.....re the Baby P case and others like...

[JimJammum]

I realise that, as the death penalty is no longer in effect, and assuming someone doesn't get hold of those scums and d the job we all want done....Is is unreasonable to expect that anyone male or female found guilty of child abuse should be sterilised??? At least then they wouldn't be able to have any more kids themselves to neglect, seeing as SS are unable to protect them.

While I'm ranting on the subject, I give money every month to NSPCC and have been called today by fundraisers for Save the Children....where are these charities and their support in cases such as this?? Can't SS use them and their funds/workers/whatever to assist them if necessary? Am I being too simplistic?

HBLB - I think that the 'oh fgs please fuck off morons' sort of comment is what I hate most about mumsnet.

We really must agree to differ.

I know that P's natural father left the home when Peter was 3 months. It's likely that social services would have been happy to hand P over to him.

Sad fact is, because the police failed to prosecute the mother through administrative sloppiness, the social services legal people probably thought they didn't have the evidence or power to take him away.

I haven't heard anything from P's father for a while, he was in the press a lot at the beginning but I've not seen any news about him since.

I'm afraid I think that actually something which needs seriously addressing WRT cases like this is basic misogyny, male privilege and the endless peddling of 'romance'. It's that set of values which lead to women putting up with abusers in their homes, believing that they need a Man in their Lives to be complete, that the couple-relationship should be 'worked at' and the man's needs and feelings take priority over everyone else in the household.
Admittedly the Victoria Climbie case was different, but that sort of thing is very rare indeed.

This man convicted of killing baby P and raping the little girl is a 32 year old 'illiterate man with learning difficulties', a warped personality, fascination with violence and causing pain.
He falls into a group of people who are completely unreachable re: having any effect upon their behaviour. People like this are not mentally wired to have the necessary conscience, awareness or regard of the result of their actions on others etc. Ad thus are completely unsuitable as child carers in any form.
The mother is probably to a degree similarly unsuitable and a 'non pc' 'non-professional' coming into contact would probably make that assesment fairly swiftly.
Herein lies the problem that there is no way at of preventing blatantly unsuitable people having children and once they have them there has to be a period of time during which the children become damaged/ abused/ neglected before they are removed if they ever are. As action by SS will deal with events that occur and reults of observations and support plans etc.
I have a close family member,a 20 year old girl who has never been formally diagnosed with a particular syndrome or her special needs formally identified. Her mum was in denial of her sn her whole childhood as child result of very abusive relationship (she adored him he viciously abused her 3 other kids and her throughout pregnancy and ultimately left her) she felt guilty and wanted to hide the damage done to child.
Anyway the girl grew from an extremely sweet and cute under 10 (similarly as sweet natured as my downs syndrome cousin) into a nightmare preteen. Fixation on breaking things, uncontrollable anger, complete disregard for any basic hygiene. Her mum was warned as she became a teen that it would be a disaster when she became sexually active as she wouldn't use contraception but again mum didn't want to see the predictable and argued she couldn't force her child to use a long term method of contraception.
So of course she became pregnant at 15, had termination and months later pregnant again and refused termination. The SS were satisfied that as the girl lived at home with her mum that the baby would be cared for by a responsible adult. But the mum worked and the baby was left in 'care' of the girl mostly. The best of his care was complete neglect and the worst..who knows? Even her mum now walked a tightrope of wanting help to be given to her daughter as she knew she was unable to parent properly but not wanting to reveal to SS the extent of the problem so that the child would be removed.
The whole family had 'anecdotes' of the girl's awful parenting and incidents they had witnessed but no-one would take the step of reporting to SS as they didn't want to be the one to cause the child to be 'taken into care'.
The girl became pregnant again, by a different guy. The first father had 'special needs/ learning difficulties' also. He had actually fathered a child before which had eventually been taken into care after a period of SS action, uncovering gross neglect/ physical/ sexual abuse. The second father like her appeared to the untrained eye to have 'formally unidentified special needs/ learning difficulties'. Pregnant for the 2nd time she regularly abandoned the first child with family or loose acquaintances, at one point he was being cared for by a drug dependant couple with severe mental health issues but the girls mum was not allowed to remove the child as SS supported his mum's right to allow people she chose to care for him.
Eventually the 2nd baby was born, the girl's mum felt unable to cope with 2 babies under 18 months and so became more insistent that SS intervene. SS formulated support plans etc, her mum constantly reported the neglect of both children until eventually some months later an observation in a mother and baby unit was set up to assess her ability to parent. The 4 week assesment was abandoned in less than a week as the SS had to face the fact that the neglect was gross and the girl unable to parent.
The children were taken into foster care and the girls mum began to fight for custody of the eldest child.. 1 year on the children are still in foster care, SS have explored a number of options including placing children with their respective father's mum's/ family members which have fallen down as they would not receive foster allowances as the children are actually family. Family conferences have been held/ the girl (mum to children) has no interest, has 'moved on' but fortunately persuaded to have contraceptive implant so no more babies for the moment.
SS have recently decided that the 2 children should be adopted together so now the girl's mum is fighting for custody of both children despite her own parenting skills being questionable. SS is now in process of evaluating her etc, etc.. I think the likely outcome is that eventually these children will be adopted but they will have had a lengthy time to experience a variety of traumas and the bottom line is that it could all have been easily prevented.
The girl was obviously going to get pregnant, obviously couldn't nurture children and obviously any children in her care would face trauma/ abuse/ worse from her or any people she allowed them to come into contact with as she is not able to protect them from the characters she chooses to mingle with.
I believe this is the fate of many children but the issue of preventing unsuitable people from having children is totally un pc and so not tackled. When these people do have children the process until eventually they are removed from parents is long and tortuous requiring evidence of neglect/ abuse etc first. And of course many children will 'slip through the net' as SS are either unaware or too easily satified that care plans are in place etc to support these families. These children will then become parents in turn...
I'm sorry for the long and rambling post but I can see the frustration behind the argument 'they should all be sterilised' as the byproduct of their sex lives will be very damaged children/ future adults. I'm convinced of the need for 'contraception with incentives for consent' and immediate intervention at birth. If SS and society want to allow children to remain with these sorts of parents they must be placed immediately in secure mother and baby units and assessed and supported from day 1. I fear the resources required would be huge so this is an unlikely solution.
I'm aware this is only 1 configuration where children are suffering abuse but as it's so predictable and easily identifiable it should be tackled however 'un pc'

that's horrific voiceoftreason.

As someone else said further back - there are too many families in crisis. I cannot tell you how often my pleas to social services for assessment or help fall on deaf ears. Currently one family I deal with are in a pile to be "allocated a social worker" when one is available. This is a young single Mum whose ex-partner makes threats to kill the children on a regular basis - the council re-housed her to a new address so this man would not know where she was. At Xmas the 3 year old wanted to see daddy so she contacted him and allowed him to come to the house. I said to her that I could not believe she had done this after all that he had done. She just could not see the danger she had placed herself in. She is young and completely demonstrates that she is unable to protect her children. Social services promised a social worker in January ..... it's now May.... ex-partner is making threats to kill again and still no social worker. I have contacted the police control office and had a marker put on the address so at least if she rings them they will treat the call as a priority - beyond that i cannot do anymore apart from ring social services on a regular basis and continue to voice my concerns.

That is so terrible JP.

I wrote to 10 Downing St because the issues surrounding the Baby P case and V. Climbie case (etc) with professionals not helping/having too many restrictions/little support/not enough budget/too much bureaucracy/too pc to notice abuse (whatever) all show the system is not working.

I do not think I could have been a good sw straight out of univ with no exp of dc but now I know I would do a good job, and would definitely spot abuse and know that dogs/snakes and dc do NOT mix, have instinct above or else when it comes to dc.

Which is why there is no excuse why abuse was not spotted. Imagine getting over ruled when you want to take a child out of a dangerous environment! omg

To be fair to the local SS department they are horrifically understaffed and overworked but to be honest I live in fear that this nutter will actually do the things he is threatening. Then of course the papers and probably my name dragged into it and "why didn't anyone do something". . At least it won't be this week though as he has been arrested again for his threats.

Yes, that's what I mean, the system designed to protect doesn't work.

If you are concerned then go to the media and say what you've told us here.

In fact all of us could. Maybe MN could be a formidable weapon against child abuse and domestic violence.

JP.....can i just hijack for a second...

My DD is in care. Long story.
But they allow her contact (supervised) with my XxP the father of DS1, he isn't her father but she considers him to be.
He was often emotionally and physically abusive to me, her, and DS1.

The same person is trying to get unsupervised contact with DS1. I refuse to allow it as he has recently had contact unsupervised and assaulted my son, slapped him round the head and on the leg, and shouted at him, right in his face. So i stopped contact and now am being dragged through court. CAFCASS have given him a positive report. I still refuse unsupervised contact despite this.
So i am showing that i am able to protect my DS? So why is the court system so bloody willing to consider handing my DS over to an abusive person for unsupervised contact on the premise 'he is 11 now so is able to tell if anything untoward happens'
How about NOT allowing ANYTHING bad to happen in the first place? They chuff me right off, really they do.

I'd rather go to prison for contempt of court then bow down to them. And put my DS at further risk of abuse.

If you have any serious concerns as JP, SA have found you can contact the Govt cabinet MPs direct, just type in 10 Downing st, send them a letter or you can email the relevant department. You get a very quick response.

Then you know the people who are at the top know. Then there are no excuses.

May be we can all do that.

Thanks kidowner, i was just using the situation to point out, what the COURTS do is not always in the best interests of kids. CAFCASS either.. They all make mistakes, its MY job in my own case to make sure i would die before putting my child in danger (again) but i had to MAKE the mistake of staying with him for 10 years and 'allowing' daily abuse.. life isn't always easy, clear cut, its not always easy to leave or to know what to do, and some people have to make mistakes to learn from them.

A lot of people are simply lucky that their mistakes haven't led to anything really serious, others continue to make the same mistakes, yes, and either end up with fucked up abusive kids, or ones that grow up vowing to be different, another branch is the kids who grow up vowing to be different but know not HOW.

Right. IMVHO...SS can be TOO heavy handed in its dealings with parents of the latter type, ones that would like to be different, but don't know how, having had a shitty role model themselves.
In any protective civilised society things can be so complex that, in solving one problem, others arise, the child in care being an example, feeling unloved, they leave care with maybe no qualifications, go on to have kids, which are then taken....

I could go on and on, different branches, different situations, different people. Throwing money at child protection is pointless unless some of it goes towards preventative programmes, family support, and there are only so many social workers.

When a SW lands on your doorstep the first reaction is one of fear or anger..
If you ask for help and don't get it, how frustrating!
If you ask, and get help, but that help turns sour as they announce that they think you're not capable of looking after your children properly, and remove them from your care......

As i said. Complex. A complete and utter overhaul of SS is needed to make them more family friendly and approachable rather than being seen as child stealing interfering busybodies.

Imagine if, no matter what, they were approachable, the fear of removal of your kids was allayed, and some of the money used up by care proceedings or keeping kids in care was chanelled instead into keeping families together, after all, if you have approached and asked for help, you are hardly an abusive parent, you are being responsible and wanting to make a change, just need guidance.

There would then be no excuse for not approaching them for help, and a seperate directorate could be set up for families where the abuse is so bad the kids HAVE to be removed, no question.

God my fingers are knackered and my brain hurts lol.
I don't think there will ever be an answer.
Everyone has differing opinions, i used to smack my DD, now i would happily advocate banning smacking, which i am sure some would agree with and some disagree, but it would, IMO, take away any doubt over what constitues a smack and where the boundary is for physical abuse.. when does a smack turn into a kick, or punch?
WHERE is a smack abusive..round the head, on the legs, bottom, hands?
Take away the doubt and excuse, ban smacking, and that would be a great start. Its unacceptable to hit an adult, after all, its assault. Children deserve the same protection under the law.

Abuse can be psychological, not just physical.

I'm sorry to hear your dd is in care and that you've had your life messed up with nasty pieces of work and you're not free of that.

They tried to keep baby Peter's family together, sw did try to help, just hopelessly dangerously inadequate as the mum was scheming, or rather, just blindly in love, or too dysfunctional herself.

How about 1 to 1 supervision 24 hrs, cctv in all rooms, register and crb check of boyfriends,etc..? As you say, it's complex.

I feel children in care should be given the same opportunities as those in top boarding schools, ie an excellent education, sporting, arts etc opportunities, 24 hr supervision, 1 to 1 counselling.

Breaking the cycle has to start somewhere. Otherwise whole segments of lost generations are selfperpetuated.

It's not right the life chances of the most vulnerable are so limited sometimes by family circumstance and low expectations.

You're right though,

I think however stretched social services are for staff basic common sense should be used. My ex partner - my sons dad physically abused him from birth to 5 months old when i left him. He was physically abusive and mentally abusive and controlling to me and when i went to the health visitor to ask for social services to be involved to help me to leave him with my son but also to prevent him using his parental responsibility to get him whenever he wanted. I went to the hv with a 5 month old baby who had a hv history of bruises on his face of unknown cause - though i had said that they were always got when ds was alone with his father (often just in another room). Ss came out and interviewed us together, took ds for a mediacal at the local hospital and then said we should try to work together more, at no point was i given the opportunity to speak to them alone and tell them how terrified i was of him and his actions etc, i ended up having to stay for a few days before i phoned them back and begged them to help me. what im saying is in those few days what if i hadnt rung back?? why didnt they speak to me on my own?? couldnt they see the wispered threats of dont say a thing etc?? at this point i had a photo on my phone of a handprint bens dad had put on my tiny babies leg that stayed there for 4 hours, he admitted it but said he was sorry and this is all they did, its so maddening, i was so stressed and down from all the abuse i couldnt agree to testify against him in court and they said even with his confession it was not worth taking it further so he got a police caution and supervised contact (though he has chosen not to bother after i involved police when he threatened to kill his son). Is it any wonder that kids get abused for years if basic things like interviewing parents seperately are not done?? ben is autistic but before he was duiagnosed this they had to rule out brain damage due to the abuse - thats what it was like, yet the ex gets away with a caution for "gbh on a minor" or at least i think thats what it was he actually got cautioned for cant remember the exact term. he is left to do what he wants and do it again for all i know. i have kept on with the csa trying with no luck to get money just so i have a way of knowing if he lives with kids again (it gets deducted off payments an amount if libving with other kids) so i can tell his local social services - 2 hrs drive from me thankfully! so anyway, thats a bit of a personal insight into the problems with social services in my opinion from my experience

Thanks to all who posted. I'm sorry if I appeared to be clueless in my Op. I have to admit, I had lots of thoughts and anger/anguish about these 2 kids and others in similar situations in my head and I needed an outlet for them. It has really helped me to sort my feelings out reading your posts, both positive and negative. However, I found it more helpful to read why people opposed my initial view and propose an alternative, rather than just calling me Moronic for expressing a potentially ill-considered opinion. With clever arguements, it is capable to change a person's mind - calling them names doesn't usually have any effect.
I know deep down that sterilisation is not an answer, and I also feel slightly demoralised that there is no answer to this issue. Alot of you have written about where you see the failings being - authorities, money, society, generational abuse etc etc and that has highlighted how complicated this issue is. I guess I am desperate to find someway to stop monsters (because that's what these people are, surely) doing such evil things to innocent children. I am sure that everyone of you must want that too.

I am naive and simplistic. If those are my worst faults, then.....maybe that's not so bad.

JBM that is so sad, and worse than I thought. I want to give sw the benefit of the doubt, but in your case and obviously countless others, sw could have done something but did not have an instinct to realise the danger, the fear.

I feel so sorry for your abused son, but well done JBM for getting out. Sons who witness and experience abuse so often think it's normal and go on to abuse (in many cases)

Your actions mean the cycle is broken. I would see it as my duty to warn any other new partner of an abusive ex, I definitely think new boyfs should be CRB checked.

Why is domestic violence and child abuse so common?

YABU, AND stupid.

Agree that the whole SS/Care system needs a drastic overhaul.
Also agree that everyone has a responsibility to protect and care for vulnerable dc and to pass-on concerns to relevant bodies. We have to get past this attitude of "I dont want to interfere/its not my place" etc etc.
I practised what I "preach" the other week, when out shopping. Myself and friend became aware of man, literally "out of it",on some sort of drug, walking round Mall with young girl of approx 4/5yrs old. Another lady noticed at same time, and I saw her speak to cleaner and point out said man-presumably thinking cleaner could use his radio to contact someone in CCTV room. Said cleaner, said something along lines of,"thats terrible", and did nothing. Self and friend follow/go into same shop as man and girl. He was swaying, steadying himself on shelves in shop, could hardly open his eyes. Little girl, beautifully turned-out, dad(?),carrying rucksack for her, asking what biscuits she wanted that night. Then swears at her, as not the ones he wants.
It looked like he was going to be looking after her overnight-no other adult with them.Icouldnt watch any longer and asked the assisstant to get her manager. Spoke with him-he saw said man, now leaving shop, and said he would radio CCTV,to track him, and et Mall police to talk to him.
I said, I would rather be wrong about situation, than do nothing-the girl could not speak for herself.At least felt I had done something, but left me uneasy re girl. Manager of shop, then tells me, he is aware of man,as he often shoplifts and hides stuff in babies buggy!
So, man, I presume, is known to police, and here he is, stoned, with dc in his "care".Is this another dc slipping through net-hope not.
Re child sex offenders-I dont know if they can be "cured"-thats another thread. Dont think sterilisation is right.Watched TV programme last week re sex offenders in a part of America. These offenders served their jail time, then got transferred,(mandatory),to a specially built facility, where they must engage with therapy. There is no time limit put on this-its at discretion of therapists/warders-place run like a prison. If they do not engage-no release,even though they have served their jail time. If therapists dont think offender is cured-no release. Clearly, many of these offenders were v. unhappy, and said place worse than jail, as they had no end in sight to their incarceration.I think its better than releasing them, with no therapy or insight into their actions. But, can these offenders ever be deemed safe in society?
Sorry for long post,but Baby P. case really upset me and just wanted to add to the thread.

My little boy was removed from his birth mum very young. He came to live with me whilst we tried to help her sort herself out and get him back.

When he came to me he was terribly underweight because she would not feed him at night. She didnt want to get out of bed.

She failed, miserably and I was there to see and hear everything she did and didnt do. I am not easily shocked. I have experience of lots of stuff, I am not naive or squeamish.

After 18mths of trying to get her to put him first and try and see where she had been going wrong, social services admitted defeat.

By this time my son's development had been seriously delayed and still is. He is 6 and needs a statement.

When he was two, birth mum had another baby. There was no proper assesment done. That baby is still with birth mum.

Why? She is the same person. She has not changed. There are several reports by several profesionals to say she is incapable of change.

Yet two years after not being allowed to be alone with a baby due to concerns, after starving her child, after continually refusing to see that a child's needs come before her own, she is treated as a brand new mum.

That child is on my mind every day.

Its a really complex issue, and although I don't agree with further violence towards perpetrators I can understand knee jerk reactions because child cruelty is so distressing and incomprehensible to most decent people. Apparently last year they were trying to pass a bill in parliament in Holland where mothers whose children were abused by her or to her knowledge, were removed and the parents had to agree to take contraception and have no more children. I cannot remember the details but I doubt if it ever passed and its v controversial as well. Sadly although this tragic case of baby P was v badly dealt with/managed, if parents want to abuse their children they probably will.
I hope the 3 people involved get v long sentences to keep them out of society, but also in the hope that a severe punishment might deter others from committing these acts.

The bill proposed in Holland that the mothers would have to agree to a 2 year contraceptive implant.

Load of bollocks and my previous post would illustrate.

Just wait a couple of years and start popping them out again. It solves nothing. The women involved in these cases are in the vast majority, damaged people. Women who put their own needs first, women who cannot recognise the needs of their children, women who crave male attention in whatever form it comes, women who have impaired capacities on so many levels.

There are women who have one baby after another removed. It goes on and on and yet they still keep getting pregnant. One reason they do this is because they simply cannot see that anything that has happened is down to them.

Its so bloody depressing.

So it was for 2 years only. Did it ever pass?
I find it really depressing but not sure if there is a solution. Many of these women are also being abused/bullied and are not even aware of it. Also if its been a pattern in their lives since childhood the concept of unacceptable behaviour must be v vague.
Its never excusable however. Would back to basics education on self esteem/relationships at a young age help to tackle the problem as some people are obviously just clueless and have had awful role models? As for the men how the hell do you break these destructive cycles?

It wasnt passed as far as I am aware.

Early intervention has to be the way. Get to these women long before they have the kids. Infact these women are the children that they have removed (if you get my knacked thought process).

But this is the rub. The Daily Mail will weep buckets over baby P but calls the older version of baby P 'feral' and feckless and wants to hang em high. That little lad would very probably have become one of those men who abused women like his mother and children like himself.

Yes and little girls brought up in homes where the mother receives regular abuse will think it is normal, this is how men behave, and so have low expectations from a relationship herself.

There are plenty of threads here on MN where for personal reasons abused mums stay with abusive partners and some are too weakened by years of it to know how to protect themselves let alone their dc.

Many choose one abusive partner after another but don't know why, dc end up traumatised and go on to perpetuate the cycle.

No one is to blame. Apart from the fact the damage caused to the dc in going to be recycled if mums don't put dc's interests first. But as chegirl says, mums sometimes aren't capable of putting their dc first.

It's tragic what happened to your little boy
chegirl, sounds like ss are perpetuating child abuse themselves.

Well, I've had enough of hearing such tragedies and want to do something about it.

StercusAccidit Wed 06-May-09 23:07:37 Add a message | Report post | Contact poster

"Yes well i will consider my opinion to be a waste of time in my next life when i haven't been SAb and neither has my DD, why should i care about the so-called human rights of these monsters?"

erhmmm for one thing, statistically speaking some of them will not actually be monsters but victims of a miscarriage of justice

this is a good reason not to mete out punishments that cannot be rectified later

speaking as someone whose children have a medical condition that is often mistaken for abuse

and as someone who has themselves been suspected of abuse

and who still has to go on caring for my children, taking them back to the same hospital, fighting to get them seen

IMO opinion people that abuse children have wiring gone wrong in the brain, maybe they can't help it??? I think though that when a person is like this is identified they should NOT EVER be allowed to live in normal society, screw their human rights.

I think that instead of testing medicines on animals we should test on pedophiles, child murders, abusers, rapists instaed of paying tax to keep them in colout TV and rehab programs.

It is just not worth the risk.

Sterilisation....good idea. I get angry enough over the way some people treat their dogs and think that we should have dog licensing brought into force.

Speaking of the human rights argument, I mean when there have been clear cut cases fo horrendous things happening to children...we know what that monster did to Baby P and his sister, we know what the boys did to Jamie Bulger. I'm talking about the out and out cases...not if a child has a few bruises and nothing can proved and it could be that they are ill etc. The kids who are dead or broken and it is perfectly obviuos what has happened to them. It ight not help the kids at the time but it would send out a message that we don't tolerate things like this happening.

There is no fear anymore of what might happen if you do something bad....Human rights has gone PC mania.

I realise abuse has always gone on but just can't get my head round people behaving so appaulingly 100 years ago, they just didn't or they were executed etc.