Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Charlotte Wyatt to go into foster care

793 replies

ginmummy · 16/10/2006 06:48

...because, according to the news, her seperated parents can't give her the care that she needs. It so sad, I want to cry. Poor, poor Charlotte, poor, poor parents.

OP posts:
Socci · 16/10/2006 16:33

Message withdrawn

charleypopspreviouslyntt · 16/10/2006 16:33

Unless you've held a child of your own flesh and blood in your arms who on the precipice of life and death you will never know how you will feel at that time. It is not a time that you will thinking about how you are going to pay the mortgage should you have to give up your career to care for your baby.

My opinion (concise as it is) counts because I have been in that position and my child is disabled. And my partner and I are tax payers.

diNOLOOKINGOVERYOURSHOULDERsau · 16/10/2006 16:34

There are all sorts of perfectly good reasons why they might have wanted to have a second baby, including wanting to have a sibling for the first, non-disabled child. Or it might have been an accident - who knows? How would we ever know? And what would ever make it any of our business?

And as for saying that you refuse to accept that it's a special needs issue, and that you won't argue with anybody who says that it is, I just can't see it. Where a child who has such profound disabilities is involved, how can it not at least in part be a special needs issue?

magic5 · 16/10/2006 16:37

charlottewyatt.atspace.org/tiny.html

thats her website with photos.
she has meet her siblings has photos show.

charleypopspreviouslyntt · 16/10/2006 16:38

AND we're trying for more babies.

hulababy · 16/10/2006 16:40

Lovely photos. I like the one of her brother kissing her head

So the report that mum has kept the other siblings away is obviously rubbish then.

hulababy · 16/10/2006 16:43

The blog is interesting to read. I think, reading that and looking at the photos, to say she has no quality of life might be unfair.

Socci · 16/10/2006 16:44

Message withdrawn

hulababy · 16/10/2006 16:46

The link for Charlotte's website

aragon · 16/10/2006 16:48

Have we missed the point a bit here? The family fought for her right to resuscitation - a battle they did not win. And yet - despite medical opinion which said she would die - she has survived.
It's really sad that the parents have split under the strain of it all (but not surprising - the pressure must be horrendous). I doubt they want her to go into foster care either but are in an impossible position of being unable to care for her themselves.

kittythescarygoblin · 16/10/2006 16:57

Hula you have mistaken me for another poster. I didn't say whther they wanted her or how often they visited her. I think there was another poster whose dd was in hospital at the same time and she made coments based on what she saw happeningin the hospital. I am sure they love and want their daughter.It never occured to me that they didn't.

mumandlovingit · 16/10/2006 16:59

just my opinion-please dont moan at me! i know its long but i had to say my bit (and wait for the disagreeing responses)

ive always said that if i ever have a child with severe SN then i wouldnt have another as i would make sure that i was available in everyway 24/7 to look after that child and put everything into making sure that child had the best possible life it could have.thats the way i was brought up.

I do honestly think that whoever has a child who needs so much care and help and hospital trips,physio, whatever else is involved with the disabilities, if they go on to having more children knowing how much the child/children they have already got need them then they're being selfish.

i have friends whose second child has severe SN and i know how much time and effort and love is needed to cope with a situation like that and its hard for all involved, especially the other child who has to also revolve its life around that child.

i think they were right to fight for the life of their daughter, they were right for getting every bit of help that they could.im sure that going into foster care wasnt the decision they wanted to make but if it means that the child gets the love, attention and 24/7 help she needs then maybe it is the best place for her if the parents aren't allowed/cant look ater her 24/7.surely the parents will still be a big part of her life still.i dont think they stop them when they're in foster care do they?

no one can plan for everything.nobody knows what is going to happen in their life.all you can do is cope the best you can in whatever situation life throws at you and get every bit of help you can to cope.my parents would have both my children with my dp if anything were to happen to me.i also know that if one of us was severly disabled say in an accident then everyone would rally round to make sure that we were supported and the children were looked after in the best possible way.yes you have to make some plans to ensure that the children are looked after but you cant plan everything in life

PeachyBobbingParty · 16/10/2006 16:59

this was on the nrews at tea time (how old fashioned LOL- tea at three theirty, dinner after....)

  1. the file is closed to the media so none of us ahve any clue whatsoever what is going on unless we work on the case, in which case we are breaching confidentiality rules

2)The father syas it was the care / SS issues that drove them apart,a s does the mother. I guess they'd know, eh? Having attempted to deal with SS, I am hardly surprised, sadly.

But then it is very much an SN issue by their admission; they'd still be together if it were not for the frankly appalling lack of services for disabled children in this country.

Youc ould argue Mum should still ahve her, bt there;s a world of difference between one parent caring for other kids and one for Chsarlotte,a nd one attempting to do all of it. Impossible, perhaps?

hulababy · 16/10/2006 17:01

Sorry if I have mistaken you for someone else kitty. Long thread now.

kittythescarygoblin · 16/10/2006 17:02

Socci,it's about difference in opinion. If I don't have the same opinion as you that doesn't make me unenlighteneed. I am allowed to have thoughts and opinions that are different to yours and that you don't like. Life's like that, at least where I live it is. I don't go bonkers at people because I don't like what they are saying.

PeachyBobbingParty · 16/10/2006 17:02

mumandlovingit-

DS having siblings means that there will always be someone (hopefully) who,loves him, even when we are not around. That doesn't mean to care for him, but to advocate would be good? DS may yet go on to an independent life, we do not know.

DS2 having ds3 means someone to share the responsibility (if he chooses to have them) of DS1 witha s an adult. DS3 has speech l;anguages totally (imo) unrealted to ASD; that couldn't be predicted, but he will be independent.

I planned for four, don't know if I will have no4 yet becauise of sds1, but don't see why I should give up my dreams and life, as long as ds1 is cared for.

kittythescarygoblin · 16/10/2006 17:03

That's ok Hula

Socci · 16/10/2006 17:05

Message withdrawn

mumandlovingit · 16/10/2006 17:08

ive just read the recent article in the paper.surely if the father is willing they should at least help him with carers so she could return home.

i cant see the difference that a two parent family makes to one with one parent and alot of carers and helpers to make sure that she gets al her medications etc

i know a foster carer who is a single parent and they let her have whatever children they need homed including ones with disabilities.

its just silly to not even let him try

Socci · 16/10/2006 17:09

Message withdrawn

ScareyCaligulaCorday · 16/10/2006 17:09

I still don't know where you get all your info from though Kitty. You have made assertions such as the Wyatts haven't considered long term care etc. How do you know?

Most people who are criticising you aren't saying they know exactly what the Wyatts are going through - on the contrary, we're saying we haven't a clue so will hold back on the judgements and the criticisms. While you appear to be saying you know all about them. Do you?

kittythescarygoblin · 16/10/2006 17:12

socci, I find you posts extremely aggressive and your views entrenched. It doesn't make me angry with you though.

PeachyBobbingParty · 16/10/2006 17:13

Mumandlovingit, my friend is a carer for her Father (as wellas aparent) and carers regualrly fail to turn up, cancel, or simply leave and never return. FAreasier to cover missing shifts if there are two of you?

And when nobody arrives to get Cahrlotte up in the morning, the other kids still ahev to be gotten ready.

Socci · 16/10/2006 17:15

Message withdrawn

mumandlovingit · 16/10/2006 17:16

my only concern with lots of children with having one with such sever help needed such as charlotte is the fact that surely if she had have gone home like they wanted they would've had al her needs to attend to and all the other children too.how could they have possible coped?

ive always thought that if you cant cope with everything for looking after one child, SN or not, then you cant cope with 2 or 3

when children get older then yes, they can help and be there for their brother/sister but doesnt that child then have to come second to the child that needs constant help with everything?

i just think its hard for anyone with a child with SN but its even harder for someone with other children too.i admire anyone who does cope with all that, i really do.

i think maybe selfish wasnt the right word, i just get upset because personally i know a few families with SN children and they've gone on to have other children and either the child with needs gets left out or the other child does.not all families are like that,i can tell from responses.i havent meant to upset anyone.ive just said my views from what ive seen from people that i know

Swipe left for the next trending thread