AIBU to be horrified by the Stolen Children of England

[LivingOnTheDancefloor]

I just watched a French documentary called "England's stolen children" and can't believe this is happening in England. Horrifying, scary, unbelievable, it is like a horror movie...

Basically, social services are taking babies from their parents based on suspicion that abuse might happen in the future, except that the decision is made based on ridiculous things.
A lady had her three children taken from her, including a breastfed baby because she went to the ER for a child's broken ankle and they judged that he must have been beaten by his parents (only based on the ankle). X years later the parents manage to prove the fracture was due to scorbut. And they found out the initial report from the ER says "no sign of fracture".
The judge admitted they shouldn't have taken the children and the parents were innocents. But the children were given to adoption so the parents will never see them again.
That is just one of the stories.
Some women are told while pregnant that their newborn will be taken as soon as he arrives (and thzney do it).
The documentary says it is due to the facts that counties have to reach a number of children given to adoption so they target poor/uneducated parents and find any reason to take their children.
And as fostering costs money to the state they prefer adoption.

AIBU to ask if you heard about it here in the UK? And if yes, what do you think? Could it be true or are they exagerating?

I am really shaken.

www.google.fr/amp/s/researchingreform.net/2016/11/14/englands-stolen-children-controversial-new-documentary-on-forced-adoption/amp/?client=safari

Sorry, no idea how to post links, and I am on my phone

Thefishewife I agree with you, it is not in the child's interest to wait for years if the parents are showing no sign of being able to parent correctly. The documentary was speaking about 6 months which seem quite short for such an final decision as adoption, but obviously they might have tweaked the facts

Our current government do see adoption as gold standard

Adoptio should be the gold standard. Of course there will be situations when its not appropriate, but it should absolutely more of an aim than it is now.

As a social worker who has worked with looked after children I disagree user but I'm not going to get into my why's and reasoning on here. The current governments attitude towards fostering and SGO's isn't helpful at all.

Barbados that is terrible and I sympathise.

There are no injuries listed in the court papers of the case I mention other than one which was documented as an accident and accepted as such, and it was treated immidately, The Mother in question also hadn't been referred to SS, but had contacted them herself asking for help for a child with special needs, whom she was struggling to cope with. When all children were put in foster care those people couldn't cope with his needs either and he was removed from them, all children were separated from one another shortly afterward. None of them got permanent, settled homes once removed.

I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm right, I am under no illusion that the things you mention occur, abusive parents are clever and dishonest and do not deserve their children I agree. I do not know of any other cases personally however through my studies (I'm a counsellor who has also worked in social policy), and my life, I have made the observation that whether 'stealing' is the correct word or not (more likely the latter) SS have in the past (whether they do now is another matter) removed children for reasons and in a manner unfair to them and their parents. I'm not saying it happens often, nor that it isn't preferable to mistakes made the other way around. I am saying it does happen, the same as other injusticies and unfair practices in the world do.

Not RTFT, but spero, you mention Gena - she appears in the documentary. I haven't watched it all as I keep shouting bullshit! at the screen. But she helps the first woman who is filmed on the ferry. So she's still at it. Which from the information in your link, is very, very worrying. Jesus.

( barbados, yes, that is the case and the person. So hard to reconcile the person I knew with the reports. But that's the thing isn't it? Personable, affable people can do terrible things).

O I bet she does. This is very much a PR campaign by John Hemming.

I have now had messages from 3 women who he sent to Genas who say it is appalling. Her partner was found to be a sexual risk to children after three different children made allegations against him in the UK. He also beat her up and put her in hospital. But it's ok because he really loves her.

I have been trying very hard to get journalists interested in this, but they won't touch it. BBC South East did a brief report which was positice about Gena - I could clearly see THREE Caravans in shot so god knows how many women and vulnerable children now live there.

It's awful on every level.

Sadly I would agree that adoption is being 'pushed' by this Gov and there are several press releases saying exactly that.

Which doesn't help at all.

Spero, I was reading the comments to your blog and saw the allegations/accusations that they were making regarding the women they think contacted you and... If they are accurate surely that proves the point that they are "helping" people inappropriately?! It made me so frustrated so I don't know how you counter it so reasonably!

OP - the reference to 'six months' is correct if what is meant is length of time for care proceedings. Following the a children and Families Act 2014 care proceedings must now conclude within 26 weeks or as soon as possible.

At the end of care proceedings a final care order and a placement order can be made. This means the LA are authorised to look for adoptive parents. The actual adoption order could be months, even years later.

But for parents it almost certainly is 'game over' at the final care order stage. It is very rare to successfully challenge a placement order and I think only once has an adoption order been successfully challenged.

Floodmud - well exactly. Tim Haines, one of Hemming's associates threatened these women via Facebook - I have the screenshots. Then Hemmings lot tried to rubbish them as mentally unfit.

Yet encouraged them to leave the UK!! You really couldn't make this shit up.

I am afraid that it is going to take a child dying or being seriously abused before anyone wakes up and takes this seriously.

Can anyone tell me what support there is for mothers who have had their babies taken from them no matter how justified)? I just cannot imagine the wrenching pain. I'd kill myself.

It is my worst fear.

Please could someone tell me how to avoid it. I am sensible, clean, tidy, patient and loving with pets/ill people etc (don't have much exposure to children). I am terrified because I have MH issues (trauma/depression type stuff, so not employed although study) which I have been unable to receive NHS treatment for as they simply do not offer the longterm therapy I need. The seem to view me as some kind of crazy unstable attention seeker and pressing for help makes this worse. Staff have got better recently and some are lovely (no regular support, just crisis team) but there are some dreadful things written about me and I'm terrified some psychiatrist who doesn't know me could write damning stuff. I'd be utterly powerless and the pain it wold put me though would be used as evidence of my unsuitability to parent.

I'm sorry to ask but this thread unexpectedly triggered the massive fear for me. I don't think there's a conspiracy but I am dreadfully afraid I am powerless against any dodgy individuals there may be. Especially psychiatrists as they are often brought from abroad due to shortages and have had some sexists comments and things due to cultural differences.

(I'm not pregnant btw but this has been a big fear since my early 20s.)

I'm sure someone will respond more helpfully in a bit, but they don't take kids away like that TurningAway - (unless you really harm them, in which case I'm sure you agree they should).

Are you on any medication for your anxiety? (Which again, would not affect anyone's judgement of your parenting.)

If your anxiety's triggered a panic attack here and you're spiralling, why not call the Samaritans? I guarantee they'll listen

TurningAway - I am sorry. Easy for me to say I know, but please don't be scared. If the worst ever happened, please get legal advice and don't run away to France.

This was one of the first posts on the CPR site, and remains one of the most widely read - which is sad, but I hope it's useful for you.
childprotectionresource.online/reporting-post-natal-depression/

I would certanily support no adoption, just long term fostering so that injustices can be undone and children returned to birth families in cases like that mentioned in the first post. Adoption is too final.

Ok this is only one case, only anecdata

But for myself ...

Fuck me I'm beyond glad that I was adopted. My adoptive father has a shallow paper-thin heart and was a truly pathetic and inadequate parent.

But considering what my birth mother was like, dear God am I glad that I didn't go back to her.

Again, that's only my own experience but all the same, it's valid.

I think you need to take it case by case and one thing about adoption / removal of children / fostering is that the situation is by definition difficult and you do not always clearly know what is best. I don't envy social workers, even though some of them are destructive.

It's silly to say that adoption shouldn't happen. It's absolutely shit to grow up in an abusive family and adoption can be the best and safest solution for the child .... depending on the case and the mother.

Blood links do not confer some almighty magic ability to parent. Deeply damaged people -or malicious ones, and there are some evil actions in my bio. family's history- need the WILL to learn good parenting, and then the support. Which is sadly lacking in the UK.

Outcomes tend to be better in borderline situations if the child stays with the birth family, I'm told. But I do wonder if a better, more intelligent and better funded system with good support for fosterers and adoptive parents would change things to the other way around.

I'm not spiralling, it has just brought up the issue and helps to know the ins and outs so I am not frightened of the unknown.

When I was about 20 I had a deeply distressing dream where I gave birth and the baby was taken, I know it sounds daft but I've never forgotton it (30s now!). It was during a dreadful time with the mental health system. This thread unexpectedly really rammed it home, iyswim.

I have had experiences where it is me against a raft of professionals, and I am powerless, it is the most frightening thing. In that case it was that I was viewed as a waste of time, just a fuckup, not entitled to MH treatment/support, and deemed to be "demanding" and making a fuss when I needed a space in a homeless hostel. They told me I was lucky to have such a nice (abusive) partner too, even though the age gap and my young age should have been waving red flags all over the place. (I am actually traumatised from this time which is a very complicated factor as MH system obviosuly wont/cant acknowledge this.)

Things have changed a lot since then but the dreadful things written about me are still on file. I had a glimpse into what it was like to be on the "other side" after being raised middle class naice girl and seeing myself on the same side as professionals. Its horrific, like you're not human, they don't see you as a person. Terrifying.

The most recent professional I saw reassured me about this. But I know what it's like to be in the "other" category. I experienced a world I didn't know existed, a scenario where power overrode truth, and it fucking terrified me, and I am so scared to find myself back there.

And you know what else? I know I sound like a looney. I wouldn;t believe me if I'd not been there. And that makes it so much more terrifying.

ps. If they don't take children like that, why did they try to with Fran Lyons?

I do not believe it's routine, at all - in fact it seems theres often not enough intervention.

But if they ask a psychiatrists for a report on me and he writes awful stuff - how the hell do I challenge it? What if they don't tell me in order to make it easier to take the baby when I'm not looking?

I really want to have sensible sane answers as it's just occurred to me that I might properly lose it (delusions, hallucinations) around birth at this rate, purely from fear.

ontheturningaway I'm so sorry about your experiences and I understand you fears. The only advice I can offer is to be open with social workers and welcoming of any support they suggest. A lot of it is about jumping through hoops. People who become resistant to what social services say will find themselves facing an uphill battle. If you were to fall pregnant I imagine that social services may have their concerns because unfourtunately mental health issues do pose risks. However if you were to accept these concerns and take the support that was offered to you, then in their eyes the risk is reduced.

Social work at the moment is a very risk averse profession for a number of reasons. I could debate all day about how this affects professional practice. The more you can do to reduce that risk in their eyes the better. A mother with mental health issues who is receptive and open to professionals, acknowledges when they need help and has a good support network will have a very good chance of recieving minimal social work intervention.

Lean and has a good support network
What if you dont? Menal ill health often comes with isolation. I mean, I'd go to baby groups and things, but don't have lots of close friends.

I understand your fear turning. Having read about the lack of accountability in relation to secret court decisions about forced adoption, I shared them but it is so, so unlikely to happen to you.

Many women who have experienced postnatal psychosis have gone on to recover and their children have not been taken from them - far from it.

I think it helps if your partner is in good health. I comforted myself by thinking, 'They would never be able to justify taking his baby away, whatever might happen to me.'

I have a friend who is not 'allowed' to care for her child on her own but she hasn't lost her - they are with a childminder until her husband gets home. Even that is only temporary until she gets better (and she has been very, very ill).

It also might help if you are under the care of a psychiatrist that you trust and who knows you to be 'usually' mentally fit. Then, whatever happens, you know that your past can't be rewritten to frame a diagnosis that would suggest postnatal psychosis is part of a bigger picture.

Attending baby groups and things is good, and will show you are engaging with society. showing you have babysitters and other family members who can ad hoc care for your child also are positives. By support network I don't mean lots of friends, it just means that you are not shut away from society.

Unfourtunately that isolation is partly why parents with MH conditions are considered more at risk. It's a double edged sword in many ways and perhaps if we had moderately adequate mental health services in this country less children would need to be removed.

OnTheTurning, it is not about whether you have x problems: it is about whether you would be willing to do what it takes to protect your dc against any potential harm that might come from your problems.

They don't take a child away from his mother because the dad/boyfriend has attacked the mother or sexually abused the child. But they might if the mother shows that she is not willing to do what is needed to keep the child safe. E.g. if she lets a violent partner come back and live with them or lets a sexually abusive boyfriend have access to the child. It is not about punishing the mother, but about keeping the child safe. And it's about present risk, not about punishing anyone for their past.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have actually been (briefly) under investigation, suspected of harming my child. What worked for us was cooperating with the people who were investigating, remembering that though they had got the wrong end of the stick they were trying to do the best for dd so basically the same as we were, being as polite and positive as I could, but never admitting to anything that wasn't true, thanking them for any help offered. For one reason or another, we ended up under SS investigation several times, but were able to use that to our advantage, in that SWs became our advocates when times were tough.

Sorry, getting way off topic.

I'm one of the "lucky" ones if it happened, because I present well, speak RP etc, have family "of good standing" who would do all they could - legal contacts too I suspect.

But it just worries me that one dodgy power crazed judgemental professional could rope others in and there'd be no comeback, especially without the relative priveledge I have.

Again, I don't think it's the norm, but if you struggle to advocate for yourself and are viewed as "other" - what protection is in place if you do encounter a corrupt professional? I've seen how apparently nice sensible professionals can have a dark side (I used to try to get others to attend appointments with me as I'd be spoken to entirely differenty, for example.)

Turning Away - I can't guarantee everything would be ok. I have met some dodgy 'experts'. If you got very upset then that could be used to build a case against your parenting.

But what I be pretty sure is that if you take the advice of Hemming and Josephs you are much more likely to end up in a very desperate situation. They encourage people not to engage with their lawyers as we are 'legal aid losers'.

If the worst comes to the worst you will get non means tested, non merits tested legal aid. You would have a lawyer who would fight your case. It is NOT social workers or doctors who decide if children get removed. It is only ever the court - unless of course its the police using their powers to remove, but that can only last for 72 hours and then must come before a court.

Thanks for the replies to my posts.
Slender It also might help if you are under the care of a psychiatrist that you trust and who knows you to be 'usually' mentally fit.

What constitutes "usually mentally fit" though? Thus far, I've passed ESA (sickness benefit) reassessments frighteningly easily, which I suspect may be the other side of the very dark coin...
Plus one cannot simply get a psychiatrist like that. I'm not currently involved with mental health services as I am deemed not ill enough (but too ill for primary care/IAPT services). Trying to get PIP benefit so I can pay for private therapy atm. But to do that I have to prove Im mad as a box of frogs...

Then, whatever happens, you know that your past can't be rewritten to frame a diagnosis that would suggest postnatal psychosis is part of a bigger picture.

But postnatal psychosis would be part of a bigger picture! As I am known to be longterm mentally unwell (or whatever the wording would be). Athough have never suffered from psychosis.

And nothing needs to be rewritten. What's there already (from the past) is bad enough I suspect. I disagree with their view of my history, but it's already there, I can't erase it. Suffice it to say I am in a mcuh worse position that the lady I mentioned.

Anyway... I guess I need to work it all out and be prepared if the time comes. Very frustrating how the one thing that would make me spin out/under immense pressure would be the risk of losing a child, not the original MH issues.

Thank you for the advice and information. Don't worry I don't really go for conspiracy theories. :)