PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE TO SIGN THIS PETITION!!!

[Beenleigh]

You may have heard the story of Fran Lyon. If not, then this is a simplified version.

Fran is currently 31 weeks pregnant with her first baby
When Fran was sixteen years old, she was the victim of a serious sexual assault, and as a result, she suffered from mental health issues. She received therapy for two years, one year as an inpatient, and less than one following her discharge. She has not received or needed any mental health therapy since that time, and the psychiatrist that treated her has explicitly stated that she has no concerns whatsoever for Fran's mental health.

Unfortunately, early on in Fran?s pregnancy, there was a difficult situation with her (then) partner, and Fran called the police. Due to the nature of the problem and combined with the fact that Fran was pregnant, the police referred the case to social services. Fran was completely honest and open about her past mental health issues, and clear that she no longer suffered from any such problems. However, a ball had started rolling out of control, and a paediatrician, who has never actually met or spoken to Fran, has inexplicably suggested that she may in due course suffer from Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. This has resulted in social services deciding that upon her birth, Fran?s baby daughter, Molly, will be taken away from her.

It is abundantly clear that Fran Lyon will be absolutely no danger to her baby, but we suggest that at the very least, Fran should at be allowed to stay in an assessment unit with her baby, Molly, pending an inevitable decision that she is capable of caring for her daughter independently.

Please take a few minutes to watch this clip of Fran being interviewed on This Morning: uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2qHcH_Eaocg

Please please sign the petition here: www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/539543596

Also, please could you copy and paste this post and send it as an email to as many people as possible, obviously feeling free to correct my crappy spelling and grammar!

Many Thanks

Bump!
182 people signed in less than 24 hours!!

Done MamaPJ- thanks!

188 & rising Beeny!!

Signed. I can't believe how wrong this country can get it at times.

Fran
I really hope that you get to the mother and baby unit and that everything does work out well for you.
I still don't understand by what is at stake why you will not go public with the full details of the incident if you really truly have nothing to hide.
I know I am sceptical maybe it is my experience from my work but there are others like me and unless you can be totally honest and open about all aspects of this case then you will be met with at least some suspicion.
I just don't get it, you seemed very plausable on "This Morning" and very "normal" (sorry I hate that word) but having witnessed the terrible families that social services knowingly allows some children to reside in I just don't get why you should be treated so differently if there is not more to it.
That said there is no excuse for the system to be how it is and for you to be assessed without even meeting your assessor is just horrendous.
You said in the interview that from what you had seen there is no information to support you being treated in this way. Is there more information that you and your legal team are not privy to. I know when patients ask to see medical records then a consultant has the right to omit any part he does not wish them to see - can this still happen in the legal system?

bump

igned and mailed out X

Four o'clock bump!! (well almost!)

signed, and bump

5pm bump & 202 signatures.

Might be a bit quiet while people get home & sort out sprogs....ah yes I knew I was doing something..............

boomp

Bump bump bump!!!!!!!!!!

signed and bump

this woman will be assessed by the courts in the usual way. the family law process is not one which just whips babies away before they have even been born. They can be put on the child protection register before birth yes, but then it is EXTREMELY unusual (and if the OP's facts are right, then this case is just not serious enough) for a baby to be taken away befroe the mum has a go at either being monitored at home, or being assessed in some kind of residential placement, and if she cocks that up, she might even get another go at a residential placement. thousands of pounds will be spent on her, and the aim is always to try to keep the baby with the birth family, even in some cases where the birth family are reluctant

Not sure what weight any family court is going to place on a petition, but good on you for publicising it anyway.

Signed and emailed the link/story.

Thanks Olala for that reassurance but obviously it ISN'T that straight forward in Fran's case or she wouldn't have been so worried by what she has/hasn't been told. If the procedure IS as you described then they are being unbelievably cruel in leading her to believe the worst.

olala, Fran has offered to go into an M&B unit to prove that she's fine, but has apparently been turned down - no idea whether they just don't have any spaces or what.

Thing is, the straightforward child protection cases are about actual harm. But with MSbP or FII as they have renamed it, it's all speculation and innuendo, whipped up into an unholy broth. That's what Sally Clarke (RIP), Trupti Patel and Angela Cannings and Donna Antony suffered from. And countless others who were stripped of their children by the family courts in secret.

If there was evidence that justified Social Services' extreme tactics, then I hardly think John Hemmings would be taking this case up with such vigour. An MP is hardly going to risk their reputation supporting a child abuser. And MPs see all human life in their constituency surgeries, they are hardly naive.

And I hardly think Fran's friends and colleagues would be so vehement in their support, either.

We know for a fact that SS get carried away once MSbP is mentioned - see the cases I've referenced before, where once the subject is raised it just spirals out of control. And I've mentioned before that one of the most eminent doctors in the country told me he was threatened for daring to point out the flaws in the case SS were building against one of his patients.

I bet they are treating the letter where the doctor - paediatrician? _ said "IF" their allegations were accurate they would have to consider removing the child as bolstering their case. In fact it does nothing of the sort, as anyone with an ounce of logic can see. Sadly logic seems to go out of the window as soon as these witch hunts are started.

i think it is a shame that the journalists in MN are shying away from this case instead of utilizing their contacts to try and gain some publicity and public pressure for the case. When Fran's baby is born she will not be able to talk about the situation at all or risk prison.

Agree 100% edam.

I think that SS are taking the 'easy' option here.

Take the baby away - have it adopted (meets with adoption targets and babies are easier to adopt because they are more in demand).

No need for close follow-up care, no drain on resources, no responsibility for them after adoption.

There is a thread on Sally Clark in this news forum (for anybody who can bear it). It is desperately sad to see what this MSbP/FII diagnosis has done to children and their families.

We can only pray that no other mother will be made to suffer what Sally Clark wen through, At the moment though it seems like the suffering will continue however.

Absolutely ruty.

totally agree with edam

Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy is like a red rag to ss. they slap gagging orders on the parents so we don't hear of the cases like these. i guarantee that if the children and family court was an open court, things would be very different.

Fab post Edam.
Ruty, why do you think this is? I really don't understand it. I posted the other day in Chat asking for help writing a petition, and got no helpful response at all. Can't understand it.