To think that Julia Hollander who put her severely brain damaged daughter into care did the right thing

[pigletmania]

I have just picked up this weeks Pick Me Up magazine and have read the brave story of a woman Called Julia Hollander and her husband who put their daughter Imeogen who has severe brain damage into care as they could not cope. The daughter is now thriving and doing so well in the care of Tania a professional carer. They are still a part of their daughters life and are involved in decision making regarding aspects of her life.

When this couple spoke out about their story they recieved a lot of bad press and was unfairly vilified by people on Mumsnet who if they have not been in that situation have no idea what this couple are going through. They put their daughter into Tanias care so that she would have a better life, this in itself is very selfless and putting their daughter first.

Well if she didn't give herself the time she needed it is indeed very sad. And these things take years, not months. However, I feel I need to stress that we don't know the circumstances really! I really feel a bit embarrased & uneasy to be talking about this whole issue as if I understand the ins & outs just because I've read a couple of magazine articles.

...Then again, those magazine articles (as well as the book) were written by JH in order to express what she was feeling / thinking about the situation. So I suppose we can't help but judge on that basis...

One thing though. Donkeyderby said: 'Testing & abortion are now a way of getting rid' (the medical profession's way). I'm sorry, but there's a world of difference between having antenatal tests & abandoning a child- after all some people do antenatal tests to prepare for any eventuality & to have knowledge! You know, there's also pre-birth treatment that can be done for various conditions that the embryo may have, including possibility of operating on a pregnant mother if needed. I would have myself if I could have done something to help/save my child & hadn't due to a supposedly progressive/kind idea of not testing. If I'm being honest- and this is very personal to each of us- I cannot imagine for the life of me abandoning my child, in whatever condition the child is (so I can't imagine under any circumstances doing what JH did). But I can imagine considering & even going ahead with abortion for various disabilities. I'm not at all sure I would actually go through with it. But I see a world of difference between the 2!

(I meant, I would hate myself if I could have done something...)

Even though I don't like how she has sold this story over and over again, I do have sympathy for JH. Finding out your child was profoundly disabled would be shock enough, not to mention the traumatic birth. Then the exhaustion of trying to deal with the baby. Then the fact that her husband was totally unsupportive and starting looking like he was going to clear out.

If I was her, I wouldn't have been strong enough to keep Immie. It can be hard enough to bond even after a 'normally' difficult birth, let alone with all the other stuff. I would also worry about the impact of the father leaving on the child they already had. Her family were obviously not supportive either - her father said 'Just because one thing is broken there's no need to ruin your whole life' implying that any trouble she had through keeping Immie would be her own fault. So her choice was effectively keep Immie and deal with things all by herself, or do what she did.

I would have done the same thing, but I wouldn't have gone on and on about it as I would have felt so shit.

'...her father said 'Just because one thing is broken there's no need to ruin your whole life''

Ouch. Not having read JH's book(s) or articles, I hadn't seen that quotation before and my, isn't it revealing.

InMyLittleHead: ...except you don't know that, we really can't imagine what we would do in these kinds of situations unless we're in that position (which doesn't mean we can't have opinions etc). I imagine that however bad the state of my child, I would not be able to abandon her. Partiuclarly if she / he was an ill / disabled child actually. I think I would feel in that case that this child was helpless & needed me even more.

...Except I don't know. Because I haven't been there.

The same with abortion (for a possible disability). I say 'I would do it'. We say these things. Others say 'I would never abort'. Except we don't know, either way. It's a life we're talking about- our child's life-, and it's also our own life too & our own limits & ability to cope... completely unpredictable how we would cope.

I just read the piece about Evan & Ellie .....

Maria2007 - no I don't know for a fact, but I don't need to have first hand experience to be able to empathise about the situation. I'm not saying she should have done x or y but I can understand why she did.

You're right, it's down to what is achievable for an individual. This is why I think people saying things like 'Why was she allowed to keep her other children?' are being unnecessarily harsh.

what does Julia Hollander do with all the cash she has pocketed from trawling the story of her daughter around? I think we should be told. Does she give it to the people who actually take care of the child?

BTW storming post earlier on, hoppity - I agree entirely.(your 18.41 post on saturday)

OK, fair enough InMyLittleHead, I see what you mean. In a way I can 'understand' what JH did too. My heart can't understand it, IYSWIM but I can imagine that if I were in that position I might feel differently. I really don't think I would btw, I just am allowing for the fact that I don't know either way, it's a very extreme situation to be in.

A lot depends on money too. Financial constraints would be, I think, the number one problem for me if I were in that situation. I wonder why JH (given that she has enough money, it seems) didn't hire live-in help (a specialized nanny etc) for Imogen? Or at least loads of help during the day? (I'm not saying she should or shouldn't have done this. Again, I stress I really don't know why & how she did what she did. But I'm just wondering how come she didn't get loads of help & keep Imogen in her home?)

I know I might get bashed for saying this, but believing that keeping Imogen might lose me my husband (father of my children) and the support of my family would be a big influence in deciding to give her up.

At the most of levels, there are people who just don't want to be bothered with, or to be confronted with, disability. Possibly JH/her family were in this category.

InMyLittleHead, why would you be bashed? I for one see what you mean. Although I have to say I would be deeply shocked if my DP / family had such a reaction, i.e. encouraged me to give up my child. Actually I told the whole story yesterday to DP (without commenting on the whole thing so I could get his honest reaction). He said 'oh my god such a tragic story'. I then asked whether he would consider giving up the child (and believe me, he's someone who finds life with our non-disabled 15 month old very trying at times!) He said 'I wouldn't even leave a dog go in any circumstances, let alone a child with a disability. Particularly a child with a disability. How could I leave him?'

At the most basic of levels

I don't know donnie but like I said in my post the other day, I'm sure if she were giving it to charity, we'd know about it. I feel like she wants compensation for what has happened to her.

I am hugely sympathetic - as I posted earlier, I have a close friend whose daughter is severely disabled as a result of birth complications and I am in awe at the way they cope with that as a family and I completely understand that some of us would not be able to cope - I'm not sure I could. But it is the not going back to get Imogen that breaks my heart. I just can't get my head around that.

A lot of people might think you should put your child above your (possibly selfish and ruthless) husband. I would also hope that my husband would feel as yours does, but you can never tell how people will react until they are actually faced with the situation (not your DP as such, just people in general).

Manny, sorry, it's not about 'not bothered about disability' (although I'm sure there's plenty of people like that around too). Here on this thread we're talking about the real difficulties that JH had to face & how she best could have dealt with them. And we try to imagine ourselves in her situation. It's hardly because she 'couldn't be bothered about disability' that she chose what she chose, I imagine. I want to give her the benefit of the doubt. So I imagine she must have thought long & hard on the issue & made a choice rightly or wrongly that felt right to her & her family at the time. However much I disagree with her choice, or can't respond emotionally to it, I would not be as ruthless as to suggest she 'couldn't be bothered about disability'... Remember, this is a real family we're talking about, JH is not a caricature that we can all just bash at will.

But IMLH anybody can be involved in an accident or succumb to some awful disease which leaves them disabled...what then? Do different rules of responsibility come into play because that person was once 'normal' but through no fault of their own, is now disabled? Surely, caring for disability is the same, regardless of how or when it comes about?

I can imagine it would be easier if you already knew and loved a person and then they became disabled, rather than a totally new person coming into your life already with that disability, whom you are under great societal pressure to love but, sadly, may not be able to. In the first case the memories of what they are 'really' like might sustain you through the difficult times and you could feel that they are still 'them'.

Maria I stand by what I said. At the most basic of levels, a disabled baby was not what the family wanted (I won't talk about JH in isolation).

'I know I might get bashed for saying this, but believing that keeping Imogen might lose me my husband (father of my children) and the support of my family would be a big influence in deciding to give her up'

do you think you would you still be influenced by your family to give up the newly disabled person (who had once been 'normal')?

I think I would find it easier to be strong enough to not give up the newly-disabled person because I would still have the idea of them as they were, which would be very powerful.

In a way, I find that a little sad (being willing to care for disability x if the person in question had been 'normal' for awhile beforehand but being potentially unwilling/unable to care for disability x from the get go) because in the latter case, the person is not valued as an individual, just a disability.

You know, the vast majority of parents of SN kids did not know that their dc were going to be disabled until after they had been born. And some parents (such as me and my dh) didn't know their dc was going to be disabled until a couple of years after the birth.

What gets me about JH is that she constantly exploits the daughter she rejected - and worse, does this in full public view. This awful woman is not only making a living out of the child who wasn't good enough to keep, she's parading the fact. Horrifying.

The idea that you can just 'put away' a disabled child should be left in the bad old days where it belongs. I saw the results in my own family, with my Great-Uncle, and the suffering this caused him and my Grandmother, who never recovered from having her little brother taken away. (And who told me that her own mother never recovered either but thought she had to do what the doctors told her.)

I'd imagined the very sad tale of my Great-Uncle was something to do with the time when it happened, that attitudes to disability had changed. But obviously not for JH and her ilk.

Manny - I do know that's possible. I obviously don't know how I would react, having not been in that situation. I can just see how factors, especially lack of family and partner support, would make you less able to cope, and I think JH genuinely suffered from that. However I cannot explain her blatant publicity-seeking, unless she finds it therapeutic in some strange way.

A disabled child is a child. This is something that people without much experience of disability tend not to realise. I have one disabled child, 2 non-disabled children. We love them all equally and their needs all have equal importance within a family.

If my husband told me to choose between any of my children and him, he would find his bags packed. When you say 'oh I think I might choose my husband'- really? If your husband asked you to choose between your children you have now and him, you'd choose him???? Really? Because that's the way you feel about a disabled child. Just the same as your non-disabled ones (if anything you remain more protective as they grow- so if your child cannot have independence at all then your love remains like the love you have for a baby).

Now I agree that Julia was in shock and the shock probably led to her not bonding. She needed someone like the GOSH consultant. But I guess she was up against her family as well as her own feelings. I agree with Manny that there were probably family things where those with disabilities are seen as something different- and I think the words she uses to describe Immie today suggests she still thinks like that. Perhaps that's defence.

It is more usual though that if you haven't bonded- once the shock is past and once you realise the child is not going to die that you bond and move on and discover the rewards that come from disability, they become just like any other child in terms of the way you feel. Sometimes mother's don't bond with NT kids for whatever reason. What would your advice be to them? Time? Or dump and run.