Rather terrifying article about social workers attempting to take baby from its mother as soon as its born.

[Callisto]

It was in the Sunday Telegraph which I got round to reading last night. The story plus a couple of related articles is here: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/26/nbaby126.xml

God, when will thsi stop? It's outrageous. Have they learned nothing from the Sally Clark case?

I am so shocked I must be so niave I thought there had to be muh more evidence to take away an unborn baby than a letter from someone she has never met

Many apologies for the badly written thread title btw.

It seems to be all about adoption targets these days - as children under 1 are easier to adopt these are the children targetted by social workers.

bloody hell

The poor, poor women in these cases.
The logic in this one seems to be that she has already suffered loads so let's make her suffer some more .
By this logic anyone who is not mentally 100% well could be deemed a risk. If they carry on with this sort of thing no wonder some women are too scared to seek help for PND.

they want to use their resources on keeping children that are already at risk safe, as they dont seem to be covering that criteria too well do they???

I mean FFS, if they think there is a chance that she is going to suffer from MSBP they can monitor her (or even give her support....) once the baby is born. Not take the baby away before it's even become clear whether she's managing well or not.

heavens above!

There was a documentary about a family who had had their children taekn into care and even though the parents were eventually proved to be innocent- the children had to stay with their adopted families and have not contact with their child.

not an area i know anything much about but..

BLOODY HELL

that is some scary shit.

was it Roy Meadows who's flawed evidence put sally clark in prison..and here we have another medic, who has also not met the woman in question, deeming her a danger to her own children..

so, she has a history of mental illness, due to being abused and then raped..but has managed to achieve fantastic academic success, and is trying to move on, but is under a terrible threat

agree totally with kathy's post

instead of kicking women when they are down, why not provide more help, more support and allow them to move on

no-one can be 100 % mentally well, their entire lives, 1 in 4 people will suffer with depression at some point

young men are more at risk of committing suicide, they are not stopped from being fathers, are they ?

Wheres the dad? Why cant the dad have custody if the mums such a risk?

i dont belive it has anything to do with the welfare of the baby, its just statistics.Where was the help for that little 4 year old girl who was tortured by her mother and her boyfriend....left in her own rom until she died??? neighbours reported her on numerous occasions, yet they did nothing and it resulted in that poor little girls murder.they should be doing all they can about the children that are already on the at risk register and do everything they can to sort that instead of taking a baby off a woman when its just not necessary

there is a scheme where she can be under constant supervison.

I would run away

I am totally disgusted by this! Christ, if everyone who had the odd mental problem had their kids taken from them there'd be no kids actually living with their parents!

She developed mental health problems after being abused by her father and raped by a stranger? No shit sherlock! I think it would be unusual if she hadn't developed mental health problems after all that.

Unfotunately it doesn;t surprise me at all.

Why ARE family courts so secretive? It just seems to lead to terrible decision after terrible decision (look at Bunglie) and seems to destroy lives.

id run away too. emigrate. disappear. and possibly make it impossible to get support for myself should i then need it

absolutely terrifying.

When ds1 was 4 a health professional who had never met me or ds1 told ds1's future mainstream school that I was a mother 'well known to be in denial'. This was because I had previously argued that he should be receiving speech and language therapy (I had been told there was no point giving him any as he wasn't capable of doing anything). I hadn't wanted him in mainstream school btw we weren't given the option of special at that time.

Luckily the school rang another professional who knew me well to ask whether I was totally in denial, as they were concerned about how they would deal with me. The other professional put them right (and repeated the conversation to me). I couldn't complain as it would have got the professional who told me into trouble.

bloody hell gess.
theyre like the modern day spanish inquisition arent they? why the hell do these people have so much power and who decides who gets it??

People with such power!

This gagging order needs to be fought - I wonder what would have happened If Bungle had fought it earlier.

The trouble is you are at the mercy of these power crazy people and are to scared to rock the boat.

And as soon as this is in the family court system the woman is PROHIBITED from talking to anyone about it. It's outrageous.

lulu is right btw, when she says that this stops people seeking help. it is precisely this sort of powerlessness and persecution, or the vague threat/awareness thereof which stopped me asking for help when i was suicidally depressed as a teenager, and has played a part in me not getting help for pnd too.

I often wonder how bunglie is doing and how her situation is now....

Notice how they want to take the healthy kids away from the healthy mothers, but continually leave children born to drug-addicts who live with people with violent criminal histories at home?

END family court secrecy. It's perfectly possible to protect a child's identity and still operate a non-secretive court system.

END non-elected judges.