Tony Hudgell concerns

[Ilikeadrink14]

Am I being unreasonable for having doubts about Tony Hudgell and, in particular, his mother? He isn’t allowed to be a little boy any more and has been moulded into a money machine, albeit for charity. In addition, all this publicity and faux admiration is fast turning him into a rather dislikable child, and that is sad. On tv yesterday, he was being interviewed but kept trying to get hints about what to say from his mother, and looked very uncomfortable one minute, and full-of-himself and rather supercilious the next. His words didn’t seem to be his.

I have a family members who adopted a DC who has been left with life long issues, physical and emotional, due to the actions of their birth mother. I can't imagine them disclosing this abuse to anyone who does not need to know let alone pushing them into the spotlight.
There is absolutely no way a child can consent for their medical information to be disclosed, and I'm surprised there are not official safeguarding procedures in place to stop it.

I was disturbed by his parents seeking fame for him many years ago. Sad to hear that it’s still going on.

That boy has suffered the most horrific traumas in his life, and doesn’t deserve to be dragged into the spotlight as “that poor abused boy”. It’s gross.

I haven't seen the latest interviews but have been uncomfortable for a while. It's his story to tell, no-one else's and I don't think it's fair to have it in public when he can't make an informed decision at his age to whether he wants that out there for all his life.

It made me feel uneasy from the start and now it is looking money-grabbing and exploitative.

His parents would have been strongly discouraged from changing his first name as it's considered an important part of an adopted child's identity. So I won't blame them for that.

Once a child is adopted there's no social care involvement, any more than for any other ordinary family. So can't blame social workers for not stopping the family from having him in the public eye, they can't any more than they can for any other family exploiting putting their DC in the media.

Having said all that, I have gone to extensive efforts to protect my adopted DCs privacy, they and I do not appear in any media including SM, let alone telling the world about their past and was done to them. That's their information to share, not mine.

I think Tony's parents are very wrong to tell the world about his past, it's not their story to tell. And I think any parent is wrong to 'use' a child too young to give informed consent for publicity, no matter how good the cause.

Unfortunately he makes a very poor spokesperson. Whether he has learning difficulties, finds the publicity overwhelming, or has SLD issues I don't know. But he doesn't seem to have the ability to communicate that you'd expect of a kid in year 6. It makes a very uncomfortable situation all round.

Shannon Matthews was adopted and had her name changed. Similar scenario. Sometimes it’s for the good of the child.

I was “strongly advised” to change my AD name but I didn’t. For various reasons I wish I had.

I just feel so sorry for this poor lad

I actually know the family really well and you have everything totally wrong.

This was an open adoption and Tonys identity was not allowed to be protected under the section 45 which they fought to get in place for the trial but as Tony was too identifiable it was removed. (Tonys name was not allowed to be changed either due to adoption identities and Social Services did not deem the birth parents a risk hence no original prosecution). The family tried at first to keep everything away from the media but they were hounded day and night and had no protection at all from Social Services or the Police due to the open adoption. They fought tooth and nail to get a trial and have been campaigning ever since to protect other children.

They have never received any monies at all for any appearances or papers (I work on the media side so I know). Any appearances are purely to help others and Tony is always asked first.

How many of you have fought to get a prosecution and change the law on sentences to protect other children?????

Its unfair to judge when you have no idea of the full facts. Both parents have been going through cancer too and you have no idea how damaging words like this are.

I find it very hard to believe that an abused child's identity "wasn't allowed" to be protected.

I do understand the concerns over his privacy, however, I know Tony and his mum and how hard she has fought for him, and for for changing the law to increase the sentences given to child abusers. He is an incredible boy, with wonderful and loving parents.

True but that's a scenario where the child's name was in the public domain before adoption, so changing it is to give privacy. Tony wasn't in the public eye until his parents chose to put him there, he'd have had his identity protected during the criminal proceedings against his birth parents I assume? PP up thread said early stories about the family hid his identity.

When I was going through the adoption process it was pretty heavily suggested that if you wanted to change a DCs first name, they weren't the right DC for you. It would only be suggested to do so for their privacy/protection, eg. if the name was so unusual it'd be too easy to find them. One of mine has a name which was only given to 5 other DC in the year they were born, and no one ever suggested changing it. I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision for you either way.

Lots of people here who seem to have inside knowledge of the situation

I don't think you have the full story either.

'Open' adoption doesn't mean you can't keep your child's privacy in the media.

And when the parents applied for the adoption order, social care could not have prevented them changing his first name if they'd wanted to. They may have had good valid reasons not to change it, but they could not be make to keep it if they didn't want to.

Asking a child that young to consent isn't fair, he's too young to fully understand what he's agreeing to. And most DC want to please their parents, if parents ask him to do something in the media he's not really in a position to refuse. He's too young to understand that all that info about him is out there, forever, the genie can't be put back in the bottle.

I'm sorry to hear both Tony's parents have been unwell, but their illness isn't a free pass to put a young child's private personal information in the public eye without people commenting on it.

Where was the interview OP?

YANBU, it’s all very exploitative. I don’t things like this something seems off.

Tony’s parents were horrifically neglectful and abusive. They nearly killed him. Surprised to hear it was an open adoption/they were deemed low risk in light of that.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-43113371

Adopting - great
Fighting for prosecution - great
Campaigning to protect children - great

None of that makes it ok to exploit this child though.
They could have done all of the above without putting him on TV or having him photographed for the press.
They have chosen to use him for attention and that is very wrong of them, even if they felt they had a good reason.

If you know them, maybe you could advise the mother to reconsider how she uses her son and his personal story and information?

See this is the absolute piffle I think that the family use to ride on the coattails of his disability. I highly doubt a nurse said that about a 3yo to his adoptive mother. And while they did put efforts into getting Tony’s Law passed, it doesn’t give them a right to exploit a child who’s been through enough.

I always laugh at the “He WANTS to do it” assertion. Kids go along with what their parents expect of them. Do you think kids indoctrinated into extreme religion Natalie hold those beliefs or are they pushed by the people they love and trust the most?

They are continuing to put him in the spotlight, no matter how the press behaved before. They didn't have to keep putting him out there, the press would have moved on, as they so often do.

He can't consent, therefore he is being exploited.

They were by Social Services, they were actually going to allow T to go back to birth parents.

It took 3 years before they were even charged in 2017 for the evil abuse they inflicted on him at 5 weeks old.

Again without the wonderful family that fights tooth and nail so no other child suffers like Tony did.

The trouble is it's too late. His whole life story is out there now and his privacy is gone for the rest of his life.

I know, poor kid. Imagine starting high school and everyone you meet knows every gory detail of the worst thing that ever happened to you.

@JCook777 doing something good doesn't mean the adoptive family can then do whatever they want regardless of the harm they cause the child. It's still exploitation.

I worry for him when he reaches his teenage years. Being a teen is hard enough anyway, and can be a difficult time for adopted kids, as they work out who they are as a person whilst coming to terms with their background. Not all adopted children go through such a stage, but some do. It's all going to be so much harder, for him.

I'm glad to see this thread because I've had the same feelings about what's being done to this boy for years. It's so wrong. He has the same name as the father who abused him, I just cannot understand why his adoptive parents wouldn't change it.

I just looked at his social media account and it's making me feel uncomfortable that his adoptive mother is trumpeting her OBE all over it. I have seen a lot of people who enjoy the adulation and praise that charity work and 'good deeds' bring, and who often exploit others in the process.

My very good friend adopted a little girl and the birth family (not just parents, the extended family) were so angry about it she has to basically live her life in fear, because if they found out where she was she’d be taken. Theyre basically scumbags with a track record of criminal behaviour. She spends half her life trying to stay anonymous, I can’t imagine why anyone would knowingly put their child in this situation.