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

News

The real story of the 'baby with no name' news story - time for a Mumsnet campaign

4 replies

DIYmumerella · 03/06/2014 09:27

The baby with no name story actually has two parents that wanted to name it but weren't allowed without social workers attending the ceremony. "A judge accepted that the child was “thriving”. The father accused of hitting a social worker was actually "normally a peaceable man who treats everyone with respect” but "could not hide his increasing impatience at the constant intrusions of social workers into his family’s life". "The social worker, as confirmed by a lawyer present, punched him on the shoulder. The father, in self-defence, took a swing at his head, and was fined £430 for assault."

It is a total disgrace that families are still being treated like this by Social Services and the family courts. Read this: Telegraph article

I don't know this family, but I was accused of child abuse by Social Services after an innocent accident and it was the same county as this family. Although vindicated as innocent after five weeks of not being allowed on my own with my baby, I still cannot bare to hear my daughter's original name and actually changed it by deed poll to what we were always calling her since the day we named her. I can fully understand why the father didn't want Social Services at his child's naming ceremony.

We were repeatedly bullied by our social worker and Social Services made lots of mistakes including calling my husband the wrong name in documents, telling us that supervision was removed and then changing their minds and not notifying us of the change and more. Again and again, we were told if we didn't do exactly what Social Services wanted we could lose custody of our child. We were told that being eloquent means you're more likely to be manipulative and all sorts of class nonsense.

In this day and age of technology, why is Social Services not recording all conversations with families? That would rather quickly safeguard innocent families against some of social services unprofessional and bullying behaviour. Surely it's time for a Mumsnet campaign about Social Services and the family courts still removing children from innocent, caring families?

OP posts:
edamsavestheday · 03/06/2014 13:05

I did think, when I saw the original report of the judgement, that the parents' story would be interesting. People don't generally refuse to name their baby without having a reason.

Appalling, if true - and it seems it is - that the father was demonised and punished for retaliating when he was attacked by a social worker.

SnowinBerlin · 04/06/2014 07:57

The trouble is that article is written by Christopher Booker who has been caught multiple times lying about child protection cases. Vicky Haigh was the most high profile one, but there have been many others where he's given inaccurate accounts and deliberately downplayed the extent of injuries inflicted on children. If you look at this judgement from para 185 onwards you'll get a flavour.

I can quite accept that injustices have happened in child protection cases as they do with any court case. But anything written by Booker, a professional contrarian (asbestos isn't harmful, neither is passive smoking, evolution isn't real - creationism is etc etc) has to be taken with a very big pinch of salt.

Onesleeptillwembley · 04/06/2014 08:16

Sorry, I don't believe that to be a factual, unbiased account, due to the author and the reasons above.

As a side issue - how does not having a ceremony stop you naming a child?

Joules68 · 04/06/2014 08:47

Er no, I don't think it's time for as 'mumsnet campaign' AT ALL!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread