I've known of multiple women to lose their children to adoption after failing to stay away from an abusive partner. It happens up and down the country all of the time. We all know that.
So why is it when somebody with money is involved, the services don't seem to care?
Case in point.
Dappy from Ndubz. He has a long history of abusing partners going way back to the mother of his eldest children. Multiple arrests, her posting images of her injuries online.
Fast forward to 2017 he's put in prison for attacking a more recent partner. The mother of his youngest children. In the home they share with their then baby daughter. A knife is involved and he needs to be restrainted by 4 members of the public before threatening to stab the police.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4499994/amp/Dappy-remanded-custody-attacked-partner.html
The girlfriend was all over social media calling him a narcissistic psychopath, drug abuser, violent, a danger..
As soon as Ndubz make a comeback she's moved him back in with her and the kids, is accompanying him on the tours, having spats with another woman who he was seeing in the interim and singing his praises as though he's the best thing since sliced bread.
Who is safeguarding those children then?
If this all happened before the fame then those children would have likely been removed long before the incident for which he was imprisoned.
Social services don't always get it right. There have been times I've completely disagreed with them, I am most definitely not advocating for mass forced adoption but come on.. what's with the disparity?
Risk is risk, isn't it?
Does having money in the bank make it less likely that children will suffer emotional (at the very least) harm?
Why is it OK for people with money to abuse drugs and behave in a domestically violent way and their lives go on uninterrupted but your run of the mill working class couple down the road get hauled into court and their children removed.
AIBU?