Charlotte Wyatt to go into foster care

[ginmummy]

...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.

charlotte had a right to life, and my god, that child has survived aginst all the odds. just because her parents cant proide the 24hour support she needs, they were in the wrong to fight for her?

oh shit, icant provide 24 hour care for my dh and we have a team of carers, nurses, supprt workers etc. shit, should we have said no to the LVAD and let him die last summer?

I am really shocked at your comments Kitty.

if your child had ana ccident at the home shoudl we, the taxpayers refuse your child medical treatment? after all you had your child its down to you to care for him and ensure he doesn't get hurt. and now that yo child is hurt you will have to pay for the treatment because s/he is you responsibility.

of course not!
i haven't read the article but i woudl assume that two parents that fought for so long and so hard to allow their daughter the chance of life would not willingly place her in the care of social services. they have done what is best for their daughter, as they have done (to the best of their ability) from teh day she was born.

I have a child with SN and if i was told that by allowing someone else to care for him he would improve and his wellbeing would be better then despite the heart break it would be, i would alow that to happen for his sake.

Its a very narrow minded view you have and sadly there are obviously a fair few journalists that share it.

woudl you have the same opinion of a woman who falls pregnant but does not want to raise the child, she cannot bare the idea of a termination so she intends to have teh child adopted at birth? should she be forced to have a termination to prevent the taxpayers having to fork out years of care for the child?

when dealing with real people you just cannot be so black and white.

Strange isn't it, on one thread people are saying how sad it is that SN aprents feel threatened on MN.... on here questions are being raised about whether an SN child has the right to help if her parents break up?

I mean, in the worst case scenario, if her parents eff up- surely that shouldn't affect Charlotte's right to support one iota?

OMG -how horrific is the idea, that children only have a right to live if their parents can afford to keep them!

Take the disability out of the equation (which is important to see the underlying - non discriminatory position) and you are left with the unpalatable suggestion, that only children who have parents who are well-off enough to support them, have a right to life!

How utterly depressing

And how far should we extend this need to pay for ourselves? Let's say you're driving don the motorway, a bit over the speed limit, you don't see a car coming towards you, you crash your car and are seriously hurt. Well you should take responsibility don't ya know? before you set out on that car journey you should have thought about not breaking the speed limit, as you broke the speed limit it's all your fault, so sorry, state shouldn't have to pay for your treatment. you'll just have to find the money from somewhere or we'll just have to take it from your sstate if you die. oh but wait, what of your kids that you've left behind, how irresponsible of you, you had kids, knowing that you might not be there to care for them because you were prone to breaking the speed limit ...

everytime i decide to have another child my Dp and i have to consider very carefull all the reprecussions. We have to try and cover as many eventualities that we can forsee, it is called being responsible adults. We have to have the discussion about whether we could cope with a disabled child, unpleasant as the conversation might be, what happens if either of us die, fall on hard times, split up, one or more of our children has something dreadful happen to them, all these sorts of things need to be discussed BEFORE we consider having a child. We don't just hope and throw caution to the wind.
My anger is with the wyatt parents whom I think DID NOT consider how they could cope. I think they were irresponible. They weren't thrown a completely unexpected situation. They were fully aware of the decision they were making, but they clearly were not aware of the reprecussions and neither are they able to deal with the consequences. That makes me angry.

Are we assuming then that they foreswa their marriage breakdown? I doubt that.

Have a look at this, the first and last are rather interesting in this context:

The Human Rights Act came into force on 2nd October 2000 and incorporates into UK law certain rights and freedoms set out in the European Convention on Human Rights such as:

*Right to Life (article 2)
*Protection from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (article 3)
*Protection from slavery and forced or compulsory labour (article 4)
*The right to liberty and security of person (article 5)
*The right to a fair trial (article 6)
*Protection from retrospective criminal offences (article 7)
*The protection of private and family life ()
*Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (article 9)
*Freedom of expression (article 10)
*Freedom of association and assembly (article 11)
*The right to marry and found a family (article 12)

but kitty you can't foresee every eventuality. if your child has an horrific accident tomorrow can you honestly say that you'd sit down with your dh, and think, oh wait, this child will be hard to look after because of his/her injuries, I can't cope with that, better let him die then.

BAttymumma, it's nice of you to think so well of the wyatts, as you can see I don't. It has nothing to do with whether your child has three arms, ten heads and twentysix legs. It is about taking responsibilty for your decisions. I believe that these people did not. I think respite care is a very necessary and much needed thing that is very underfunded. What makes me angry is that they have the responsibility of this child and then neither of them is able to look after her . I'm off to do cleaning now.

neither is ABLE its not that they dont want to. the dad has all the training. i know they were fighting for carers a while ago.

no Wannabe, but before we have that child we have to know that we can support them whatever happens. We have to know that we have the infrastructure in place.

but kitty you could have a child in the knowledge that you are responsible and you could die in childbirth and your husband could be hit by a buss. should you not have had that child? or your other children for that matter, because you might die prematurely and not be able to look after them?

I think Charlotte's medical history is irrelevant. Like every other family in the UK has the potential to be, the Wyatts have been hit with a double whammy of a child with profound SN and a relationship break-up (and the two have to be linked with the strain the Wyatts have lived with).
Charlotte is entitled to foster care while the courts sort out what her best interests are.
I hope her parents are also getting plenty of support because the impression I always got was that they were pretty vulnerable adults, quite possibly in the mum's case with SN of her own.
I don't grudge a penny of my taxes going to support this family unit.

Does that mean people without famillies shouldn't have children, in case they die and there's no one to care for them?

or you might appoint legal guardians for your children and you and the legal guardians could all be killed in one place leaving your children homeless. you can't forsee every eventuality.

Yes I think that some people go into having children without thinking through the consequences, the 13 year old who decides she wants a baby is too young and irresponsible imo, the 67 yo who has IVF treatment is irresponsible imo, because she knows she's unlikely to survive to bring up her child, but in situations like this you just can't foresee what the future holds.

Wannabe, it's about infrastructure. Before having children we have involved grandparents and made as many contingency plans as possible with all the 'what if' eventualities we could think of and we involved those close to us.
We have as many plans in place as we can think of. I do not beleive the Wyatts did that.

well i havent planned any of that. shit...

for Charlotte and her parents. I do not believe that we should presume to judge anyone without (a) the full facts and (b) having ever been in that position.

Also very sad for any mums with children with SN who read this thread. Please believe that Kitty's is a minority view (and, imo, a horribly horribly wrong one).

you're not a project manager by any chance? you make planning a baby sound like planning a project.

Message withdrawn

Thinking about all the things that could go wrong might seem a rather dour thing to do. The chances are, god willing, that we will all be ok, but if we're not.....

Marina I cannot be that 'generous'

shame on you misdee. you should have foreseen that Peter would need a heart transplant and that he would spend years in hospital and need 24 hour care when he came out. Why ever did you not sit down and discuss this when you started to plan your family! how irresponsible! sorry i don't know if there's a sarcastic smily

im sorry but im getting a bit annoyed now.

i am sorry but if your telling me you and your huibby sat down prior to conceiving each of your children and said

" ooh but what happens if our baby has a life threayteniong illness and we have to fight every DR in the land in order to keep her alive?? i mean wemuight split up with the pressure, then what will we do? i mean im sure we will cope, but what if we dont.....oh its ok, i cant use hindsight so i'll just put my black and white perspective glasses on and, there we go its all easy peasy now"

BOLLOX

you have no idea what living with a SN child is like and there is absolutly NO Fing way you can possibly discuss how you will cope because you do not know what will happen from day to day.
no SN is the same and so there is no way of comparing.

god forbid your hubby ever plays away because you should be denied benefits, after all im sure you discussed the possibility of infidelity

Thank you, Ellbell.

I completely agree with your post, and have subsequently deleted what I was going to post.

It had the same sentiments, but without the diplomacy and restraint shown in yours.

wannabe, having a baby should be the most important project you ever plan for in your entire life. If you are only ever going to plan one thing very well then surely to god this should be it?