Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Nine years for starving a baby to death

999 replies

PropertyFlipper · 06/08/2021 15:07

I’m struggling to see the justice here. This sorry specimen will be out in five years no doubt. Devastating.
Teen mother, 19, bursts into tears as she is jailed for nine years

OP posts:
the80sweregreat · 06/08/2021 22:53

I agree that any children she goes on to have should be removed at birth.

SavageBeauty73 · 06/08/2021 22:54

It's heartbreaking. The terror the young child must have felt 😳 I can't even leave my dog for 6 hours!

She must have wanted her to die subconsciously or not. It's so tragic.

PolkadotClouds · 06/08/2021 22:55

@ghostyslovesheets

Of the children I work with the ones in really horrible dysfunctional families still fare better than the ones in care. We can't reach the "looked after children" at all

Yup 'care' varies so much I would rather a child be with a shit parent who has support and can work on being a better parent than in care!

Also kids LOVE their parents - they really do - even the utterly shit ones - you will not believe the fight older kids put up to stay in awful situations - the constant running away, returning home, refusing to leave to return to care - because they are mum and dad - you have to fight that and it's impossible!

Hence why they should be removed much earlier. This baby should have been removed and placed for adoption. A baby would have been very unlikely to end up in care long term.
Lockdownbear · 06/08/2021 22:55

@ExpressDelivery

The first thing I'd do would be to pay foster carers (maybe not as carers but certainly as enhanced lodgers) to keep children until 21. Very few other people are completely on their own from their 18th birthday. Some are effectively abandoned at 16yo.
The mum was being abused in care at 14 what chance is there of her staying in care until 21?

There is a fair chance the babies father was her mothers abuser. This sounds like a girl who needs tons of well targeted support and counseling.

Biancadelrioisback · 06/08/2021 22:57

Imo she should be in a psychiatric facility.

Spanielstail · 06/08/2021 23:02

There is no excuse here. My 11 year old nephew would know not to leave a baby alone for an hour, never mind days.

She had the capacity to get herself to another city (or two?) To party. She knew you shouldn't leave a child.

I thought this had been misreported when I read the story initially. I thought it was 6 hours and was appalled then.

It defies all comprehension. There isn't a punishment that is enough for this. Sadly punishment changes nothing for that little girl.

Sterilisation might be an idea though.

ObviousNameChage · 06/08/2021 23:02

And no doubt she will go on to have more kids too, just like the other mothers of the tragic children mentioned in this thread.

Why do so many people keep repeating this? There isn't any indication that she wants more children,now and in the future. This poor baby that died was conceived when she was 15, very likely as a result of rape. Not exactly a breed them quick scenario.

Not to mention that there's no way in hell she'd be allowed to keep another baby.

She's guilty of enough, without made up bullshit to spark even more outrage.

PolkadotClouds · 06/08/2021 23:02

[quote Pebbledashery]@polkadotclouds it would never happen after the first time. The local authority like to give these kind of people multiple times to mess up.
I watched a documentary on YouTube about the hidden social worker, a boy who lived in absolute squalor with his parents, he had serious speech delay, his father was violent and aggressive.. They were given multiple chances before the child was placed in to Foster care. Multiple.[/quote]
I know. But they bloody should!!

MichelleScarn · 06/08/2021 23:05

@bluewanda

Yes I've no doubt about that at all, because in our pathetic system 'everyone deserves a second chance'.

Yes - everyone except the victims, apparently.

Yep, and there's always got to be someonelse to blame! She wasn't supported enough, people didn't listen enough that the poor baby wasn't crying and so on ad nauseum. The absolute fault on this poor little girl dying is her mother. Her and her alone.
ghostyslovesheets · 06/08/2021 23:05

PolkadotClouds

On what legal grounds?

It’s easy in hindsight I agree but at the time what evidence was there to legally remove her child?

Because, as I am sure you are aware , SWs operate within a strict legal framework

ghostyslovesheets · 06/08/2021 23:07

She's guilty of enough, without made up bullshit to spark even more outrage

Yes this!

HarrisMcCoo · 06/08/2021 23:07

@Biancadelrioisback

Imo she should be in a psychiatric facility.
Insulting to those who have genuine mental health problems. Please!!
Panickingpavlova · 06/08/2021 23:11

The bar should be lower and parents who fail not given these endless chances but where do the dc removed go. That's the massive problems.

ColdTattyWaitingForSummer · 06/08/2021 23:11

It’s a tragic case, and no sentence will bring that poor baby back.
As a pp says, a lot comes down to who knew what and when. If social services or those within her “supported” housing were aware the child had been left before, then questions must be answered as to why no one stepped in and safeguarded the child.
And yes, ultimately the mother is to blame, but by highlighting any failings, it should hopefully stop something similar happening again. (I know “lessons learned” is a cliche, but the hope would be that it would be true.)

PolkadotClouds · 06/08/2021 23:14

[quote bluewanda]This is the video I’m talking about:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-48962296[/quote]
Jesus. SadSadSad

EspressoDoubleShot · 06/08/2021 23:14

@Biancadelrioisback

Imo she should be in a psychiatric facility.
Referral to a psychiatric unit is based upon assessment of mental state One doesn’t just go to psychiatric unit because of dysfunctional behaviour or to appease public anger. You need to be assessed by Psychiatrist and deemed to have a mental disorder under ICD categories . As unpalatable as some find it,not all odious & dysfunctional behaviour is a result of mental illness
CloseYourEyesAndSee · 06/08/2021 23:15

@bluewanda

I agree with there being an obsession with keeping children with parents, no matter how terrible they are.

This. How many more children have to die before there is a change in the law?!

A change in the children act? Not likely. It's quite clear you don't know or understand the law. The law is fit for purpose. We cannot prevent every child death, tragic as it is. We are not 'obsessed' with keeping children with parents. Many children are removed. But there HAS to be evidence to remove a child. It sounds like this woman escalated her neglect rapidly in the weeks before asiah died. To the point where it had not even reached the point of social work assessment. That was not a failing of the law.
PolkadotClouds · 06/08/2021 23:15

@ghostyslovesheets

PolkadotClouds

On what legal grounds?

It’s easy in hindsight I agree but at the time what evidence was there to legally remove her child?

Because, as I am sure you are aware , SWs operate within a strict legal framework

The law needs to change.
ObviousNameChage · 06/08/2021 23:17

@PolkadotClouds this woman is a care leaver , it didn't exactly work out for her and her baby did it?

CloseYourEyesAndSee · 06/08/2021 23:19

@Pebbledashery

The local authority failed as well. She should've been removed under a care order and placed into Foster care.
Based on what? A crystal ball? You can't remove children without evidence. We do not know who knew that she had left her alone prior to this last occasion.
PolkadotClouds · 06/08/2021 23:21

A change in the children act? Not likely. It's quite clear you don't know or understand the law. The law is fit for purpose. We cannot prevent every child death, tragic as it is. We are not 'obsessed' with keeping children with parents. Many children are removed. But there HAS to be evidence to remove a child. It sounds like this woman escalated her neglect rapidly in the weeks before asiah died. To the point where it had not even reached the point of social work assessment. That was not a failing of the law.

Yes, it is. The law is not fit for purpose if a child with so very many obvious risk factors is left in such a vulnerable situation. Nobody has suggested it is possible to prevent all child deaths. Sometimes unpredictable things happen. This was not one of them.

The thresholds for removal need to be much lower and a proper care system funded. Just like with healthcare in this country, why are we seemingly incapable of adopting best practice from elsewhere that is proven to work? Kids in the care system in Denmark for example have outcomes nearly as good as those who live with parents. I agree with the many posts about funding needing addressing urgently. Sadly children don't vote so no politician gives a shit about vulnerable kids whose parents' votes also aren't influenced by their welfare, or cast at all. But to claim the law has landed in the right place when leaving a child in such a clearly vulnerable position and just crossing your fingers they stay alive is deemed acceptable is insane.

PolkadotClouds · 06/08/2021 23:22

[quote ObviousNameChage]@PolkadotClouds this woman is a care leaver , it didn't exactly work out for her and her baby did it?[/quote]
See my post below. The care system doesn't have to be shit. People can decide they want it made fit for purpose and vote for that. That isn't an excuse for leaving children with abusive parents.

CloseYourEyesAndSee · 06/08/2021 23:23

The law needs to change.

To what? Do you want to give the state powers to permanently remove your children without evidence that you have caused them any harm? Really?

UndertheCedartree · 06/08/2021 23:24

The conclusion of most inquiries are that agencies are not sharing information enough. I believe this is an ongoing issue. So GP is aware of one incident, police know about another, supported accomodation know something else but this information isn't passed to the SW to see the bigger picture. In this situation it appears there wasn't an allocated SW - perhaps previous had left and case was waiting reallocation so there was noone to pass information to.

CloseYourEyesAndSee · 06/08/2021 23:24

But to claim the law has landed in the right place when leaving a child in such a clearly vulnerable position and just crossing your fingers they stay alive is deemed acceptable is insane.

The level of speculation about what social services did and didn't know before she died is getting ridiculous. I'm tired now and bowing out. Goodnight.