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

[saragossa2010]

As the other is full.
There are far too many cases where the authorities rush to remove children and do not give both parents and wider family a say. Adoption is rushed through.
The fact a senior family judge is insisting he is involved in the rest of this case is a good thing and the more cases like this which receive publicity the better.

The point is it is like justice in China and Russia. If it's secret then those involved cannot justify themselves. If we have more in the public domain that is a greater good than any risk from disclosure to the children and parents involved. it is why open justice and published judgments and rights for all those involved in child disputes to use twitter, blogs and emails and no stifling of free speech.

Thankfully things are all moving this way and we lucky to have people like JM and C Booker to give publicity to the issues which need much wider debate. I would imagine most social workers and lawyers involved in this area are very happy that the issues get more public debate not less. Most professions would.

'Italians DON'T care or WON'T do anything for this child.
Italian audiences are even less concerned than the authorities because in the eyes of a socially prejudice Italian (which is the 95% of the population) this lady "behaved" in a morally unacceptable way.'

But the law should be above prejudice and should protect its nationals whatever prejudiced individuals think and I don't believe that can be true of so many Italians. We have heard what a senior court official in Milan said.

Claig, if you want to read only your own book and you are so determined to believe to things printed in the Daily Mail and in their reporting, just do it.

I won't answer directly any of your questions again because it seems pretty meaningless me reiterating things one million times and then you claim you know better because of course you heard three Italians speaking, therefore they represent the whole nation. I lived in Tuscany for 35 years, so allow me to say I know a few things about them more than you and the Daily Fail.

I honestly give up.

@Carpe, in that part you quoted I was referring to the social judgement she had exposed herself to, not her illness. If she was sane, it was the same. I know it seems incredible to you, but that is how things work there.

I have said that the Daily Mail made mistakes and that it got some facts wrong as do many other papers as a story is being looked at and reported on. I don't believe everything it says.

This is from the Spectator, not the Daily Mail. It may also contain mistakes, I don't know.

"Now, thank God, a manifestly sane judge, Sir James Munby , President of the Family Division of the High Court, has said he wants to hear the case before the adoption goes any further . He at least seems to recognise the gravity of the situation. But as John Hemming, the LibDem MP who has championed the woman in all this, points out, many decisions taken by the family courts – actually, the Court of Protection is specifically to do with mental incapacity – are taken by the magistrates court and appealed in the county court. Not quite the high-level appeals system you need for a really grave case then."

If it is true, and I say if because I don't know, that the President of the Family Division of the High Court has said he wants to hear the case before the adoption goes any further then it suggests to me, and I may be wrong, that the case needs closer at.

Sorry, forgot to include Spectator link

blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/12/the-forced-caesarean-case-proves-that-light-must-be-shone-on-social-services-and-the-courts/

"Claig- (it's me Bucharest, your old sparring partner btw) I can tell you what the Italian TV news has said about it.......diddley squat."

Hi Bucharest (DrankSangraInthePark) good to see you again, my old friend.

The case needs to be looked closer at only from the British side or so it seems. And that makes me guess that all this charade has been created only to support a political agenda.

Until I don't hear, from a respectable paper, that the Foreign Italian minister or the Italian embassy in London released their official statement about the case, for me it is deprived of any authenticity. Sorry

Have a nice day ladies.

The baby isn't an Italian citizen. It doesn't have a nationality legally.

www.headoflegal.com/2013/12/04/booker-hemming-and-the-forced-caesarian-case-a-masterclass-in-flat-earth-news/

This blog piece is bloody brilliant.

Every time JH pops up I will post it.

I really hope he is right that JH and CB will now be revealed for what they are.

Spero. did you see the link someone posted to BF getting in trouble with the court?

No! How exciting. Maybe the whole lot of them are going down now? If I google will I find it?

The spectator reports me accurately. If permission to appeal is refused in the county court a case decided in the FPC never gets to the court of appeal. We have I think shifted the European Court of Human Rights to recognise that it has failed to pick this up previously and now have a hearing on a case next year (which is unusual).

I don't think this appeal problem is intentional, but it affects a lot of people.

Has Carl Gardner also been inaccurate JH?

The baby is Italian.

There are only a handful of citizens in the whole wide world who are technically, genuinely stateless. This baby isn't one of them. She might never have been registered in Italy but the British authorities will be regarding her as Italian until the point when/if she is adopted.

johnhemming, can you tell us if the Liberty (the National Council for Civil Liberties) are helping your efforts at all in this case?

I was very surprised to see such a strong statement by Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty, I thought they would not have much to say about this case. I expected some journalists and newspapers to be concerned, but not a civil liberties organisaion like Liberty.

"Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights organisation Liberty, said: "Please God there's more to this, but at first blush this is dystopian science-fiction unworthy of a democracy like ours. Forced surgery and separation of mother and infant is the stuff of nightmares that those responsible will struggle to defend in courts of law and decency."

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/01/enforced-birth_n_4369235.html

Has there been any follow-up from Liberty and have they been in contact with you, John?

One of the comments on the link you posted to head of legal.

I thought we had established that the baby isn't Italian?

But surely Shami and co have now read the real story?

The baby won't be British for sure unless the mother, as an EEA citizen was considered settled and resident in the UK, and as she was apparently living in a hotel near Stansted seems doubtful.

She is Italian because her mother is I think. (although I don't know that much about Italian nationality law and I stopped working for the UK Nationality Office when I came to live in the country at the centre of this shitstorm)

(maybe LakeDistrictBabe or Clare as Italians can tell us more about Italian nationality?)

I found this statement from Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division of the High Court.

It is from the Daily Mail, so it may contain inaccuracies, I don't know. But it is an interesting statement.

"He said that since the abolition of the death penalty the family courts hold the most drastic powers of any tribunal – the power to take a baby away from a mother for life.

‘We must be vigilant to guard against the risks,’ Sir James said.

Citing two notorious social worker scandals, he said: ‘We strive to avoid miscarriages of justice, but human justice is inevitably fallible.

‘The Oldham and Webster cases stand as a terrible warning to everyone involved in the family justice system, the latter as a stark illustration of the fact that a miscarriage of justice which comes to light only after the child has been adopted will very probably be irremediable.

‘ We must have the humility to recognise and to acknowledge that public debate, and the jealous vigilance of an informed media, have an important role to play in exposing past miscarriages of justice and in preventing possible future miscarriages of justice .’

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2501885/Let-Press-family-courts-uphold-justice-stop-irreversible-wrongs-says-judge.html

It is very encouraging that a senior member of the judiciary has the humility to say that and it gives hope that there will not be any arrogance that refuses to expose an injustice if it may occur in the future.

'But surely Shami and co have now read the real story?'

I sure they have, but have they made a statement at all about it? Is the story closed for them now?

I'm sure it was Lake who explained why the baby wouldn't be.

I think for a lot of people who do media appearances it can be a case of 'A dog barks, the caravan moves on'. They're on to the next story, not following up on this one.

Yes, possibly not technically, because the mother won't have had her registered...see, this is another loophole the wee thing has fallen into. For the Brits, she's definitely not British, but I'm guessing the Italians won't have recognised her as such because she won't have been registered by the mother....I don't suppose the Senegalese want her either.