Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be horrified by what I just saw on tv

226 replies

Mammajay · 16/01/2020 17:50

I just watched Panorama I Want My Baby back on 8 London live. I know how vital it is that endangered children are taken into care but these poor parents have been the victims of gross injustice. Mums with vitamin d deficiency have given birth to children with vitamin d deficiency. The babies then suffered rickets and bone fractures. Doctors thought the babies had been abused and the children were taken into care. There were four families and only one got their child back. When a child died ( not one of the 4 families) the parents were charged with causing the death due to the fractures. The pathologist who did the post mortem found the babies bones broke as she handled the body and concluded the child had rickets and vitamin d deficiency so the charges were dropped. Watching the couple and the grandparents whose child had been taken into care going for the final visit before their much loved son / grandson was to be adopted was heart breaking. So, aibu, to think there should be some sort of official inquiry into such cases.

OP posts:
FenellaVelour · 17/01/2020 10:26

I have no doubt that any number of children would fare better if they were brought up by different parents. It still doesn’t mean we can remove them.

And this is why the test of the court is that “nothing else will do” except removal to keep the child safe. This isn’t about social engineering or expecting parents to be perfect or even anywhere near perfect. Children are only taken away when the court is satisfied that they are at risk of significant harm if they remain with their family.

Mammajay · 17/01/2020 10:30

Fenella I completely agree. Protect the child but then allow and insist on detailed open medical review if there is evidence that in some cases there are medical causes of multiple fractures. I am being specific about the broken bones issue.

OP posts:
FenellaVelour · 17/01/2020 10:41

What I would expect, and how I would respond, is professional curiosity.

I’m not a medical expert, but I’d ensure I asked the questions. “Could there be another reason for x? What tests have been done to ensure that there are no other possible explanations?”

There’s too much at stake not to be as thorough as it is possible to be.

Booboostwo · 17/01/2020 10:52

I don't think people understand how complex things become with rare medical diagnoses unless they have been through the system themselves. It took us four years to get an approximate diagnosis for DD's rare bone disease and during that time we went from claims of abuse and neglect, to being told it was nothing, to excluding bone cancer, to red-herring diagnoses of other rare conditions which were immediately rejected by the expert, etc.

karencantobe · 17/01/2020 10:55

The rare illness/disease one is such a tough call. Judges who make these decisions rely on medical expertise. But of course no medical expertise is ever 100% foolproof.

I am reminded of an American case I read about. A large family were under suspicion of munchausens in one state because of the symptoms the kids were displaying and the death of one child. Lots of investigation by child protection and the kids were in foster care for a bit. Eventually a rare disease was diagnosed and kids were returned home. It got huge publicity in the state media. In the same state in another family their babies died, one after another. The mother told everyone it was a rare disease the medics hadn't found yet, like the first family. 5 babies died. It was not until their adopted toddler son died that they were properly investigated. The babies and toddler had been murdered. The mother had done everything she could to hide what was happening, but the widely publicised first family helped her do that.

It always hammered home to me what a tough call rare diseases are.

karencantobe · 17/01/2020 11:01

@Booboostwo I understand this. My DP has a rare genetic disease that was not diagnosed until he was a father. We don't know yet if our kids have it, the specific genes have not been identified and there is no way to test until symptoms appear. Nearly every Dr DP meets has never heard of this disease. And as an adult it has a large impact on him. There is no treatment except for symptoms. So sadly I do understand this. Although the symptoms could not really be mistaken for abuse.
But since abuse is very rarely witnessed, decisions have to be taken on what is the most likely scenario. So could a toddler have multiple instances of broken bones over 6-months not caused by abuse, with Drs saying there is no medical cause for this? Yes, but it is very unlikely.

Oliversmumsarmy · 17/01/2020 11:43

karencantobe

HE and not giving inoculations are also choices as a parent I am allowed to make.

Whilst my children were young I was unable to walk without the aid of a zimmerframe I was in absolute agony 24/7 all because I was misdiagnosed by the NHS so things got left because I couldn’t cope.

It didn’t make it easier if I did actually try to get an appointment for dcs inoculations and given one 6-7 months in advance.

If the doctors thought that it was so important to get inoculations done on a timely basis then why leave it so long.

Usually i forgot about the appointment or something came up and I couldn’t make it.

As I have said I have been through the system as a child in the 60s and 70s and it makes me very cynical about how SWs operate.

I didn’t meet one who didn’t have their own agenda.

I wasn’t a cute little English girl that could be placed easily. Although I am white you can tell I am definitely not British (immigrant family). I also had several issues that made me look even uglier

I think because they couldn’t place me easily and didn’t want me around ruining the aesthetics I was constantly returned to my mother who was mentally ill and had a thing about having a joint suicide pact with me

I just cost them too much money and I was never going to be adopted.

There might be a few good SWs who look at the whole picture but there are a few who do have a nasty streak and I think it is a profession that attracts those that have a particular personality where they can throw their weight around and everyone around them follows their lead and anyone who questions their authority is cast away.

The Ellie Butler case was tragic but the ones on the programme had gps who didn’t believe for one moment that their dc and their spouses had ever laid a hand on their grandchildren.

I do believe that the family courts should be under scrutiny and that their should be more transparency.
It might make the SWs and experts more accountable for their actions.
It might shine a light on the discrepancies in their statements.

I can well believe a solicitor not acting on behalf of their client.

My friend realised quite quickly that her solicitor just didn’t know the basic laws and ended up giving herself a crash course in family law to actually direct the solicitor in what to challenge.
The solicitor didn’t realise that just because a SW said something didn’t make it true.

karencantobe · 17/01/2020 11:49

@oliversarmy Of course HE and not giving innoculations are a choice. But as I said missing innoculations are often a sign a parent is not coping. And you say that you were not coping. Parents can struggle to cope for lots of reasons that are not their fault.
When a close relative was murdered I was a crap parent for about 3-months. It was only because DP was there and able to step up that my kids were not neglected. Life can be tough, I do get that. But SS job is to put kids first.

It is well recognised that in the past too many kids went through that yo yo of being taken into care, returned home, taken into care, etc. So more kids are adopted or in long term foster care at an earlier stage now.

Oliversmumsarmy · 17/01/2020 12:08

Life can be tough, I do get that. But SS job is to put kids first

So if a perfectly happy child just hasn’t had inoculations and is being HE because the school he was attending wasn’t actually teaching him anything a SW can say it is in the child’s best interest to place with another family.

The other family (who the child doesn’t want to be with) will just send a severely dyslexic child off to school and so he can sit in another classroom not being taught anything.

I am not sure what his sister was supposed to do?
Do foster carers take over private school fees or would she have been ripped out of her school to be placed in an ordinary comprehensive and having no ECAs (which have ended up being what she does for a living)

karencantobe · 17/01/2020 12:12

@oliversarmy A HE child with missed innoculations will not be taken into care. I have lived in areas with a lot of HE kids and anti vax. Theur kids are not taken into care. But yes with missed innoculations and HE a SS should check if things are okay.

You say yourself you were not coping. The missed innoculations and HE triggered SS involvement. There will be other reasons your DC was taken into care.
I appreciate it is a tough situation for parents, especially when the reason they were not coping is not their fault.

Sunflowerdaisysummer · 17/01/2020 12:24

IME someone making an active choice about not to vaccinate their child is different to someone who misses appointments due to a chaotic home life.

Oliversmumsarmy · 17/01/2020 12:57

You say yourself you were not coping. The missed innoculations and HE triggered SS involvement

I was not coping because I was in so much pain when they were younger. Ended up going private to get a proper diagnosis. I had been walking around with a slipped disc for the previous 7 years. NHS diagnosis was I had crumbling hips and needed a hip replacement which wouldn’t be available until I was 60. There was nothing wrong with my hips

I was reported to SS when children were teenagers. I was coping fine by that stage

Didn’t think there was much point in getting inoculations against childhood illnesses that they had already had. DD had measles before she was due the MMR

Glad I didn’t take the advice I was given at the time of asking for help.
I know how these things turn out.

Booboostwo · 17/01/2020 12:59

karencantobe the problem is that there is no clear "Drs saying there is no medical cause". Take my DD for example. She broke her leg as a toddler, she was walking and fell on her bottom but still broke her leg. At first two doctors turned us away and said it couldn't be serious. 10 days in she still wouldn't weight bear so they did investigations but focused on her hips. We were in hospital for 3 days when I insisted on an x-ray. They found the break and what they said was an old break in another leg. They showed her xrays to 6 other doctors to get a final opinion and came up with OI...not only was it not OI but the 'break' was not a break but a benign tumor. That is how far off everyone at that hospital plus 6 extra doctors, all the way to Paris apparently, were. Not even a break, a tumor. There is a suspicion that another tumor caused the second break (the one that led to the x-rays) but was no longer visible because of the break but experts disagree even on that - a team in the UK say no, a team in Italy say yes, go figure. Had the first doctors realized it was a tumor there would have been to question of abuse or neglect. They told my DH I had probably dropped her and was hiding the accident because I was emotionally unstable. Further evidence of my emotional instability apparently was that I was still breastfeeding her at 14mo and that she would not leave my arms to walk...even though she had a broken leg and could not weight bear. As you can see it's a mess of evaluative (mis)judgements as well as clinical mistakes that (mis)informs the medical decision.

karencantobe · 17/01/2020 13:07

@Oliversmumsarmy So your kids were not taken into care? A SW visiting does not mean kids will be taken into acre, even if you are not coping.

@Sunflowerdaisysummer Yes fair point

@booboost I know that can happen with rare diagnosis. I was saying what the judge will be hearing. The judge is not a medic, they can only rely on what medics are telling them. And if they say there is no sign of a medical reason for broken bones, then why would the judge go against that? Very rare medical reasons are difficult to diagnose. But if it is that cause that should become very clear soon after the kids are taken into care.

OldQueen1969 · 17/01/2020 13:29

As I have previously mentioned, ad nauseam, my specific experience and those of others accused of fracturing neonates relates to metaphyseal fractures and the main point of contention comes from the position that these type of fractures in the un-mineralised area around the growth plate are highly specific for NAI / Child abuse.

A cursory google re-inforces that this position is still widely held.

The mechanism is regarded as typically thought to be shaking while holding the body, hence rib fractures sometimes being scene, while the limbs fail causing a torsion injury. If no rib fractures are found, then the mechanism is thought to be pulling, twisting and shaking at the site of each fracture.

So, in my case, these "fractures" were seen at both ankles, both knees, one hip, both wrists, both elbows and one shoulder. This is a roughly symmetrical pattern. There were no rib fractures. A brain scan was done which indicated no typical shaking injury. Retinal bleeding was not found.

My son was 6 weeks old at the time these anomalies were identified. there was no bruising or soft tissue damage. He had been born at 35 weeks due to pre-eclampsia which was sudden onset - I had all the symptoms except high blood pressure for a few weeks before I started projectile vomiting and was induced. I had naturally low blood pressure and am a negative blood group. So my own care wasn't the greatest, as without the high blood pressure, the massive water retention and recurrent UTIs and need for almost constant antibiotics in the last few weeks was not considered significant nor a risk to my pregnancy.

My son was in hospital for a week after birth - mild jaundice etc - then we came home. My in-laws were with us for week two; we had regular visitors which I wasn't stressed about - he was the first grand-child and having the family together was wonderful. In week three our landlord who was a close friend (professional - college lecturer) stayed with us.

My son was seen by the HV regularly, and no concerns were noted. I was described as being like a cow in clover, and my partner was also thrilled. He took time out from work and was appropriately involved and supportive.

Allegedly, between him coming home and being placed in FC I had, on multiple occasions, as I was the main carer, taken every opportunity to very carefully torture him, leaving no marks and without him showing signs of distress.

He had a few feeding, problems, an anal fissure thankfully witnessed by father and grand-mother during a nappy change, and was diagnosed with colic which we treated appropriately. Every concern we had was brought to the attention of professionals, advice taken and followed. He was almost sleeping for six hours at a time when he was taken, and I was utterly gobsmacked because I had been a terrible screamy baby, and even at his worst his cries were more like loud miaowing than screams. (We are cat people for reference). I really did feel very lucky.

So even knowing all of this, interviewing those who were around us and doing background checks, I found it very hard to believe that the conclusion was still deliberate child abuse. Because of the type of fracture. Even though it made no sense and decisions are supposed to take a range of factors into consideration.

I understood the need for, and co-operated with being investigated - with the underlyng worry that he had a condition or illness that was being over-looked. But right up until they said we had to place him voluntarily into FC I believed the professionals would get it right and there would be an answer other than "You did it because you are a really clever psychopath taking your rage out on a defenceless child and showing no other signs of mental illness under the noses of dozens of people".

We were interviewed once under caution by CID and no charges were brought. The SW doggedly tried to pursue criminal proceedings. I sometimes wonder if a day in criminal court would have allowed us to really examine the medical evidence properly, rather than it just being passed from expert to expert bound to agree with each other due to the "balance of probabilities".

As mentioned, in FC he was treated with high doses of vitamins despite all his levels being "normal" (precautionary and to help his bones heal.) He also had a rare type of anaemia not picked up on until 6 or 7 months had passed but too late to look into because he had changed to formula and had become much more robust.

My son was just under 6 pounds at birth. His newborn clothes didn't fit - we had to get smaller ones. His feet (I still have some first socks) were so tiny, that had I gripped one to yank and twist and shake it, causing the injuries to his ankle, I'm sure injuries would have been much more severe.

Remaining calm, rational and objective while being accused of harming the most precious thing in your world - in fact being TOLD without doubt that you have done this, is rather hard. As the investigation progressed and I juggled contact and court hearings and expert meetings etc, my emotions sometimes got the better of me. I tried not to let it impact contact, but playing happy families, jumping through assessment hoops and all the while wondering how long have I got before I lose him was very challenging.

So, to prevent this happening in fracture cases, I think each child, regardless of medical dogma, should be treated as a blank slate and every single avenue explored before a definite pronouncement of abuse is made. By all means do the safe-guarding - most loving parents will try and put aside their feelings for the welfare of their child, if it means answers are found.

And if anomalies are found in blood tests they should be further investigated there and then, not dismissed because it's "highly unlikely in my opinion" to be relevant. Also any sort of nutritional deficiency should be looked hard for, and the quality of both the childs and mothers intakes investigated. In pre-eclampsia, the placenta starts to fail and perhaps nutritional exchange is impacted?

But continually saying "It must be abuse because it's always been abuse" does a child no favours - there lives could effectively go on to be based on, if not downright lies, then stubborn refusal to see a bigger picture and saving face.

I asked to be hypnotised and also for a lie detector test - i was so determined to prove one way or the other what had happened as I had no explanation outside of normal handling, which wasn't good enough. It had been suggested I had done things without being aware, although I have no history of fugue or absence. My requests were denied because they were a bit off the wall and can apparently show false positives when you are under stress. But that is how desperate I was for answers. It truly is a hell that is difficult to escape.

I really hope things have changed since then, i really do.

Oliversmumsarmy · 17/01/2020 13:30

So your kids were not taken into care? A SW visiting does not mean kids will be taken into acre, even if you are not coping

I never said they were. It was me who went into the care system. Hence why I have a suspicion over SWs

Just that one visit and the threat that if our names were reported again they would take it further was enough for dc to be very suspicious of healthcare professionals

Booboostwo · 17/01/2020 14:07

karencantobe I think what I am trying to say is that you are underestimating the complexity and assuming a clarity where there is none. For example, you say Very rare medical reasons are difficult to diagnose. But if it is that cause that should become very clear soon after the kids are taken into care. if my DD had been taken into care it would have been another 4 years before she had any medical problems at all and even then the type of problems would be consistent with a fracture after abuse so they wouldn't have pointed to a tumor as such. Not all rare diseases present as urgent, especially if you are looking at the wrong thing. Even in OI not all children have the same frequency of breaks.

OldQueen1969 · 17/01/2020 14:13

@Booboostwo

I am sorry to hear of your experiences x Very worrying.

The idea that moving a child to FC determines whether or not there is an underlying condition is quite terrifying. As an accused parent, there is a conflicting desire for your child not to suffer which is at odds with the knowledge that if something crops up far enough away in timescale from your last contact to prove you are innocent that makes one feel extremely nauseous and guilty.

SVRT19674 · 17/01/2020 14:17

Wow, I live in Madrid, we are told to take vit d during pregnancy and then once the baby is born and we go to the gp a week later the firs thing they tell us is to give her vitamin d drops. From then on and for the first six months I was asked every single time I took her for her check ups if I was giving the prescribed vit d. It was the first questions right after good morning. It is so distressing that sick kids are treated like this which is basically letting them down. And a parent's worst nightmare coming true.

Booboostwo · 17/01/2020 14:18

Thank you OldQueen1969. You are entirely right and of course all the time the professionals are assuming abuse is time when no one is looking to find what caused your DCs medical problems!

Thetigeronthewobbelboard · 17/01/2020 14:47

karen the hospital did panic and it was really quite a bad error to make. Had our son been at risk (which he was not) it could have caused very serious issues.

The social worker I would have liked to have been listening to what we were saying, otherwise there is zero point to the call. They were following procedure but it seemed they had already made their mind up before speaking to me which really doesn’t seem right. In our case it was fine because it was simply an accident but it could be different in another case.

OldQueen1969 · 17/01/2020 15:02

And there's the rub - an error in either direction can be catastrophic for a child and its family.

Which is why, despite moments of feeling it my calling to advocate for the falsely accused I have resisted the urge. My knowledge is limited to my own experience, and while I can empathise I can't make that judgement call because every case is different and I couldn't live with myself if I was hoodwinked due to my own personal biases.

This is why CP is a multi-disciplinary exercise, because no one opinion should over-ride a whole bunch of contradictory evidence.

Research and best practise must be observed and pursued in the best interests of the child at all times. sadly, due to lack of resources and a pinch of human nature, there will always be mistakes, but hopefully fewer and fewer as diagnostic tools and criteria advance.

For those interested in fractures this link is the most recent one I can find with regard as to current thinking among professionals:

www.rcpch.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-02/child_protection_evidence_-_fractures.pdf

Dating of metaphyseal fractures in particular is contentious, but it didn't stop the conclusion being drawn in my case that they all happened at different times in a five week window but definitely NOT during birth or in hospital. That is the kind of dogmatic approach that should be taken to task.

Mammajay · 17/01/2020 15:05

Svrt.. in Madrid, do breastfed babies get given vit d or does the breastfeeding mother take them?

OP posts:
karencantobe · 17/01/2020 16:03

@Thetigeronthewobbelboard People make mistakes. The Dr forgot to do their job properly. In terms of the SW though, she may have already checked with HV/GP and knew she was just going through the motions with you. If an accident sounds plausible, it is the first one to need an A and E visit, and no concerns have been raised, they are going to have to take your word for it anyway. Because nearly all the time the parent is telling the truth.
A relative had 3 accidents with her young baby. All were genuine accidents. The first time SW went through the motions. By the third one they had a long visit, lots of questioning, contacting other relatives who were witnesses to accidents, etc. That was the right approach, because although they were all accidents, the number of them did mean they had to check it out properly.

I am sure mistakes do happen. But I also have personal experience of parents, in one case that I reported, who would tell anyone who would listen that they had been falsely accused and their DC should never have been taken away. In the case of the parent I reported to SS, I had to listen to other parents complain about how terribly SS had treated that family. I did not feel it was fair for me to disclose what I knew had happened to the kids, so only said vague things like - we don't always know the full truth. But I agree that those kids needed to be taken away from their parent.

Tgbiitcf · 17/01/2020 17:39

I think it's important to advocate for the falsely accused in general, in the abstract (not least because each case represents some children who might be unnecessarily sent away from their parents). That's different from concluding that specific people have been falsely accused and advocating for them as individuals - I agree that that is quite dangerous.

After all, in the criminal justice system, worrying about mistakes and miscarriages of justice is where cautions and solicitors and taped interviews come from. Should some of those things be more routine in child protection cases? Now we have technology and digital storage? Child protection might need to have a lower standard of evidence before action is taken (erring on the side of caution), but shouldn't information gathering and representation be just as good, somehow?

It ought to be in the minds of the people who design the systems - how do you build in really robust failsafes to counter the types of mistakes, misunderstandings, confirmation biases and so on that are bog standard in all areas of human interaction, in this particularly sensitive and important system? It seems like constantly trying to improve that should be a win for everyone.

Swipe left for the next trending thread