Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Italian adoption case III

999 replies

Juliet123456 · 07/12/2013 09:29

The last thread says all I need to know about those in the system. It also the most legally dangerous thread I have ever seen on mumsnet. I hope someone has been through the posts for libel risk. It also entirely one sided and biased and makes me laugh.

The defensiveness of those involved in this area will hopefully disappear once we have the openness that JH and indeed many others are seeking and obtaining as the judges increasingly accept that it helps everyone to understand what are very difficult decisions - parents, children and lawyers and social workers and expert witnesses in this field.

It will continue to be important always to get to the facts and where possible publish the facts. I continue to believe that almost any of us could have our children removed if the state set its mind to that. If publishing more decisions and giving rights to parents and those involved and the children to write what they like on twitter, facebook and the like and to let parents and children even when separated communicate and talk about any issues they choose will help then let us hope the law continues down that course.

OP posts:
exexpat · 09/12/2013 09:52

Spero - have you tried @jackofkent? He's blogged/tweeted about this case and has a lot of followers.

Spero · 09/12/2013 10:02

Brilliant suggestion.

Have tweeted Richard Morehead of UCL and Baroness Young.

Have to go to work now.

LakeDistrictBabe · 09/12/2013 10:02

@claw2 what a load of b@llocks! There are no politicians here whatsoever, so your claim that some posters are using a public forum for political gain without being politicians themselves... Sounds pointless, really.

CarpeVinum · 09/12/2013 10:05

Political platform ?

How, what, where ?

Is this "pull random accusations out your bum as a debate style week" on mumsnet and nobody mentioned it me ?

CarpeVinum · 09/12/2013 10:13

How do I create a link so when clicked it goes to a specific post in the thread ? I'd like my twitter link to take people to where JH offered to send Spero the court doc so they don't have to wade through the entire thread.

DrankSangriaInThePark · 09/12/2013 10:21

Does it work if you bookmark that post on your own MN?

LakeDistrictBabe · 09/12/2013 10:25

@Drank the Italian press published an update one hour ago, it seems baby P's grandfather spilled the beans. Good Lord....

MurderOfGoths · 09/12/2013 10:25

carpe If you bookmark that post then refresh the page it should give you the post specific address in your bookmark bar.

CarpeVinum · 09/12/2013 10:29

I can't see how to bookmark. Is that an iPad thing ?

If anybody on a 'puter can do it could they post the resultant url on the thread. My kid in at school on our "puter and I don't think his teachers will be impressed if I shove him off in the middle of lessons.

Mignonette · 09/12/2013 10:30

Have PMed certain people who follow me on twitter.

Nurse with Glasses is an award winning MH nurse who writes, blogs and campaigns.

@nursewglasses.

She may have issues w/ some of the psychiatric service provision issues but won't like to be portrayed as a co-conspirator in the snatching of innocent babies of the mentally ill. .

MurderOfGoths · 09/12/2013 10:34

Carpe Here it is

DrankSangriaInThePark · 09/12/2013 10:50

So this is what the Italian press are saying that Grandad has said in yesterday's Daily Mail: I haven't translated it all, the first part is a summary of everything already known, have just quickly translated Grandad's words>

"Today the Mail on Sunday is publishing a long interview with MP, A's father, who, unlike A expresses his support for the behaviour of the British authorities, saying that his daughter was, and remains, a “threat” for her own child because when she doesn't take her medicines she falls victim to “paranoid crises”. Mr P says “It might seem a harsh judgement, but I do not believe that my daughter should be allowed to have her child. I think that the British SS have acted in the best way” Then he repeats a story which, in part, is already known, - that his daughter has 3 children with 3 different men, but he also adds further details about the unreliable behaviour of A when she doesn't take her medicine. He also reveals that the British SS accompanied A to Italy when she returned, asking him and his ex-wife (they are divorced) and the father of the child if they wanted to have A's daughter. “I said no, because I am too old, my ex-wife said no because she is tired and she already has the other 2 children and she doesn't feel up to taking another one, and the child's father (a Senegalese immigrant who entered Italy illegally and who is now with another Italian woman) doesn't want her.”

LakeDistrictBabe · 09/12/2013 10:59

@Drank
Thanks for translating for everybody. In fact I am amazed the DM published the interview at all... It nearly contradicts in full the first article!

Compared to previous articles, it came out that baby P's grandparents are divorced (i.e. They are not available for adoption either, separately) and that the manic moments of the woman have been a trend for the last 12 hours.
Drank, if you live in Italy you know very well the birthrate there..... Around one child per couple. How can someone even remotely think to have three children without having a job to pay for them?

DrankSangriaInThePark · 09/12/2013 11:01

Yup.

I can't find the English article in the Mail on Sunday (my eyes started bleeding and my brain needed bleaching after the homepage tbh, I just wondered how faithful their translation of Grandad has been?)

DrankSangriaInThePark · 09/12/2013 11:02

Lake- I have one child and we both work and my Mum has still just had to pay our flights for Christmas! Never mind having 3 and no job....

AngelaDaviesHair · 09/12/2013 11:10

There is an air of 'never mind the quality feel the width' about the JH position. In the end, sadly, it doesn't seem to matter how many factual allegations get debunked. The accusations he makes 'feel' right to many people, they push buttons, they feed into a narrative to which many have fully subscribed, so fully that actual evidence becomes irrelevant.

AngelaDaviesHair · 09/12/2013 11:10

I sense quite a bit of sock-puppetry, too.

nennypops · 09/12/2013 11:21

Juliet: Gosh, when people resort to that kind of thing it feels so below the belt it's not worthy of mumsnet

Could you explain what you mean by "that kind of thing" and why you say it's below the belt? All I have seen is people pointing out that a document which Mr Hemming says supports his position actually doesn't; and legitimately suggesting that, as he is a serving MP widely quoted in national newspapers in this issue, similar attention should be drawn to the extraordinary things he has been saying and doing on this thread. If he chooses to go public with his views, what is below the belt about doing the same in response?

Mignonette · 09/12/2013 11:22

Angela quite. And love your name too!

LakeDistrictBabe · 09/12/2013 11:28

@Drank

Exactly! I have no friends having two children... Even those who actually wanted to have them, they stopped thinking about it once the first was three/four.. They just can't manage. I read a couple of days ago, on a very interesting blog, that two children in Italy are considered 'recklessness' if you are not backed up by two wellpaid jobs and a whole lot of grandparents swapping duties...

Concerning the translation, I would have paid to hear the Granddad giving the interview in full Tuscan dialect... That could sound like "La mí figliola? Unnaltro figliolo? Maccheeeè s'è grullo... 'Un lo posso fa' pe' legge ma gli darei du' scappellotti belli assestati sai... Occhè si mette figlioli a í mondo in questo modo!"

Disclaimer: avoid to translate with google, dialects can't be translated properly and it is Lake being silly, not a true transcript. Thanks.

nennypops · 09/12/2013 11:34

John Hemming:

Firstly, that does not change the original assertion which is that a SW was fired for proposing that a child be returned to its parents (against management instructions).

Yes, it does. It is clear from the document you provided, which you said constituted absolute proof, that management was not saying that the SW should never propose that a child should be returned to its parents, but that they should wait for further reports before making a decision on this. It would appear that the SW ignored this and went ahead anyway.

Secondly, the child did remain in care, but no further assessments were made. To me that is evidence that the management did not really believe that any further assessments were needed and were merely using that as a spurious justification for the case of not returning the child to its parents.

No, it is not evidence of that, and I am sure you know that perfectly well if you have really made any genuine effort to examine this neutrally and properly. That conclusion could only be drawn with the benefit of the full context. For example, it could be that no further assessments were obtained because the situation changed radically or more factual information came to light which made it clear that the child could not be returned to their parents.

Moreover, if your assessment of the position is genuinely correct, any SW with any level of competence would have had a number of different ways of dealing with this without directly disobeying an instruction. The obvious thing to do would be to contact her superiors to ask about the lack of further assessments and to say that, if they weren't going to be obtained, she thought her recommendation should proceed. She could have gone to her union. If her superiors weren't playing ball, she could have gone over their heads or gone to local councillors. She could have used legally protected whistleblowing procedures.

She may have done all of that, of course, but we don't know because you have only chosen to supply one carefully selected page of a long document and have not provided the rest of the documents relating to the case.

Until you do so, you really cannot continue to suggest that this case supports your stance in any way, shape or form.

Lilka · 09/12/2013 11:35

by all means let us discuss the issues

The problem is Juliet that you aren't discussing issues - indeed, everytime someone responds to you, discussing an actual issue (nothing to do with JH) you completely ignore it. For instance last thread when you asked how the care system could be improved, you got a lot of interesting replies and just ignored them. This thread, I and several others talked about contact when you brought that up, but again you completely ignore it, and merely pop up again after some more JH posts have appeared. Discussions aren't one sided, and especially since you brought some of these (very interesting and worthy of a LOT of discussion) issues up yourself, you need to contribute otherwise the very brief discussion just ends and there's nothing left to talk about except John Hemming

NO ONE on this thread is involved in politics except Mr Hemming, ONE person on this thread is involved in the court system, and ONE person is a retired social worker.

So I'm getting a bit bemused by all the references to social workers and family court workers in the plural.

It seems that some people are just assuming that there are multiple peope involved in the 'system' on this thread, without any proof and despite being told multiple times that this isn't the case

Going "I don't like what you're saying, you must be a social worker/family court lawyer" is a bit pathetic

CarpeVinum · 09/12/2013 11:39

Ta Murder

I've made a tinyurl

preview.tinyurl.com/qcja7vb

Twitter's character limits are hard enough as it is without a hacking great url to stuff in there

Lilka · 09/12/2013 11:44

You lot are all on Twitter?

I tweeted a cryptic reference to this on the 6th and the left it, although I still have a copy of all the threats made that day