Thinking that these baby assessment (SS) are spectacularly late.

[LoveMyPiano]

Friend/neighbour is - as I posted months ago - pregnant (again) and due around 21/2.

This baby, as have two prior to this, most likely to be taken into "the system" - BUT, certain assessments need to be done. She is still getting legal help over the adoption of the last one, and what she "wants" (which is I think, annual photos), and now there is of course cross-over of the cases regarding these two babies (last one is now 18 months old and with adoptive parents - finally; it took a while). But she could easily give birth to this one at any moment, and to still be getting assessed, seems so late minute!

They are still saying that they will not be completed, and thus, a decision made, until mid-February. And yet they will be critical of the fact that she has not made much preparation herself.

I have obviously failed with regard to boundary setting - although some ARE respected. I simply cannot turn my back on her - and am slight pissed off at her parents (themselves adopters and foster parents) who do seem to be supportive with this, which is why a lot of it falls on me.

Does anyone else think that this should have been settled - as much as it can be long before now, It would be hard enough on someone without mental struggles (part of why, 1. theses children and taken away from her, and 2. she keeps getting pregnant....) - so being to late with these processes it almost tantamount.

Or any official perspective would be greatly welcome as well.....

The test for removal of a baby at birth is a high one. The fact that she has recently gone through proceedings where her child was removed at birth makes it highly likely the same will happen again. If there was any chance of a M and baby placement, this would have been pushed very hard in the last proceedings by her solicitor and quite possibly by the solicitor acting for the baby. The risk she and/or her partner pose must be very great and I would imagine there’s virtually no chance of a residential placement this time round.

If this baby is not due until 21st Feb, it doesn’t surprise me that pre-birth assessments are only just taking place. The LA will not have resources to assess pregnant women until birth is imminent, and in this case they will be merely updating previous assessments which won’t take as long.

However, your friend and her baby have a right to assessment and for care proceedings to be conducted fairly. The only way things can be “done” at birth is if she relinquishes her baby. That’s exceptionally rare and highly unlikely from what I‘ve gleaned from what you’ve written about this woman.

I would also anticipate that she is unlikely to succeed in getting photos of her adopted child. I don’t know how she’s being represented in those proceedings. It is highly unusual to get legal aid for adoption applications.

Thank you @AFS1

Yes, the waters are clouded by her continuation of issues with last baby, and mention of her in the Solicitor's letter - but, having re-read, they mention the previous PAMS assessment as reference for their concerned re. the new circumstances.
It is a different Solicitor to last time, so she has no previous knowledge of the people, but obviously (I would hope) files and official communications.

There has been a PLO meeting, but it seems that the Local Authority are certain to apply to remove, in the same way as last time. It just, again, seemed very late to be assigning an independent Social Worker, but (obviously) what do I know....

Of course ---- when a baby is relinquished, it must be (as well as rare) more straightforward, even though my mother apparently umm-ed and ahh-ed for six weeks. But she didn't want him in the first place.

@AFS1

So, very little hope of the photos?
I thought as much....
And do agree that it shouldn't happen..
But she is very persuasive, and demanding.

Legal proceedings can not commence prior to baby's birth. If the local authority are seeking separation they can only apply to courts once baby is born.

What- for the grandparents to take their grandchild in , they would have to cut off their daughter? What kind of a choice is that- so messed up- surely there must be a better way?

It may depend on what risk is or could be posed. If, for example, there has been DV and there’s a risk the perpetrator could have access to the photos it would make it easier for the child to be located. It’s why adoptive parents are advised not to put any photos on social media. There are obviously open adoptions where there is direct contact between the child and birth parents. If there isn’t, it’s very unusual for photos to be given to birth parents on a yearly basis.

It’s desperately and heartbreakingly sad, and your neighbour is not unusual in repeatedly getting pregnant following removal of previous children. My heart goes out to her.

Oh it's you again. I'd advise posters to have a look at OPs previous threads on her issues with this neighbour, before investing too much energy into this one.

Care proceedings can only be issued when a baby is born. You can assess as much as you like during pregnancy but a final assessment that a baby will be permanently placed away from its birth parents will never be made until after a child is actually born. Given the vast majority of countries worldwide do not allow a child's ties with its birth parents to be legally severed via adoption, with no contact, in the way UK law does, that is a very good thing.

Decisions are made pre birth all the time, foster to adopt placements are just that, decisions are made that a child will be removed at birth.

@Cheesetoastiesz I don't know if you misunderstood my post, but decisions - final decisions by a judge - are not made pre birth at all. Assessments may be done, plans formulated, likelihood assumed, but applications to court cannot be made until the baby is born, won't be an 'urgent' (EPO) hearing unless there is immediate danger, typical wait for an initial hearing in our area is min 3 weeks after application.
The post you quoted was before OP gave updates about the urgency of this case, but regardless a judge wouldn't make a decision pre birth. The local authority plan is just that, a plan, until agreed by the courts.

It is quite OK if people want to do that; I am not ashamed of what I have tried to do (reluctantly, I must add), which has included standing as Godmother to the child who has been adopted.
Any nastiness in the other threads was aimed at me, did not come from me.

I did not want to go much beyond mentioning that this was the second time, and that I have had involvement through both. I have been looking for advice rather than criticism, but realise that is part of the whole Mumsnet experience.

I did feel for sure that someone form the other thread(s) would come along with something to say. However minor.

And look, here you are.

That is a kind and understanding thing to say. Thank you 💕

I have been looking for advice rather than criticism, but realise that is part of the whole Mumsnet experience.

You had pages and pages of advice on your previous threads, you ignore it all. Which is your choice, but I think it's fair for posters to know that, before they spend time and energy offering you help and info which you won't use.

You don't know for sure what I did and didn't do, so thank you, please keep out of it with the nastiness. Which is pointless.

(I posted last year that she was pregnant again, and literally no-one responded. Now, here I am again. Input like yours is absolutely worthless to me, and I don't need it thank you. )

You don't know for sure what I did and didn't do, so thank you, please keep out of it with the nastiness

Well you didn't disentangle yourself from the neighbour did you, if you've got letters from her solicitor in your hand and have been named on her paperwork? Despite pages and pages of support and helpful suggestions previously, when you said that was what you wanted. Which is your choice. It's not 'nastiness' to say that other posters might want to be aware that you are unlikely to do anything different, before they give you their time, energy or expertise.

I suppose that you are one who suggested or supported "disentangling".... Oh, SO much easier said than done, with words on a page.

If you want to discourage and disparage, feel free. I honestly am not interested.

And she named me without my knowledge or consent, only telling me after the fact.

I suppose that you are one who suggested or supported "disentangling".... Oh, SO much easier said than done, with words on a page.

I understand that better than you think - I had a neighbour a bit like yours. She'd turn up crying saying her benefits were being stopped, while I was in the middle of cooking or bathtime for DC, and have no understanding that it wasn't a good time and I couldn't give her my attention (and the letters always said she was getting a Xmas bonus or something, she'd just panic when she saw the letterhead). Once I said I wouldn't be able to talk for a few days as we were going to Legoland - she rang me at 7am the first day. I had to cut her off, she couldn't manage a normal level of interaction and I couldn't and didn't want to offer what she wanted, though I still feel a bit guilty occasionally.

So I do get it's not easy, what I don't get is asking for help then not doing anything. If you don't change it, it won't change.

It depends on the case. In some cases the parents will get a residence order and contact can happen between parent and child. The plan for contact, boundary setting etc will be set out clearly with all parties knowing what their part is and that if they are broken the child could be removed. Where a parent is a possible danger to the child, in any way, then sometimes that person has to be completely cut off. In the case of addicts they are exceptionally manipulative and it's easy to get sucked in. That Isn't in the best interests of the child. The child is now at the centre of the planning. It's no different than contact not happening with a perpetrator of DV. It took the case of Baby P for it to be realised that the plans centered on the adults and SWs tended to get caught up in their story. Sadly that seemed to be the case in the Logan Mwangi murder. The aim is to make it about the child and the need for stability and safety.

Its none of your business.

If you stood back; like her parents have, she might finally
realise there's no more mileage to be squeezed from her pity-party attention seeking -b- pregnancy.

Then she might get sterilised.

Has it occurred to you that by playing the guardian angel supporter, you are in fact enabling her to carry on the feckless irresponsible lifestyle, repeatedly getting pregnant, offloading babies etc? Your sympathy and attention might be what she seeks; the reason she keeps re-enacting her own life story. Another tragic replay of SW wresting the baby from an inadequate mother's arms .

When adoption is delayed for 18 months for a baby removed at birth, it could be necessary for medical /developmental assessment of suspected damage in utero from drugs or alcohol; FASD, or the longterm effects of being born with drug dependency .

SW may be waiting to see if the new born exhibits such symptoms , before making a care plan for it.

As you say, you 've not seen the case notes and don't have all the information SW do. The delays that concern you, may be loud clues to what you're missing.

@2bazookas

I know enough to know that it is not involving drugs, alcohol or any other substance. And any delays are not due to waiting to see, or testing, for any issues of that nature with new one.

Despite what I do know, I am not so involved that my presence or lack of would have any effect were she to get pregnant again. In fact, I told her yesterday that should she (which she says she/they won't) try to have another, I am done with her. I was very hands off - despite being Godmother to baby 1 - for many months last year. I resent the suggestion that I have any power or influence - if I did, she would not have got pregnant.

I am NOT overtly sympathetic; what I am is patient and a (semi-) calming influence when the shit hits the fan and there is no-one else to turn to.

I sympathise; it must have been hard.

One boundary that is set, and has remained so, for over two years, is that she does not have my number - and she accepts that.
When she goes to the Hospital, they will have my number to call me - which is not what happened last time. I didn't go - and have never even held my Godchild.
There is no easy way to negotiate this. That does not mean that I disregarded any input, from last time or now. I have learnt a lot.

I hope they can get on with the "assessments" now.
Baby is on the way into the world tonight.

The baby arrived - and was taken away within a day.
(Again - this is NOT a drug/addiction issue....)

So - I still maintain that the "assessments" - mentioned and semi-scheduled within the paperwork were too late in the day. And are meaningless, as baby has been taken away without them!

She (mum) is not home yet - and no-one has officially told me anything. But I really do hope that official support is going to put in place, otherwise that is a(nother) major dereliction of duty!

If anyone who has knowledge of these things and how this can be allowed to happen can shed light on this process, I would be happy to be educated.

(And I realise that half of the justification for taking this baby is the fact that they removed - albeit in the awful long-drawn out manner that they did - the previous one, and so recently).