything else after.