Child taken by from womb by forced C/S for social services!

[StarlightMcKenzie]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10486452/Woman-has-child-taken-from-her-womb-by-social-services.html

Could there ever be a justifiable reason for this?

I'm frightened to click on it in case the Court of This or That doesn't allow me to look. But I will risk it.

Italy is a great country and they care about the family and I remember when I think it was that some British tourists were robbed and killed in Italy, they held a day of national mourning and they held a day of national mourning for the immigrants who died off Lampedusa, and that is why this case involving an Italian national is so shocking and I hope Italian papers treat it seriously and put it on the front page like our Daily Mail has done.

Because I don't care about Berlusconi and his Bunga-Bunga parties, but I care about human rights.

OK, it is a different case, so I am allowed to look.

Yes, it is a tragedy, but it doesn't appear that the Italian State is in any way at fault.

I cannot see why saying what other countries does is any kindo f justification for bad things that happen here. There is a big pattern of foreign states looking very badly on English law which has taken children away from their parents in situations that would not happen in the home state. The cases get publicity because a foreign government is involve. They are just the tip of an ice berg. As the embassy is involved the parents actually get an iota of support. Not so for many others caught in the system.

I'm not sure what postpartum depression in Italy has to do with this case - the reason the poor woman was sectioned and subjected to a force Caesarean is, apparently, because she has a diagnosis of bipolar disorder.

I'm frightened to click on it in case the Court of This or That doesn't allow me to look. But I will risk it.

Come off it, it you aren't in the least frightened to look. You know perfectly well that there is not, and never has been, any law against looking at a freely published news report.

nennypops, yes, but to be honest, I am frightened to look at an Italian story of this case, in case I read it and then, unknowingly, say something about it that I am not allowed to say because of some law of the Court of This and That that forbids me saying something about it that is not allowed.

Why was the woman allowed to keep her other 2 children is she is such a 'risk'?

Nenny - there is also no law banning people from talking to their MP, yet the family courts threatened parents of children subject to care proceedings that they would go to prison for contempt if they dared to speak to anyone, including their MPs.

Courts, health and social service professionals dealing with vulnerable people have been known to overstep the mark and misuse their powers in quite astonishing ways, unfortunately. Look at the case I cited where a woman was snatched off the street and imprisoned in secret.

'Why was the woman allowed to keep her other 2 children is she is such a 'risk'?'

Probably because she is fortunate to be an Italian citizen and our system does not have jurisdiction. If she was a British subject, who knows what may have happened?

I really think this whole story is getting far too confused. There are basically three separate issues:

1. The decision to section the mother. That is one essentially for medical professionals in the mental health field.
2. The decision to apply for a court order allowing a Caesarian section. That is one for medical professionals in the obstetrical field, and they will only obtain a court order if it is in the best interests of the mother and she lacks capacity to make the decision for herself: for example, if she had pre-eclampsia which would lead to her death if the baby is not delivered.
3. The decision to keep the baby in care. That is one for a combination of social services and health professionals.

Overlaying all three is the fact that each and every decision is subject to supervision by the court, and in fact some decisions (notably the one for a C Section) cannot be carried out without the express sanction of the court. At all stages the mother and any other interested parties will be legally represented.

The knee-jerk response that this decision must be wrong is undoubtedly the one the Telegraph and Mail wanted, but that doesn't make it correct. It is open to the mother and her legal advisers to give us the full facts, at least about issues 1 and 2, but they have chosen not to do so. I wonder why?

Maybe you will have to leave your children and kidneys at home when visiting UK in future...

Edam, there are in fact laws protecting the privacy of children, including in particular children who are subject to care proceedings.

'Maybe you will have to leave your children and kidneys at home when visiting UK in future...'

I remember hearing about the Slovakian Roma who came for a better life and ended up losing children. John Hemming was helping.

"It's the social workers who are racist, say Slovak parents in UKIP fostering scandal: The Mail reveals the truth behind Thought Police furore - and it's more shocking than it seemed"

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2244297/UKIP-fostering-scandal-Its-social-workers-racist-say-Slovak-parents.html

"The Slovak father, a handsome and articulate man, was contacted for comment by a Slovakian television station after his first two children were taken.

The TV station asked him to take part in a talk show highlighting how more than 120 children from 40 Slovakian families have been put into care by social workers in England. Some have been adopted and will never see their parents again.

However, the father refused to do so, hoping that he would get his children back. Indeed, he says he has been told he faces jail if he talks to the Press

Meanwhile, the Slovakian Government has protested to the British authorities about the huge numbers of Slovak children being put into care by social workers , and last Friday a debate at the Council of Europe, which promotes human rights in all European countries, centred on the scandal.

A resolution was passed that said children are being removed by UK social services and family courts ‘against the will’ of their natural parents and in violation of the ‘right to respect of family life’ and the ‘principle of fair trial’.

It insisted that social workers should give ‘practical assistance’ to families in difficulties instead of their children being put into care which caused ‘irreversible damage’ to the entire family.

A sign of the diplomatic tensions between Slovakia and Britain came in September, when protesters filled the street outside the British embassy in the Slovak capital of Bratislava, waving placards saying ‘Stop legal kidnapping’ and ‘Britain thief of children’."

Can you imagine what our media would be saying if cases like this happened in Russia aginst British citizens by the Establishment's arch-villain Putin?

We'd have pop stars, slebs, knights of the realm and all and sundry protesting about human rights.

But when we are involved, it's some brave MPs and campaigners, no pop stars and actors and knights of the realm, and our campaigners are lambasted for it.

Nenny, you cannot do part 2 or 3 unless you have first done part 1.

Now part 1 ie sectioning the mother, sounds like a bit of an ill informed, rushed decision or even a temporary condition if she does in fact suffer with bi polar.

If they did make a mistake on part 1, what do you think the likelihood of them admitting to it, after part 2 and 3 have already taken place?

She hasn't got a local lawyer, she got the cream of Birmingham's dodgiest!

So why did Essex seek out a Laywer so far far away to represent her?

traumatic tale

however did I not see that she has had other children taken away???

I suspect there is way way more to this than we know (I hope)

also, lets say it was Baby Ps mum. or Daniel Pelka Mum who were pregnant, would I mind if they had their baby taken off them? hand on heart, no I would not.

this could be a horrific miscarriage of justice, or this Mother could be such a risk to her kids that the court decided suich a drastic action was the only answer

we dont know, so maybe best to withold judgement

I wonder how much he charged.

@claig, the assumption that all Italians care about their families is wrong. Italy is nearly a war zone at the moment. Saying that having Italian citizenship is luckier than having the British one is quite misleading. It is actually a curse and I am quite willing to renounce to it in the future.

Social services in Italy don't give a damn about people having mental health issues. The stigma is one hundred per cent worse than it is perceived here. My bro has one of these disorders and mum is still going through hell after 6 years he was diagnosed because families are not helped at all. If you have money to take care of them, it is ok... Otherwise it is your business.
Psychiatric hospitals don't exist anymore and so everyone is treated by GPs and appointments with psychiatrist.
And I am full of sympathy's towards the mother of the child's mother, because she is the only one who will take the worst blow out of this story, either way.

If this poor lady had a bypolar disorder, her original family was given to care for the other children, regardless of her mental condition. They just don't care, nor they will care about this one. Especially because for the law the child has British citizenship but not an Italian one YET.

@nennypops: my guess is that a few details won't ever be fully disclosed. They are pointing out that the social services overprotecting children in UK are bad and ugly and they don't know how to do their job. I am full aware this is the case sometimes, but generalize is bad too, I guess there are many people who really have children's best interests at heart.

I think the journalists are wankers. they dont have all the facts and are writin upsetting tales that scare the bejeesus out of any PG woman with a mental health issue

shameful

I cannot conceive that the court would randomly manadate this for a pregnant tourist

we dont have the facts

LakeDistrictBabe

I agree, I would far rather be here than in the fucked up beyond belielf Italian system right now

this story will be all over Rai Uno tonight suspect

I am not blinding defending SS by the way, but in my heart I dont beleive whats been written thus far

LakeDistrict, I am also sure that you are right.

I was in an office in Italy once and someone's relative had had a car accident, and people were going into every office asking people to donate blood.

I like our system, but we have to question it if we think things are going wrong as they did in Mid Staffs hospital and on the Liverpool Care Pathway and elsewhere.

Our system is not perfect and not above criticism and secrecy will only prevent us improving it.

Essex didn't seek out a lawyer for her. In this country, on care proceedings you get to chose your own lawyer and it is funded by the state.

She has chosen this lawyer in Birmingham. I hope she doesn't come to regret that choice.

And Edam what do you want? You are not impressed when the system recognises a mistake and corrects it. Are you saying mistakes should never be made? If you are then please do give me an example of such an infallible system, so we can all learn from it.