Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

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

999 replies

saragossa2010 · 03/12/2013 21:09

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.

OP posts:
MadameDefarge · 03/12/2013 23:59

Sigh. Yes. the judge didn't think she was well enough.

But apparently she had been considered competent by medical professionals.

therefore for the purposes of the court proceedings she was deemed well enough to participate. Even though she was not fully recovered.

How that judgement was reached is another matter entirely, and I assume, would be revealed if she revealed her medical history during her sojourn in the uk.

Again, the ball is in her court.

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:02

She MAY have appealed. And have lost. We just don't know.

nennypops · 04/12/2013 00:02

claw2, she was a meaningful participant as she was legally represented.

cestlavielife · 04/12/2013 00:02

It would be difficult for them to retrospectively evaluate her status at the time of the c section.
They could certainly evaluate how she is now today .
But the history is important. With this kind of cyclical condition. Whether it is under control and whether she has insight.

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:02

Come on John, you are so keen to strip away the secrecy surrounding family court proceedings, why not encourage your friend's client to offer a full and transparent account of her treatment here?

JaquelineHyde · 04/12/2013 00:03

claig My sister has been on the verge of a crisis and clearly very unwell, yet she has been able to demonstrate that despite that she still has mental capacity. She has also managed to be released from a section despite the Drs knowing she would be back very soon because she has managed to show that she met the thresholds for mental capacity.

To everyone around her it is clear she is still unwell, but being unwell isn't enough to hold someone against their will.

To lack mental capacity you really have to have be below rock bottom.

Would you have been happier if she had been detained against her will and forced to remain in this country, despite meeting the thresholds required for mental capacity?

claig · 04/12/2013 00:03

"5 years down the line, every court in Europe could rule that she was outrageously unfairly treated but this is still unlikely to result in the child being returned as this would be an incredibly traumatic event for a child that never knew her mother.

The sole interest of the judge is the protection of the minor"

Wow! So the professonals cannot really be challenged and what they say goes essentially. It seems it is out of the mother's hands. The judge makes a judgement based primarily on what the professionals say and write. Is that right?

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:05

claig, yes they can be challenged, by her lawyers who may or may not have done so. We do not know.

are we back to the baby snatchers at large again?

Are you suggesting her doctors would LIE in court in order to obtain a c section?

REALLY???

To what end?

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:06

And if you read the judgement it was clear the judge took on board all the things the mother had to say, at both hearings.

So no, not just down to the testimony of the 'professionals' in the case.

claig · 04/12/2013 00:07

"Would you have been happier if she had been detained against her will and forced to remain in this country, despite meeting the thresholds required for mental capacity?"

No, I would like cross examination to establish the reasons for advice or treatment etc in order to ascertain if she received the best advice and treatment. Is that possible at an appeal an how soon can an appeal be mounted after a care judgement is made?

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:07

And again, sigh, she had legal representation to challenge the conclusions drawn by the other professionals involved.

ChristmasCareeristBitchNigel · 04/12/2013 00:07

Claig.

If, by some bizarre twist of fate, one of your children was discovered actually to have been switched at birth and was not yours, would you think that it would be fair to the child to be removed ? Of course it wouldn't - because the child has grown up knowing you as it's mother and therefore uprooting them from you and giving them back to the "correct" mother would be absolutely devastating for them and incredibly traumatic.

This is why, the more time passes, the unlikelier it is for a child to be returned to its natural parent.

As I said, care orders are not made to acknowledge right or wrong or, indeed, to right wrongs. They are made to ensure a child has a stable home

JaquelineHyde · 04/12/2013 00:08

Would you rather the judgement rested with average Joe on the street rather than a professionally trained and experience person.

Do you really think that all of the professionals involved in this case, including her own legal team have colluded to find against the mother?

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:09

her lawyers were perfectly free to challenge at the hearings.

Are you confusing the two issues? Her medical treatment and the care proceedings?

She would have legal representation for both issues.

OK?

ChristmasCareeristBitchNigel · 04/12/2013 00:10

I do believe that some people would, Jacqueline.

Probably the same sort of people that mistake paediatricians for paedophiles

claw2 · 04/12/2013 00:10

Cest,

There is a threshold for legal capacity "A person who is diagnosed as being mentally ill, senile, or suffering from some other debility that prevents them from managing his own affairs may be declared mentally incompetent by a court of law. When a person is judged to be incompetent, a guardian is appointed to handle the person's property and personal affairs"

claig · 04/12/2013 00:12

"Are you suggesting her doctors would LIE in court in order to obtain a c section?"

I am not talking about a c-section

What rights does she have throughout the entire process. Are there none because she is sectioned and has no capacity? Can she challenge what happened at all?

If you are arrested for a criminal matter, you have to be read your rights and you can challenge for unlawful arrest or detention or treatment or abuse of your legal rights etc.

Are any of those things available in a care order case or not?

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:12

so to be clear, at the court hearing to sanction the c-section she would have had legal representation.

At the care proceedings she would also have had legal representation.

She can certainly clear up any ambiguity regarding her personal medical care right away by publishing those details.

We already have the judgement for the care order in the pubic domain now.

What else do you want?

ChristmasCareeristBitchNigel · 04/12/2013 00:12

I must go to bed. Got an enthralling conference to attend tomorrow "Working with partner agencies to achieve better results for victims of crime"

Can't wait Grin most of our partner agencies are collapsing into the ground !

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:13

YES FOR THE BLOODY MILLIONTH TIME!

MadameDefarge · 04/12/2013 00:13

what do you think legal representation means Claig?

c'mon.

claig · 04/12/2013 00:16

OK good. I don't know, I'm confused. I'll leave it to the lawyers.

claig · 04/12/2013 00:17

Good night, I've got to be up early tomorrow.

JaquelineHyde · 04/12/2013 00:19

She will have had a legal representative appointed to act on her behalf whilst she was incapacitated. Her family will have also been made aware of the situation and could have appointed any legal representation on her behalf. Their job would have been to oppose anything they felt was not being carried out appropriately and to ensure the best interests of their client were met.

Her daughter would have had a court appointed guardian whose job it is to look into every decision that is made about the daughter and ensure that every decision is in the best interest of the child. Guardians can and do oppose many decisions when they feel it is not in the best interests of the child.

Once better mental health was established full assessments will have been carried out on the mother and her ability to parent effectively.

JaquelineHyde · 04/12/2013 00:21

I too am now off to bed. I suspect we shall continue this tomorrow.

Swipe left for the next trending thread