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

Thanks!

My parents just renewed theirs by post from the US last spring and it took forever. Like 8 weeks. Luckily, they have other passports to travel - if need be they drive down to Mexico, you don't need a passport to leave the US into Mexico - and fly off from there on their other passports (my dad has a Mexican one and my mother a French one).

I do hope that everyone who has expressed their horror at the secrecy of our family courts and the powers that are abused will please do as John Hemming asks and write/phone/email their MP to urge them to support his early day motion.

There is a list of MP's email addresses here: www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alms.cfm and please bear in mind that ny correspondence between you and your MP is strictly confidential.

Hello all,

I'm Fran; the expectant Mum in the article at the start of this thread. I'm new here so please excuse me if I get some of the acronyms wrong.

I just wanted to say thank you for all the kind words and for all the support.

If at all possible I'd like to answer some of the questions that have been raised too. If I miss some please let me know and I'll try and answer them.

Molly's father is the same man as the ex partner I referred to on GMTV. I'm not bound by any laws regarding confidentiality and my discussion of him - but I do respect his right to a private life and as such I won't identify him at present. The "incident" that precipitated the involvement of the police and social services was extremely frightening and deeply disturbing. It was a time where I felt that Molly and I were in danger and so I did what I thought to be right and called the police for help. I'm not being deliberately evasive here by not going into the details of the incident, I'm just trying to be fair to all concerned - no matter what they have or haven't done.

I'm not in this to demonise or villify anyone, least of all the people involved in child protection work who have a desperately difficult job to do. All I'm asking for is a fair and balanced procedure leading to a fair and balanced outcome. I fully understand that once Children's services were involved that they needed to take account of my past too. I also understand that my previous history of mental health problems could be cause for concern. I have never asked that Children's Services cease their involvement, all I have ever asked for is a chance to prove that I can be a loving, devoted and competent Mum.

My one concern in this is that Molly have the safest, happiest and most stable start in life. I really do believe that that is best achieved by her being with me. If an assessment in a Mother and Baby Unit is needed to assuage professional's anxieties and therefore allow us to achieve that for Molly then so be it. I have nothing to hide and nothing to be afraid of in an assessment; I just want to be given that chance.

I know it is hard to believe that the child protection conference only lasted 10 minutes, but that is the truth. The independent chair presented my previous solicitor and I with a copy of the letter from the paediatrician before the conference started. It was then suggested that there was no need to consider the other evidence before the conference because his letter was so compelling. Before the conference I had never heard of this doctor and I had no knowledge of his involvement.

As I said before, I'm not in this to launch an attack on child protection work, or those who do it. I just want the best possible chance for Molly and a transparent, fair system for everyone else who finds themselves in this invidious position.

Thanks again for all the kind words - they mean a lot.

Fran Lyon

what a courageous woman you are, fran... I really hope that things work out for you and Molly. I posted earlier on the thread that I think this whole story is horrifying and terrifying and you must be so scared about what is going to happen.

So sorry that you are going through this.

Best of luck to you, Fran. What's happening to you is outrageous. I hope you get a fair outcome, for you and Molly.

Perhaps the fact that this has happened to somebody as articulate as you might help to raise public awareness of the disgraceful system operating in our family courts. I think many people simply don't know this sort of thing is going on.

We're all behind you!! I hope you'll keep posting here now you've found us.

Welcome to mumsnet Fran. I'm so sorry this is happening to you. Thanks for posting.

Welcome to Mumsnet, Fran. I'm so glad you are fighting this. Please keep us posted as we will be rooting for you & MN can be a fantastic place for support.

Fran,

This is awful. Surely if you are happy to go to the Mother & Baby unit to be assessed the council should support that??? Have you got a good lawyer?? It is a breach of your Human Rights isn't it?? The Right to family life??

What I don't understand is why a letter from a paediatrician seems to have more weight than an assessment from your own psychiatrist.

I am concerned that Council's often use information from GP's / Medical profession within these cases when IMO (and experience) some of them are very free with their opinions instead of objective assessment.

The Fuckers!

Your post speaks volumes, Fran. You are one exceptionally brave, articulate woman who does indeed deserve the chance to be mother to your child.

I hope by publicising your story you can get the help and counsel you most certainly merit.

Fran, I really hope you get this all sorted out - it seems impossibly unfair to me - surely someone in a position of authority must realise it and get you and your daughter some kind of justice. I sincerely hope so.

Good luck, Fran.
I was shocked by this story as well, and wish you a happy ending.

Welcome to mumsnet Fran, good luck with your struggle to keep your dd.

Please everyone concerned about this have a look at the john hemming link. We really need to fight this, we can't have parents being terrorised by the state like this. Apart from anything else, it puts children in danger because parents are too afraid to ask for help.

Fran,
So sorry that your pregnancy is being marred by this. Keep strong and keep letting us know here if there is anything we can do to help.

Hello all,

Thank you once again for the messages of support. Knowing that there are people thinking of Molly and I, and knowing that there are people who want to see us be given a chance means a very great deal.

I do now have a very good legal team and they are being phenomenally helpful - far beyond the call of duty.

I can't explain why the paediatrician's letter carried more weight than the two letters from psychiatrists who know me. To be totally fair to Children's Services I will try and hazard a guess from their perspective - but do bear in mind this is just me guessing...

From their point of view I would think that the letters from the psychiatrists are not enough. The paediatrician's letter is very strongly worded, and it would require great confidence given the current risk-averse culture for the social workers not to adopt it's recommendations.

The letters from the psychiatrists are equally, if not even more, strongly worded. However these letters are of a positive nature and I suppose there is a reasonable tendency to focus on the negatives, or potential negatives, when considering a child's safety.

It is also important to remember that neither psychiatrist is currently treating me. However this is not because my current psychiatrist has a different view - it is merely that I don't have a current psychiatrist. I was discharged from all mental health care, with a clean bill of health, several years ago.

On balance I do understand why Children's services have felt the need to react to the paediatrician's letter. If I were faced with such a letter, suggesting in no uncertain terms that a child were at risk of such heinous abuse then I would think that I myself would want to err on the side of caution. The issues that I don't understand are:

• Why a paediatrician rather than a psychiatrist should be commenting upon an adult mental health issue.

• Why they should comment without meeting the adult in question.

• Why when faced with an expectant mother who is eager to co-operate it is not possible to arrange a "mother and baby" assessment immediately post-delivery. These assessments can involve 24 hour supervision where it is deemed necessary and so can eliminate the risk concern until such a time as that risk has been fully assessed.

My contention is, and never has been, with Children's Services involvement. Rather, it is with the way in which the situation is now being progressed.

Thanks again,

Fran

What a horrific story Fran. I hope and hope that you get to keep Molly. Actually I can't imagine how you couldn't. It would be an absolute outrage.

Fran,
Do you have family around to support you?

Fran I've been lurking on this but haven't posted as I just couldn't find the words to express my horror & outrage at the way you & Molly are being treated (at least not without resorting to a lot of swearing).

My thoughts are with you both & I hope things work out well for you.

Fran I too have never understood why in such cases, paediatricians are considered experts on mental health issues. They wouldn't be listened to if they started to give diagnoses about the state of a patient's liver, or lungs, or heart, as it's not their area of expertise - so how come they are listened to when they pontificate about the mental health of a patient, which is also way beyond their area of expertise?

I have always been perplexed and alarmed by the apparant lack of a) humility of the paediatric profession in thinking they are qualified to offer opinions on mental health and b) critical thinking on the part of social workers and courts in accepting that just because a fallible human has expertise in one area, it doesn't mean they have in another. If I wanted an opinion on my finances, surely I should ask an accountant, not a solicitor, however well-qualified the solicitor is? If I want an opinion on the mental health of a person, surely I should be asking an expert on mental health, not on children's health? I have never seen a satisfactory explanation as to how it is, that paediatricians are considered qualified to diagnose MSbP, or any other mental health issue.

fran, I am glad that you have a good legal team that are fighting your corner-I am sure that they will be able to turn things around for you-hopefully before the birth.

Given that you now have legal advisors, it is more likley that the Local Authority will be forced to apply for an interim care order(rather than an emergency protection order) should they have any intention of removing your baby at birth. This will no doubt be contested vigorously on your behalf.

I truly hope that your advisors get your case kicked up to the County Court rather than leaving it with lay magistrates.

The law is in your favour-in that the Local Auhtority will have to have a very clear case of imminant risk to warrant such a draconian step.

good luck

sometimes they just donot come under the radar.

'But the BIG unanswered question is why the hell are there so many junkies and alocholics and people living and begging on the street who haven't had their kids removed? '

It's much easier to adopt out a healthy, white infant than a child suffering from heroin withdrawal or with FAS.

it really isn't just babies that are removed.

Many, many of the children taken into care each year are toddlers and older children.

Yes, but it would be interesting to see which ones are adopted out to meet their targets.