UK mum separated by force from newborn in Spain. AIBU to be shocked this is taking so long to resolve?

[wigglylines]

Poor woman, poor baby too. I can't imagine what she's going through.

Why would they drag it out so long? How long does it take to get a DNA test FFS?

Story here www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/03/british-woman-says-she-was-separated-from-newborn-daughter-in-spain

[Petition link removed by MNHQ as we don't allow them in AIBU or anywhere other than our Petitions topic]

Interestingly the woman may
Now have a bill for around 10,000 euros as normal term pregnancy is not covered on the ehic card

My 3 year old was born in an excellent Malaga hospital. I have no doubts about their procedures. Some British mothers do have complaints because they don't speak Spanish and are not able to communicate well. Some nurses and doctors speak English but not all. However I can believe that the health professionals would have judged the woman as a bad mother for the position she put her baby in. They would have been astounded as this kind of behavior they normally only see from Senegalese immigrants

The arrogance of ranting on about the medical staff and their supposed mistakes, when you have no idea whatsoever what they did or said! There are any number of different scenarios that are as likely.
For example, the baby was kept in for three weeks because she was ill due to the mothers neglect (lack of prenatal care, unassisted birth, no medical sought for baby). She would hardly tell that to the press. Easily as likely as what she says happened anyway. And same proof..ie none!

Matters which I am involved with professionally are regularly reported in the media, and it is shocking how often the fects are either completely misrepresented or distorted. In fact, it happens so often, that when I see things accurately reported, it shocks me more.

My point is, who knows what has happened here, but all there is is a one sided account in a couple of minor news outlets.

Guardian has a bit more today on this:
www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/09/spanish-hospital-that-took-uk-womans-baby-did-so-in-best-interests-of-the-child

The Spanish hospital didn't obv have much experience of lotus birth as the spokesman kept mentioning the umbilical cord!

From the info provided the hospital seems a bit nuts bit maybe it is one sided reporting.

Maybe it wasn't a lotus birth, the mother has never mentioned that. Maybe they were presented with a woman with a strange and inconsistent story and a baby whose development didn't seem to match what the mother said and a newborn whose umbilical cord hadn't been dealt with properly and then when questioned, ran off. Should they not have followed up?
Anyway, she wasn't there for medical assistance she said herself she went to register the birth.

If you ask me the only person who sounds "nuts" in all of this is the mother!

Lotus birth babies have to be watched carefully for infections. How was leaving the hospital a good idea?
The hospital were just supposed to let her go and roam about with the baby?

Says she's considering suing. Well, I don't think she has a leg to stand on

A more balanced article that makes a lot of sense. A foreign national turned up at a hospital with a supposedly prem newbor, and when some normal questions were asked, legged it before the infant could get any medical attention. Of course the hospital had to do something about it! The same thing would have happened in any european country, to any person who acted that way, regardless of their colour.

nobody has suggested it was a "lotus birth" so whybring that in?

The hospital also say she presented 2 days after the birth not the morning after as she reported.

Another interview in today's Daily Mail. Very one sided and contradictory report where she fears she is trapped in Spain for a year yet further down it says that the British Consulate can issue emergency travel documents in such cases and are helping her with this.
She says she's had enough of Spain and will be suing for negligence as a solicitor has told her she has a strong case.

Keeps repeating they said the baby could not be hers when that's not the case.
There were concerns and she ran off leading to police having to look for her. Of course after that suspicions were aroused and dna ordered by a judge.

On one of the first reports it said she'd gone from the hospital in the same taxi which brought her there. Which means she asked the driver to wait.
So she fully expected to just turn up, register the birth and take off within minutes.
How naive is that?

Sorry i was not clear. The kept mentioning how the baby still had the umbilical cord attached. The practice/protocol seemed very medical model, all babies born in hospital etc.

Whereas here homebirth is viewed as fairly normal, less common bit no reason for concern. And practices like leaving the whole placenta attached for days on end raise eyebrows but don't warrant social work involvement. whereas the Spanish hospital spokesman appeareaappeared horrified that the baby still had done umbilical cord attached.

I think there was definately a culture clash in expectations around birth. There may well be underlying issues too that aren't reported. But I think they have treated her poorly (although i also think she was a bit nuts to travel! )

So according to the guardian article,

• she gave birth at 36 weeks, not the originally stated 38 (which is premature),
• she waited 2 days to go to the hospital, not the few hours originally stated,

• when questioned about the birth, and told she would be kept in hospital (routine I would imagine with a premature baby) she legged it,

• a judge, having reviewed the evidence, ordered the DNA test and the restrictions on access, not the hospital, and as soon as the judge had the results and cleared the case the hospital released the baby.

All I can see here is weird behaviour from the mother, and some unclear information (38 vs 36 etc), a hospital following a pretty reasonable protocol that the mother didn't comply with and the mother deciding that it must all be down to racism, not her own frankly bizarre actions.

Very glad I didn't sign the petition without a lot more information (that I still don't think is clear or ever will be) than just the mothers side of the story.

As mentioned up thread we should not believe everything that we read in papers

I have no idea whether a birth is registered at the hospital in Spain or not but that's not the case here so why would she think she had to go to the hospital to do that?
I hVnt had a home birth here ( or anywhere else) so I don't know the procedure but I don't think that you need to go to the hospital after the event unless medically necessary so why would this lady just go " to register" the baby?
I don't doubt the baby is hers but her behaviour is at best very odd.

She didn't have a 'home birth' in the normal sense though did she? Intentional home births are planned and have a midwife in attendance. Because the midwife is there, there is no need to go to hospital unless the midwife assesses there is a medical need.

If you have an accidental home birth in the UK and your midwife can't get there in the short space of time needed, then yes, it is normal to phone an ambulance so mother and baby can be checked over as soon as possible for problems which are not visible to the untrained eye but could be potentially life threatening.

I agree this story is very odd. I have had a look online and the name she gave to reporters is not the one she goes by (or ever seems to have gone by). We will never know because, of course, what happens in the future is private for the sake of the child. But it seems like the professionals did their job and there is definitely something not quite right happening here even if the baby is hers. I suspect this may well be a case of absconding from social services, but who knows? It's all odd.

Exactly ourdearleader it's not a regular home birth and of course a mother and child have to be checked over if birth unattended.
For medical and legal reasons.
People can't just turn up say this is my baby and I want her registered.

I too noticed about the name to reporters not being the name she goes by.

It looks a bit like a clash of cultures. According to that spokesman, they regarded the situation as a health risk requiring the baby to be kept in hospital purely because she was newborn, nothing more. Whereas of course in the UK you wouldn't necessarily require someone who had given birth at home to go to hospital at all, or if you did, it would be no more than a quick check-up on the mother and baby. What is odd in this case is that, as I understand the reports, they did not question that the mother had recently given birth or that the baby was anything other than newborn, so it really isn't that clear why they wanted DNA tests. Do they demand that for every mother who doesn't give birth in hospital or with medics around?