OH wants custody of baby niece?

[milkshakess]

So OH's younger sister has recently had a baby and there is possibility that the baby may end up in care.

She already has an 18 year olds on who has lived with their mum since he was 8.

She dips in and out of his life, she even forgot his last birthday, she hasn't really been a mum to him at all. Despite this he has turned out to be a lovely, smart and hard working lad.

Everyone was so surprised by the pregnancy.

From what we understand she was kept in hospital for 2 weeks whilst some kind of team were getting stuff ready for the baby.

I think the hospital staff were monitoring and observing her interact with the baby and something must of been flagged?

Her mum has sold her house and was due to move abroad in September but she had been visiting her and the baby at the hospital daily and helping.

OH isn't really close to his sister but he is close to her son, he calls OH the "best uncle" as him and the other uncles have all chipped into help raise him.
OH would sometimes not see his sister for years and she was always changing her number and would have to talk to her though her son.

Anyway the family don't want the baby to end up in care but everyone has young kids themselves ( we have toddlers and are trying for a 3rd).

OH wants to go for custody but the care would really fall on me and I work from home and have a very flexible job.

Just wanted input on the situation as OH and the family don't want the baby to go into care

Nope. I was suggesting the 18 yo deserves any ongoing support he can get from the family so he doesn’t have to go and live with his biological mother when his grandmother moves abroad.

The baby is a separate situation- and not an easy one, especially as SIL may be dropping in and out of the baby/OP’s lives and making things chaotic.

The beauty of a public forum is the variety of perspectives, and there’s really no need to police how others brainstorm.

How does this comment sit with your earlier comment to me?

Hi MilkyLeonard, thanks for answering a question that wasn't directed at you.

What do you mean by until nephew is better set up?

I read it the same way your thinking a young adult with little support could take this baby when she is a toddler

No, I meant until the nephew is more established in life - at uni, doing apprenticeship or in work, and so on a solid path that can’t be derailed by his biological mother.

I dont see the nephew taking on the baby, no. Just that it would be a shame if he was dragged down by SIL when he’s so close to making a good life as a young adult. But presumably OP cannot take both nephew and baby in, so could DH’s DP family take baby.

Call me hard hearted but there is no way I'd be taking on raising a baby that wasn't related to me when the mother would be wafting in and out of my life and seems at best to have major mental health issues which she may have passed on. This is even assuming as you say that the child was not exposed to who knows what alcohol and drugs during pregnancy. You are not even married to this man who expects you to spend the next 18 years raising the child of his 37 year old sister? A sister who seems in no hurry to give up her parental rights and benefits but instead has some ill defined plan that somehow family members wii be pitching in to do all the hard work.

Raising a child with any special needs is hard - really hard. I raised two non-neurotypical children and their issues were tiny compared to some. Sure they are now fully functioning adults with university degrees but it was nightmarish at times for me and for them and they were my own children. I don't think I'd have stayed the course if they weren't.

What's the alternative? That you let the poor thing have a life of misery in care? She's family, what is the reason for hesitation? You already wanted a third baby and if you take her in, now you're spared the pain of pregnancy and childbirth. I don't see the downside tbh.

Why would a baby have a life of misery in care? You know that babies are adopted and raised within normal loving families right?

"A life of misery in care"?!

A young baby will be adopted very quickly, a short term placement with a specialist foster family and then placing with her parents. There is nothing to suggest that she wont be adopted by people who want her. Far better that than being brought up by someone who cares but didnt really want her and may harbour resentment that she couldnt have a third biological child because of her.

They won't adopt her out, she will only be available for foster care.

And you know that, how?

If SS decide that she would be better off adopted and a judge rules with them, then she very much will be adopted.

The OP has said that the mother doesn’t appear to want to give up the baby, and has said SS don’t seem overly concerned. So it’s reasonable to consider that adoption is not on the table, or at least won’t be for some time (if ever).

Says who? SS would never agree to an arrangement where a baby was pass-the-parcelled between birth relatives, because ‘family’. Depending on any assessment of SIL, there’s every possibility that she could be prevented from having any direct contact. SS will only be concerned about what is in the baby’s long-term interests, not whether the adults’ needs are being met. Babies and children are removed from birth parents with significant mental health issues that prevent them from being a functional parent. The evidence of the lack of parenting of the teenage sibling will inform any assessment. The baby has the right to be raised in a functional household. Love is sometimes just not enough. The baby needs stability and security.

God only knows.
Debatable if the SIL meets the threshold for the baby to be removed AND for her to have her parental rights removed to have the baby made available for adoption.

But if I was to take the child on under a kinship care arrangement I'd want some assurance that she wouldn't be returned to the mother or if she is MY ties with the child wouldn't be broken.

Very difficult situation. As lots to think about for both the Op and the babies best interests

Or even a parent or a person who wants to adopt. Sorry to be so pedantic, but there is a silent and stoic army of single adopters who have and are stepping up to raise some of society’s most vulnerable and harmed babies and children.

Give me strength

Page 33 and bright sparks are still coming in with this gem.

It brings "cancel the cheque" to new heights

This is the problem, it seems that it’s just the SIL and her family who want all responsibilities absolved from her, and that as per the norm everyone else has to pick up the mess that she’s created again?
but of course when she decides she wants to cosplay mummy again it’s amazing and everyone has to dance to her tune, she’s obviously more important than anyone else!

Also, as an adopter, it amuses me how often it is trotted out as the happy-ever-after solution. For other people.

SW obviously aren't happy for her to be unsupervised with the baby either or they wouldn't both still be in hospital at 5 weeks.

They must be thinking / hoping some sort of family kinship care arrangement can be achieved or baby would have been removed by now. Its not unusual for babies to be removed at 2 days old.

Hospital can't be left supervising her and baby much longer.

If the baby is in hospital at 5 weeks then it sounds like there are other issues at play here - otherwise SS would have the baby in foster care while the long term issues are assessed/decided.

SS would need to have secured a full care order for the baby to be removed at or close to birth. Usually in the grounds if risk of significant harm. If the baby is still in hospital at five weeks old, there could be health issues at play.

Well, exactly. It isn't unusual for babies to be removed immediately at birth or just days after even just for temporary foster care. It seems odd that baby is in hospital 5 weeks later just because they are hoping for kinship care yet haven't had any contact with OP who other family members involved would've recommended by now.

It's very possible that baby is in hospital due to some health issues or they are actually attempting to support mum because she wants to parent the baby.

So it seems like nobody in the family wants to commit to raising the baby. But don’t want her going into foster care. I think adoption would be best all round. It wouldn’t be fair for the mother to fuck up another child’s life.

It seems like a lot has happened in just five weeks, where the mother and baby haven’t left hospital (?) She’s said she wants to keep the baby and everyone to help, she’s asked for people to visit, but sounds like you and OH and maybe others haven’t due to illnesses (very sensible). You said before you’ve been trying to call her for weeks but she doesn’t answer or phone is off.

SS can’t be too concerned as they seem not to have got a care order as yet, and you’re not sure what their concerns are, or what mother’s issues are.

I wonder if anyone actually has a clear picture of the situation? Until you do this is all a mess but someone else’s mess and you don’t need to get involved at all.

I wonder if initially theyve thought she'd be ok. But MWs have raised concerns.
Hence care order wasn't in place before birth.

SW are now trying to get the care order.
And looking for suitable people within the family.

(I have no idea how long it takes to get a CO, although I'm guessing it might depend on the evidence the SW have)

Nope
If care proceedings happen and she can't return to her mum or be placed with family then she would 100% be placed for adoption. Babies don't ever have care plans for long term foster care.