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

Baby girl taken from mother to live with dad and his boyfriend

528 replies

Darcey2105 · 06/05/2015 13:13

I'm horrified!! Have you seen this story this morning?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32603514

A baby girl was taken from her mother and is now in sole custody of the dad and his boyfriend. The reason being that he said the baby was conceived to be their surrogate child. but she says he agreed to be her sperm donor so she could have the baby.

What is going on? Surely even if the mother had changed her mind about surrogacy she could still be allowed to keep her own baby. I am totally appalled. The men had a top female lawyer fighting their case. And it looks like it was a woman judge who ruled it was in the baby's best interest to live with the dad and his boyfriend - even though the baby was still breastfeding!!

how can there be so little support of mothers? Please tell me I hallucinated the whole awful story.

OP posts:
AuntieStella · 06/05/2015 14:04

It says M has had overnight contact with H&B, drinking from a bottle and eating solids, and is showing no signs of distress about that.

It also lays out a chronology of the number of times S has interfered with contact; including visits to hospitals (leading to intrusive tests) when nothing was ever found to be wrong with the child, and (if I read it right) triggered concerns in hospital staff who made a safeguarding enquiry.

BoffinMum · 06/05/2015 14:04

I found the case very unsettling but assume we only know half the story.

Any system that takes children away from mothers needs careful scrutiny.

ArcheryAnnie · 06/05/2015 14:05

SoupDragon does none of the decision worry you at all?

SoupDragon · 06/05/2015 14:08

Not particularly.

AuntieStella · 06/05/2015 14:10

"I found the case very unsettling but assume we only know half the story"

What sorts of things are not included in published judgements? (genuine question)

SoupDragon · 06/05/2015 14:10

Why are mothers so special and protected?
Is a mother always better than a father? No.
Has this mother acted in the best interests of the child? No. she has excluded the father every step of the way. Not for the first time.

BareGorillas · 06/05/2015 14:12

It's odd actually the way you have set out your OP, - at first reading it would appear that the story was Dad has left Mum, taken up with a new boyfriend and now the baby has been taken from Mum and handed to Dad and new partner.

When actually, this child was conceived by the father and a female friend (obvs) to provide a child for the male couple.

Doesn't appear that you have read the article at all, let alone the full judgement. Confused

BoffinMum · 06/05/2015 14:14

Mothers are special and protected because history tells us societies pretty much fall apart when they are not. That's not to say that all the mothers in the world are perfect, but overall it's a reckless society indeed that assumes they are dispensable once the breeding process is over.

Read ' A Handmaiden's Tale' for a fictional account of what decoupling reproduction and childrearing can mean.

SoupDragon · 06/05/2015 14:16

Any system that takes children away from mothers needs careful scrutiny.

What about taking children away from fathers? Does that system not need careful scrutiny?

I wonder what the comments would be if a father had agreed to be a sperm donor with a subsidiary parenting role and had then decided to take the child, claiming it was a surrogacy and lying and excluding the mother at every opportunity.

I do not believe mothers are by default the better parent.

Taking gender out of the equation, on one side you have a parent who appears to have ignored court orders, deliberately excluded the other parent and who has form for doing this before. On the other you have one who appears to have stuck by the agreed "rules". Which is acting in the best interests of the child?

HetzelNatur · 06/05/2015 14:17

If a child had been taken from a father who had had her from birth and given to the mother would you care so much?

Yes I certainly fucking would. It's about the child, remember? Even more so if the child has been very very close to her mother all this time, to wrench it away like a dog, or a TV or something is really wrong.

SoupDragon · 06/05/2015 14:18

Read ' A Handmaiden's Tale' for a fictional account of what decoupling reproduction and childrearing can mean.

Why would a fictional account have any bearing on reality? Confused What does Snow White and Cinderella teach us about step mothers?

DuelingFanjo · 06/05/2015 14:18

"The breast feeding doesn't mean a thing. The baby can be fed a bottle."

no - actually it is quite meaningful given that it is the most natural way to feed a baby/child.

but... moving on... doesn't this sound familiar? There was a poster here once who had a very similar story and had started an online petition about it - though the details of the father's sexuality were not the same?

Anyway - I am torn. It sounds like the woman has been punished by the courts for making such a fuss. Hopefully they have acted in the best interests of the child rather than just punish the mother.

SoupDragon · 06/05/2015 14:19

Even more so if the child has been very very close to her mother all this time, to wrench it away like a dog, or a TV or something is really wrong.

The child is equally happy and content with her father.

DuelingFanjo · 06/05/2015 14:24

here is one of the original threads. I strongly believe this is the same story.
I had and have great sympathy for this woman.
I think that she has fought hard in whatever way possible to keep a child she changed her mind about giving up. It's all very sad IMO.

HetzelNatur · 06/05/2015 14:24

Not equally attached to him which was my point

DuelingFanjo · 06/05/2015 14:25

IF any of this below is true I really do have great sympathy for her and don't blame her for putting up a fight

"Two days after I came home from hospital with my baby, I got the first letter from his solicitor demanding that I give my baby to him!! When my baby was 4 weeks old I had to go to court first time, in London at the Family Division of the High court. I live one hours away!! I am brestfeeding her on demand still. Since then I had another court hearing and on Monday another one. I cant afford a solicitor so I have been representing myself. It got too much now, I cant follow the legal rules, I am stressed, upset I cant sleep and I cant eat properly. All I want is to be left alone and to be able to fully enjoy my baby. I was given no opportunity to recover from child birth, I am all on my own, I have other 2 kids to look after too. "

ArcheryAnnie · 06/05/2015 14:26

Eh, SoupDragon, then it's no wonder we disagree. I find a decision that seems to think a single parent being "highly involved" in their baby's life is a bad thing quite concerning. I also find the treatment of this whole thing as some kind of non-delivery-of-goods transaction really horrible.

BoffinMum · 06/05/2015 14:27

Or indeed does 'Children of Men' tell us anything about childlessness and the human condition?

Hey, let's ditch all literary fiction as it never explores the human psyche in any useful way, does it?

(Folk tales often tell us interesting things about medieval society's views towards women and children, actually).

PastPerfect · 06/05/2015 14:28

The mother posted extensively on MN whilst proceedings were ongoing - she showed absolutely no comprehension of the concept of putting her child first.

DuelingFanjo · 06/05/2015 14:29

The Judge says

" I conclude that she must have either deliberately misled the Applicants about her intentions or changed her mind as the pregnancy progressed."

isn't this a surrogate's perogative? The baby was four months old when the thread I linked to was posted. The father was trying to get custody just days after the birth.

Personally I think this judgement is all about punishing a scared woman who was unable to defend herself properly and resorted to anything she thought would stop her baby being taken from her.

SoupDragon · 06/05/2015 14:30

Duellingfanjo as I understand it, the mother in this story does not have two other children to look after as they were removed and sent to live with their father after she sent them to Romania to deny him contact.

The actual text of the judgement is very informative.

HetzelNatur · 06/05/2015 14:31

Would the baby have been taken from her if someone else hadn't been trying to get custody if it? Is a pertinent question I think.

If not then the concerns about her parenting cannot have been too strong.

If so then perhaps there is a case.

TulipOHare · 06/05/2015 14:31

Why would a fictional account have any bearing on reality?

All good fiction has at its heart society, people and human nature. It can be set 500 years ago or 500 years into the future, be scrupulously historically accurate or speculative. It makes no odds. Literature reflects us back at ourselves and asks us to think.

AuntieStella · 06/05/2015 14:32

"I have other 2 kids to look after too. "

This bit cannot be an accurate representation of this case. For custody of her other two daughters was awarded to their father some 3 years before this child was conceived.

M is now about 16 months old, and overnight contact started around October last year. There's not been any sudden change.

I was wondering why the mother was awarded less contact than the father offered.

halestone · 06/05/2015 14:33

I stopped taking the OP seriously when she stated. 'I think the mother should have kept the baby. As that is the best interests of the baby'

Narrow minded and completely wrong. Keeping a child with a mother is not always in the best interests. Otherwise there would be no need for courts to decide or even for social services to exist. Just because some people can have children doesn't mean they should have them.

Swipe left for the next trending thread