Newborn baby confiscated when mother fails competency test

[MumoftwoNC]

This is in Denmark. I didn't know this was a thing, I'd never heard of this... I'm so upset by it. Does anyone know any more about this? Surely this wouldn't happen in the UK? I thought mums would be given support if they weren't "competent" rather than just have their baby taken into care.

Apologies for the Guardian link which just goes on about the mother's ethnic minority, whereas I think this would be awful regardless of the race of the mum.

Protests as newborn removed from Greenlandic mother after ‘parenting competence’ tests https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/23/protests-as-newborn-removed-from-greenlandic-mother-after-parenting-competence-tests?CMP=share_btn_url

I found another article from January incorrectly saying the tests had been banned.

"According to a 2022 report published by the Danish Institute for Human Rights, 5.6% of children with a Greenlandic background living in Denmark had at the time been placed into care, compared to 1% of those with a Danish background."

Even 1% seems quite high for children who are taken into care??

https://www.euronews.com/2025/01/21/denmark-abandons-controversial-parenting-competency-tests-used-on-greenlanders

What’s shocking is that this is still happening in 2025. However, the targeted removal of children from indigenous communities has been a thing for centuries, in many countries.

I know you identify with this case, but realistically, you wouldn’t have ever been on their radar simply for being born and raised in a different country/culture.

This baby wasn't born yet but she may have had previous babies that were removed from her care for failing to care adequately. In this country that might be grounds for removal at birth. I have represented a mother who had already had several children removed, had previously had periods in mother and baby units and still failed to learn the basics, so her baby was removed and she was not allowed a place at a mother and baby unit. She was given the chance to be assessed to care for the baby but it was always during supervised visitswhilst the baby was in foster care. I think this is sensible. I don't think we know enough about this particular case but it does sound draconian.

Exactly this. Sometimes race (and class ) does play a Huge factor even now and definitely historically this has been the case.

I also agree that race definitely is relevant in this case. Cultural differences are relevant. I think we discriminate in the UK against non-white non- British families, albeit unintentionally.

I know a family who adopted three babies, one after another, from the same mother because she was not competent to look after them. She had learning disabilities, MH issues and drug misuse. She lived an utterly chaotic life. She did have intensive support with her first pregnancy and newborn but she didn’t have the capacity to grasp the basics (feeding regularly, responding to cries). The younger two were removed from birth.

It’s heartbreaking all round but the children have a wonderful home and family and are thriving.

And even if they do, they may replace him with another abusive man. It happens.

But this case seems to be about cultural issues- at least that is part of it. There may be other underlying issues we aren’t aware of.

Some of the criticism could be seen as valid- communication style etc- but when culture is considered it’s not what it appears.

Years ago we were taught to be aware black boys avoiding eye contact were being respectful, not shifty. That ‘look at me when I’m talking to you!’, was not appropriate. The article hints at Greenlandic having different language norms, that facial expression is implicated in some way.

Maybe Greenlandic children don’t learn some Danish norms when they live in Greenlandic families. It could be handicapping them for a future living in Denmark. That was considered problematic and worthy of intervention. Obviously that’s no good reason to take them away.

I wonder what we’d do here if there was evidence that a cohort of DC weren’t learning English, and were hampered from future employment and independence as a result? Imagine if they are home educated so never get that opportunity. Would we intervene?

There are quite a few clues in the article that there is a bit more going on than the surface presentation.

firstly, it states this is the third child the danish social services have taken away. It says her other two children were taken away 11 years ago, and states that one of them now lives with his father and Keira is only allowed 2 hour supervised visits.

the professionals involved have commented to say that processes have not been followed and that Keira should have been “given the chance” to live in a supported mum and baby unit.

they are also quoted as saying the FKU “contributed” to the decision to take her previous two children which strongly suggests there was other stuff going on they are not allowed to comment about.

i don’t know Denmark. But in the uk to have only supervised contact with your kids you’d have to be a threat to them - high risk of either physical or sexual abuse.

I've just read the full article and that would never happen here if this is her first child. That's horrific.

Different case.

There might be more going on, but the key question is whether the mother is being treated differently to an ethnically Danish woman in similar circumstances.

The statistics bear out that this is true, and given Denmark's long history of forced sterilization, forced IUDs and child removal from indigenous women, AND that Denmark itself has recognised the tests are problematic, we have a lot of corroberating evidence.

Indigenous women around the world have had their children removed on 'welfare' grounds throughout history, or sometimes killed.

I have a friend who had her first 5 children removed, but slightly different to this as the children were placed with their respective fathers and she is allowed supervised contact. The reasons for their removal are complex and not my story to tell but relate to childhood trauma/abuse and resultant vulnerability. I don't necessarily agree that it was the right decision and she has subsequently had two children who have remained with her full time. The process to reach these decisions has been long, very involved and included many professionals. The sort of tests you refer to op had no place in this process.

I also have an ex-sil who raised her second child in a mother and baby unit for the first 6 months where she was assessed consistently and taught the skills she needed to then raise her child independently.

For those who want to do something about this :
It might be worth writing to :
Ms Mette Frederikson
[email protected]
In Danish Parliament involved in Health and Social Care .
or if you can find anyone else to write to please let us know.

No i don’t think it is.

Brønlund was told that her baby was removed because of the trauma she had suffered at the hands of her adoptive father, who is in prison for sexually abusing her.

that’s in the guardian article about Bronlund. 🤷‍♀️

Denmark, always held up as a beacon of liberality, is a deeply conservative and conformist society. I have a friend married to a Dane who's lived there for 30+ years and she says she's still held at arm's length by many people (including her in-laws) because she's a foreigner. Greenland may be Danish territory, but there's a long history of Danes regarding Greenlanders as uneducated and generally not to be trusted.

How ridiculous how are those questions related to parenting !

Heartbreaking. So she has her childhood stolen due to SA from her father then her baby stolen by the government because she was a victim ?

I think there are two things going on in these cases.

Ivana (first article) is an adopted child, her adopted dad is I prison for abusing her and she is 18 years old - it's not a surprise that there would be some level of agency involvement. I read the article quite quickly but I didn't notice any mention of the baby's father so wonder if that might actually be the imprisoned 'dad' which would also have had a massive impact.

Keira appears to have started having children at a young age which may have been the initial 'red flag' for the authorities, probably compounded by her race, and this has filtered down to her subsequent pregnancies.

The real issue imo is the testing - which is explained more in this article and is appallingly flawed and racist.

It's akin to the IQ tests that were carried out on Black Caribbean children in the UK in the 60s and 70s and saw then categorised as 'educationally subnormal', when the tests themselves were so culturally and linguistically biased the outcomes were inevitable for many.

The fact that this appears to still be continuing in Denmark until so recently and in Ivana's case even after they claim to have stopped the tests, is appalling.

This also happens in the UK. There are dedicated assessment centres where parents stay with their children and are both supported and assessed by the staff. If they "fail" then the local authority will apply for a court order for fostering or adoption. Sometimes it's parents with learning difficulties, or substance abuse, or psychiatric issues, etc.

Taking the child into care is a last resort and only done when it's at real risk of harm. Not just because someone isn't the best parent ever.

But I consider myself (socially) conservative. And for me part of that is the view that babies are best with their mum if possible. If it were up to me (obviously it's not and I have no expertise in this area) - we'd exhaust every other alternative before separating a newborn baby from their mum. If there's an abusive man in the house, lock him up! Every support we can possibly give - surely fostering is so expensive, we could deploy that money towards supporting the mum-baby dyad instead wherever possible.

I'm really reassured to read about the mother and baby facilities for teen mums that a pp mentioned. I'm going to try and read more about that.

I don't think snatching babies from their mums is a conservative thing. I don't know what politics it is but it doesn't feel conservative imo.

There are dedicated assessment centres where parents stay with their children and are both supported and assessed by the staff. If they "fail" then the local authority will apply for a court order

This isn't the same though - I'm fine with this, it seems a good solution. It's not the same as taking a baby away at only an hour old.

My mistake , sorry. I only read one article and assumed both were about Keira(who also seemed to be the focus of most posters).

Two cases, two very different circumstances, same outcome. Broønlund’s is even more confusing as it happened after the FKU was supposed to be scrapped, because apparently she wasn’t “Greenlandic” enough for that rule to apply to her?

I don’t know how helpful it is to classify it as socially conservative or liberal. But as many have pointed out here, it often goes hand in hand with racist notions and prejudices.

You seem to be studiously ignoring the racial /cultural dynamic in this case but the guardian mentioned it for good reason.

I think it was Australia, Canada and New Zealand where the white immigrants decided on the practice of removing many of the children from indigenous homes and placing them in children’s or with white families and royally screwed up the kids and subsequent generations.

@SummerCanDoOne thanks for that info on the tests done on Black children. That is awful but not surprising.

Conservative in the sense that there is only one way of doing things(their way) and anything else is not just wrong, but sub par and needs correcting/fixing/eradicating.

“Conservative in the sense that there is only one way of doing things(their way) and anything else is not just wrong, but sub par and needs correcting/fixing/eradicating.“

You have basically summarised and described imperialism very well .

I'm not "studiously ignoring" at all, wtf. It is terrible that they are doing this disproportionately to greenlandic women.

(I am mixed race myself and an immigrant to the uk. Not that it's relevant but you seem to be implying something about me and my views. I'm an old mumsnetter and have talked about my race under other name changes.)

But I don't think they should do these tests on any mums.

It seems they have (claimed to have) scrapped it for greenlandic mums but I don't think it can be justified for other mums either.

The mum in the article is appealing on the grounds she is greenlandic (I hope the best outcome happens for her and the baby) but my argument is, why is it OK for any mum to undergo this test?