Nine years for starving a baby to death

[PropertyFlipper]

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

Let's just hope if she does have another child in the future, is born into a loving stable relationship instead of rape / sexual exploitation of a child.

She still needs to live with the knowledge that her neglect caused the death of her child. That is a heck of a burden to carry.

Surely they only discovered she had left the child 11 times previously after Asiah’s death from checking CCTV / interviewing the mother. I have read a lot about this case and haven’t seen anywhere that says social services were aware of the fact she had left her so often, for 2 days once. Are people just speculating this? Or is there a link? My bet if they had no idea she was doing this and only found out from reviewing CCTV

@Lockdownbear what about men who rape, torture and beat children to death? Apparently a lot of them claim to have had a difficult to childhood and mental health problems too- I take it you also empathise with them and you hope they get all of the support they need?

For the last time, we know she was troubled. Posters like myself object to the made up stories absolving her of any wrongdoing at all. Absolute drivel and disgraceful, once again, to the child who is the real victim.

No matter how many times you repeat this nonsense it doesn't make it any more true. Nobody in this entire thread has at any point attempted to 'absolve her of any wrongdoing at all'.

Drivel indeed

Give it up ffs, you are just embarrassing yourself.

The role of of the state is foremost to protect its citizens and to protect its most vulnerable citizens first.
We are as strong as the weakest we protect.

The state must do all it can to stop child abuse and mitigate further opportunities for child abuse.
The state can offer choices to people who have killed or seriously harmed children and those choices should include sterilisation and staying away from children.
Very very small price to pay really after robbing someone of their own life.

The flawed logic is,sterilisation after the event doesn’t prevent death. It’s simply a punishment to appease the public revulsion

[quote Sweetchocolatecandy]@Lockdownbear what about men who rape, torture and beat children to death? Apparently a lot of them claim to have had a difficult to childhood and mental health problems too- I take it you also empathise with them and you hope they get all of the support they need?[/quote]
How can you compare rape for personal gratification or abusers to neglect.

If your talking about a child 18 or under, who sees rape and is normal, and copies the same behaviour then yes I'd have sympathy and think they need help as much as punishment.

Equally if she'd been a bit older I'd have less sympathy for her.

Children abused in care are let down by society, some will cope, others need help to break the cycle.

The state can offer choices to people who have killed or seriously harmed children and those choices should include sterilisation and staying away from children.
And when the individual declines sterilisation ? Then what

Staying away from children How’s that monitored and enforced? Define away does it mean no direct contact?or is it proximity? So no accommodation near a park or school.
Who supervises this staying away given it’s not mandatory

It’s not the role of the state to sterilise prisoners. That’s knee jerk punitive punishment to appease public anger.

Some people may feel that way but for me it's a simple matter of risk management. No child should be used to measure the success of a rehabilitation program, I would call that an experiment. The surest way to make sure she doesn't kill or neglect another child is to make sure she doesn't have any. The liberal in me should feel uncomfortable with that but I absolutely don't.

I doubt there is anyone on this thread who would be happy to send their child to a nursery run by a convicted paedophile no matter what reassurances they received about the effectiveness of rehabilitation.

@Lockdownbear both rape and neglect are recognised as child abuse under the law as both acts involve inflicting harm upon a child. Just because this woman didn’t rape or beat her baby (not that we know of anyway) doesn’t mean she didn’t knowingly inflict suffering upon her-evidently she did as the baby starved to death and she had been told by social services countless times that she had not been providing adequate care.

It’s interesting you mention age though as this person was an adult, so at what age do you think a person is capable of taking responsibility for their actions?

I find it astounding that people think that just because someone has had a ‘hard life’ gives them a free passport to abuse a child.

Compulsory sterilisation after a death isnt risk management given the event has happened. Acting after an event doesn’t mange risk, it enacts a punishment to appease public anger and revulsion

I doubt there is anyone on this thread who would be happy to send their child to a nursery run by a convicted paedophile no matter what reassurances they received about the effectiveness of rehabilitation that’s just a nonsense statement. Of course no one would be happy or chose that. And the enhanced CRB would reveal such convictions and a convicted paedophile wouldn’t be employed in a nursery

And the enhanced CRB would reveal such convictions and a convicted paedophile wouldn’t be employed in a nursery

Why not?.. thought rehabilitation was wonderful?

What are you on about?
CRB check reveal conviction, cautions ,spent conviction
Rehabilitation is a undertaken in prison

@PolkadotClouds

Six days to her, in pain and frightened, must have seemed like months. It seems like millenia to your next birthday as a happy child, or a trip the following week. Let alone terrified and alone, nappy full of poo and horrible painful nappy rash, starving, in pain, so thirsty. The extent to which she must have been traumatised already not to cry or scream in this situation says it all. It's just devastating. I don't know how her "mother" can bear to still be alive.

And suffering from flu. With nobody to wipe her nose or comfort her. Poor little mite

Rehabilitation isn’t a cure or a panacea. It’s an after event intervention to moderate,and manage behaviours and behavioural patterns. It doesn’t extinguish risk,it potentially reduces risk

I do accept that a lot of teenagers who grew up in care are badly damaged, and hence I can see why this girl was unfit to be a mum. It’s made me think of my two adopted DDs’ birth mum (they’re 12 and 9 now), who also grew up in care and was sexually exploited. She’s had 4 DC, who have all been taken off her. It’s heartbreaking and I know it will be for my DDs when they see all the details one day.

Asian should have been in care, that much is totally clear. Or at least, she should have been monitored far more closely than she evidently was.

I think I would feel sympathy if this had been the first time she’d left her daughter alone or if it had been for one or two nights only and she’d been distraught to discover that her daughter had died.

But it wasn’t the first time. And it was for 6 nights! She also lied time and again, saying that she had left Asia with her mum. She also inquired about modelling jobs, with no thought about her poor daughter.

So I’m struggling to have any empathy for the mum in this case. I’ll save that for the poor little girl who died alone and must have been in agony.

Although I wouldn’t use the word ‘evil’ to describe her, I think that’s a word that’s vastly overused. I would describe her as ‘damaged’, and too much so to care for a child. That’s not excusing anything. She had ample opportunity to give her daughter up if she didn’t want to be tied down by a baby. But I also think some of the responsibility has to be shared by Children’s Services, who knew that she wasn’t looking after her daughter properly. How else is there a record of her having left her home alone before?

Compulsory sterilisation after a death isnt risk management given the event has happened. Acting after an event doesn’t mange risk, it enacts a punishment to appease public anger and revulsion

I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse as my post said "another child".

that’s just a nonsense statement. Of course no one would be happy or chose that. And the enhanced CRB would reveal such convictions and a convicted paedophile wouldn’t be employed in a nursery

Is it nonsense? You are quite right that an enhanced DBS check would prevent a convicted paedophile working with children because we don't think it's sensible to take the risk even with offenders who have undergone a rehabilitation program. Why would we allow someone who killed a child have more after rehabilitation? Do we risk the safety of children to prove how compassionate we are?

As I said Sterilisation after a criminal act doesn’t prevent further criminality. It simply means the state has intervened to undertake a barbaric procedure. To appease public rage & revulsion. It’s an after the event punishment

If you want to effectively reduce or prevent criminality it’s better to have intervention & support for individuals who are vulnerable and at risk

To appease public rage & revulsion.

You keep insisting this is the motivation for proposing sterilisation as if the rest of us are just far too emotional to objectively consider ways of guaranteeing this young woman can never inflict harm on another child. It's not about calculating risk it's about eliminating it.

If you want to effectively reduce or prevent criminality it’s better to have intervention & support for individuals who are vulnerable and at risk

I'm sure there are offences for which this is true but why would we spend time and energy trying to support an individual not to commit the same offence when we can absolutely assure it. For this particular offence I'm very comfortable with a zero risk strategy. We should not give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who has killed a child, it is likely to result in a child in and out of foster care before being finally removed from the parent and then the whole cycle of the care system producing damaged adults starts again. Children deserve better than that.

@EspressoDoubleShot

I'm all for rehabilitation when it's theft... Drug issues... But not harming children no You won’t offer rehabilitation for a heinous crime?why If no rehabilitation offered all that’s achieved is detention and deprivation of Liberty. She still gets released at end of sentence Sentencing is based on guidelines & sentences the judge can recommend

I think the point being made was that certain people are beyond rehabilitation and releasing them at any point is too much of a danger to others to be justifiable. Hence the law/ sentencing guidelines for such individuals need changing. While the vast majority of those im prison absolutely do benefit hugely from rehabilitation intervention and can live a productive life in society - I was actually involved in performing a study on this - to rehabilitate child murderers or paedophiles or serial killers etc is a pointless exercise.

@Lockdownbear

I'm all for rehabilitation when it's theft... Drug issues... But not harming children no.

What about a child who had been through who knows what?
She didn't end up in care for nothing, she was abused while in care, and pregnant at 15.
What a wonderful start in life that girl has had.

I sincerely hope she gets the help she needs in prison.

She should be treated humanely in prison, but it's madness to suggest she should ever be released and given a new identity and the opportunity to hurt more people.

@MichelleScarn

I hope she is repentant for her heinous behaviour and actions.

So far nope. Just sad for herself that she got caught out with her lies.

@Lockdownbear

Let's just hope if she does have another child in the future, is born into a loving stable relationship instead of rape / sexual exploitation of a child.

She still needs to live with the knowledge that her neglect caused the death of her child. That is a heck of a burden to carry.

Errrr no. Let's hope she never has another child. And that if she does, the child is removed at birth.

The mother would have had extensive and thorough psychiatric assessment and reports done as part of her defence. If there was a problem with her capacity or mental health that affected her ability to be responsible for a baby it would have come out in the court case and she would have been sent to a secure psychiatric forensic unit instead of prison. I suspect she thought someone else would step in an take charge of the baby while she was away. It's heartbreaking to think of the suffering of that poor child.

@EspressoDoubleShot

Compulsory sterilisation after a death isnt risk management given the event has happened. Acting after an event doesn’t mange risk, it enacts a punishment to appease public anger and revulsion

I doubt there is anyone on this thread who would be happy to send their child to a nursery run by a convicted paedophile no matter what reassurances they received about the effectiveness of rehabilitation that’s just a nonsense statement. Of course no one would be happy or chose that. And the enhanced CRB would reveal such convictions and a convicted paedophile wouldn’t be employed in a nursery

It's not been called a "CRB" for a number of years. I think you really have no idea about safeguarding practices etc.