Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Child taken from womb? Truth into darkness....

999 replies

LakeDistrictBabe · 13/12/2013 20:20

Ok, the old thread is nearly full. If you read the other three, I don't need to re-write everything again ;)

But you know I am referring to the case involving an Italian mother and the British social services.
Opinions welcome.

OP posts:
YoniMatopoeia · 18/12/2013 23:53

The spreadsheet doesn't seem to tell me how many babies that have been 'taken' are soon after put fir adoption.

What does it prove? And where is the source of the information (confused)

CarpeVinum · 18/12/2013 23:54

hands carpe the John Culshaw award for best impression

Oh my god. You love me! You REALLY LOVE me! Oh I wasn't expecting this... I have nothing prepared.

What can I say. To the man who inspired me to greatness ... Mr John Hemming, this one is for you!!

MadameDefarge · 18/12/2013 23:56
cestlavielife · 18/12/2013 23:56

Sorry that case is desperately sad reading
But it does not back up any argument about adoption targets or snatching children etc.
The birth family involved a mother who was later jailed for assault or neglect..the father killed himself with an overdose. Ther was an aunt but she already had six children.The terrible tragedy of serial foster placements some of which were highly abusive. Failings of the la yes.

But apart from being a v tragic case it does not serve to back up any of jh arguments about forced adoption. Perhaps if the boys had been properly adopted when it all began the rest of the story would be much happier...

CarpeVinum · 18/12/2013 23:57

What does it prove? And where is the source of the information (confused)

Look I have to go to bed soon. I am an hour ahead. Can you not just look at my last JH impression. Grin

Is very tiring all this tiptoeing around posts in case I actually answer a question.

MadameDefarge · 18/12/2013 23:57

As the self-appointed Head of IMPISH may I be the first to congratulate Carpe on her award...

MadameDefarge · 18/12/2013 23:58

John, are you EVER going to say sorry for fucking up so badly with that cut and paste that revealed baby Ps name and that of her older sisters?

You need to. To Alessandra at least.

CarpeVinum · 19/12/2013 00:00

Installs auto-answer unit for John

scottishmummy · 19/12/2013 00:02

It's a great shame people habitually decry social services as default

CarpeVinum · 19/12/2013 00:04

.....and as soon as you have apologised for naming the children.

Can you please apologise to me and all the other Italy based readers/posters here for misleading us re the "not so fucking public and actually covered by Italian privacy law" nature of the ENTIRE extract you posted here. Knowing full well we would be the ones most likely to quote and comment on it.

nennypops · 19/12/2013 00:08

John Hemming: Madamedefarge: it is not you I need to convince, but those reading the thread seeing that those opposing my view normally resort to abuse rather than logic.

Oh, the irony. Every time someone puts forward a logical view, you ignore it. Every time someone asks you for evidence for your sweeping assertions, you ignore it. I think everyone involved in this discussion would be absolutely delighted if you would engage in a logical debate, but you swerve it over and over and again.

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 00:08

Alessandra, In the hope that you are reading this thread....

Please be assured that NOBODY here thinks what you have been through is ok.

Many many of us have been through Mental Health crises, many of us have had social services intervention as a result.

None of us would wish the outcome that has unrolled to be your reality.

But you must understand, that, as much as we sympathise and want to support you in this hideous time in your life, we would all have preferred for your privacy to be respected, and that of your children.

Our disagreement with John Hemmings is not about you. Honestly. Its about how he has manipulated so many vulnerable families for his own needs.

I wish I could say with all honesty I know the TRUTH behind your story. But of course I cannot.

I just want you to know that I feel so very very sad for you, and your babies. And want the best outcome for all of you. However hard it might be to go through.

No one doubts the love you have for your children, or that you wanted, with all your heart, to be able to take care of them yourself.

For that I commend you. But also please understand that many of us also know how debilitating mental health issues can be, and how they can, despite OUR DEEPEST DESIRES mean we cannot care for our children in a way that they deserve. Sometimes, tragically, love is just not enough.

If ever you want to post here please do. We will support you. Not perhaps in a fantasy way of regaining your children, but certainly in a real, and ongoing way that maybe could provide you a way to move forward.

xxxx

CarpeVinum · 19/12/2013 00:10

cestlavielife

Perhaps John/ spreadsheet should contain a column for that sort of information.

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 00:17

Oh John. Scottish Mummy is here.

nennypops · 19/12/2013 00:19

NanaNina: I appear to be on some kind of final warning as I have made personal comments about/to JH in the past, and am being threatened with suspension should I break the rules again.

Can anyone else work out MN logic? JH put them at risk of contempt of court proceedings by publishing information in direct breach of a court order. He refuses to admit that he was wrong to do so or to apologise publicly. If NanaNina is threatened with suspension for personal comments, surely JH's conduct justifies an outright ban? I'm all for free speech, but MN surely does not have to extend access to someone who does this?

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 00:29

Actually, that is a bloody good point.

Why do we have to entertain JH who has put us all at risk?

Would this not normally get an MN ban?

I love you all loads, MNHQ, but if you are treating JH differently simply because he is an MP, that is wrong IMHO. He clearly has no regard for MNHQ or MN legal position. He has I t hink, proved his contempt for MN by this action.

I would imagine most private posters would have been banned for this kind of behaviour.

He either posts as a private individual, or as an MP. we need clarity on this. And I do think it is up to MNHQ to provide that clarity.

Really. It is very rare for me to call for MN clarity on these points, but I think it is absolutely imperative we get a call on this from MN.

YoniMatopoeia · 19/12/2013 00:30

Nenny - I completely agree with that last post

scottishmummy · 19/12/2013 00:33

I sincerely hope Essex council legal are perusing this thread for reporting restriction breach

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 00:36

Yes they are SM.

It has been brought to their attention, as MNHQ pointed out when they closed the thread a while ago.

I would be very interested to hear your opinion on JHs claim that Scottish SS practice has led the way in forced adoptions.

I know you have some knowledge in this area.

scottishmummy · 19/12/2013 00:40

I expect he's got a dossier to substantiate his theories,and won't be disavowed of them
Naturally if he wishes he can submit to the appropriate agencies
I suspect he will enact scottish theories online as opposed to judiciary

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 00:45

yes. I don't suppose the Scottish Judiciary could give a tuppence about the random theories of a Birmingham MP regarding their SS practices.

Lucky old John.

scottishmummy · 19/12/2013 00:47

As a responsible pm I'd expect jh to submit any collateral evidence of poor practice,he can report in England,doesnt need to travel

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 00:56

I find it poor practice to submit figures for scrutiny without citing their actual source, and the references needed.

MadameDefarge · 19/12/2013 01:03

The thing is John, even the poxiest of BA submissions need to cite their sources.

Why can't you do it properly?

Spend a little bit of time citing, and backing up your figures, we wouldn't need to go round the houses.

At the moment your figures have all the academic gravitas of 'my mum says so'.

Surely you must realise this?

Give us proper figures, proper citations, proper analysis, heaven knows, you might well have a few converts.