the Fran Lyon case: "Mother-to-be flees as social workers warn her they will take her baby away at birth"

[theUrbanDryad]

i didn't realise she'd left Northumberland. Hopefully she'll have more luck in the Midlands!

i think some of those comments are a bit extreme; "No one could figure out why she had a tracheotomy..." is it really likely to be that relevant?

if i had a villa i'd be the first to offer it up to her and her baby. and money for legal representation as well.

Very unpleasant business.

(meemar- my old mentor on my last mental health placement was involved with a team that removed a baby from its mother hours after birth, she says that the howls from the mother were unforgettable and she soon had to leave that team as she could not go through doing something like that ever again.)

"Flee" might be a bit dramatic but it was the presentation of the birth plan stating the minimum contact that prompted Fran to leave.(this is old news she left over a week ago!)

She has friends & family around her in the Midlands & like many mums-to-be in the 3rd trimester could do with the physical support.

As I understand it frorm Frans postings on our other threads she is waiting for the handover from Hexham to Birmmingham SS & will be hoping to get a more sympathetic hearing there.

I'll try & find a link to her exact words.

Extract from another FL thread.....

By FranLyon on Sun 11-Nov-07 13:58:52
Yeah, there will be a "transfer conference" arranged (not sure when - soon I would guess). Northumberland, the new local authority, me, and new medical team (GP, midwife, child protection nurse etc.) and legal will be at the conference. Having never been to one before I don't know how it will work. I would guess that Northumberland will lay out their concerns, my solicitor will lay out our points, I'll express my willingness to co-operate and the new local authority will decide how they want to take it forward.

I may well be entirely wrong about all that though - it's just my best guess! Someone else on here may have a better idea!

I'm going to contact the new SS tomorrow morning and let them know I'm "here" so to speak. I might have a bit of a better idea then of what will happen next.

Thanks,

Fran

The fucking Daily Hate is a pile of shite. She hasn't 'FLED' - she has MOVED house.

Except this is a supportive article from a paper that has been supportive to Fran Lyon from the start, so the hatred may be misplaced.
Anyway, she has moved to get away from SS after reading their birth plan for her. Otherwise she would still be there. It's not a simple case of moving house. I don't think that 'flee' is in any way a criticism. You hear 'fleeing persecution' - it's a reasonable thing to do.

Ozy I haven't read the piece, you're right, I stand corrected, not much time, posted quickly.

Good lord, I recognise her as the pregnant woman I sat next to on a train a couple of months ago. She was lovely. We chatted about motherhood and how much she was looking forward to it. I feel sick that this is happening to her.

tiredemma - that has made my blood run cold. Hideous.

Hideous for the mother i mean. It's just unbearable. I so hope Fran is spared that. x

I don't know how ANY human being could do that to ANY new-born & it's mother. Unless the mother was COMPLETELY psychotic & likely to smother/harm the child immediately I can't see why they can't be supervised & supported. Comes down to money I suppose yet again.

FFS we allow convicted female prisoners to keep their babies with them until they are 6 months old in a hospital wing in Holloway!

she had mental health problems (not psychotic- just unable to look after previous children due to her mental health so SS decided to take her last newborn)

How can doing that to her help her mental health problems?? Surely it's going to make them worse. It's like inflicting a severe trauma on someone thinking it's for the best. It makes you wonder what kind of heartless morons dream up these plans.

there may be hope for her with a new local authority.

My SIL suffered from drug-induced psychosis, had been sectioned,history of living on the streets and trouble with the police. She became pregnant while under treatment and medication for her psychosis. Despite all of this she was allowed to keep her baby with support. (although she later lost parental responsibility)

I really don't understand why they don't feel Fran should have the right to prove herself a capable mother.

I hope to God that Brum SS are more enlightened and more sensible than Northumberland. The dept up there seems to be jumping straight for the most extreme option without even pausing to pass 'go'.

tiredemma, that is chilling. Reminds me of some of the accounts of women who had their babies forcibly removed in the days when unmarried mothers used to be forced into homes and stripped of their babies - the homes used to be paid for each adoption. There is plenty of evidence for any reasonable, intelligent human being to conclude that the way we used to treat unmarried mothers was appalling and caused life-long trauma for them and their babies.

Why on earth has society decided to do the same thing all over again but picking on a slightly different group this time?

Edam, it makes me think of the film about the Magdalen Sisters.

Do you find that many people you talk to about this simply do not believe it's happening - 'SS wouldn't do that', 'it's not easy to take a child away', 'judges know what they're doing' etc etc?

Kathy they do say that, the public have a trusting faith in "the system". I'm not one to subscribe to conspiracy theories but this continued situation in the Family Courts makes me VERY uneasy at best & downright angry most of teh time.

BTW those are 3 phrases repeated to me last week by a SW in child protection.

If you don't know anything about the subject, you do have to assume that SWs would only take a child away where there is a real risk. The alternative - that SWs are failing in their duty and tearing loving families apart - is too horrifying to contemplate. Yet look into the whole MSbP/FII issue and that's the inevitable conclusion. Terrifying.

I'd have more faith in SS had there been a proper, independent inquiry into what the hell went wrong in the tragic cases of Sally Clark, Angela Cannings, Donna Anthony and Trupti Patel and the related cases in the family courts. Instead there has been a wholesale cover-up.

I might have a bit more faith if the Rochdale SWs who tormented children in pursuit of ridiculous fantasties about satanic abuse had been sacked or at least discplined. The tapes of the interviews with those children are appalling. The children themselves, now adults, have spoken out. Yet there has been no justice and those SWs - proven liars - are still working. Which brings shame on the whole profession.

SS appears to be afflicted by repeated attacks of mass hysteria. And nothing is being done to stop it and introduce reasonable standards of basic professional behaviour. I know individual social workers are under a hell of a lot of pressure, doing a thankless job while harassed by staff shortages and a terrible lack of resources. But there is no excuse for the continued wrongdoing. And a proper inquiry might actually force central and local government to provide proper resources.

Ezactly it's the continues " we are above reproach" attitude that appalls me. EVERY profession has it's shirkers,bad eggs & total incompetants-they're humans with all their wonderful variations. But any public body funded by tax-payers money (yes we're all paying for this shite which I think we sometimes forget!!) SHOULD be accountable & answerable for it's actions. If mistakes are made procedures must be changed to reflect lessons learnt. It's not fair on those who DO do a good job if they are labelled & despised along with the rest.

Exactly, 'we are above reproach' leads to megomania and terrible injustice. As we can see from David Southall...

It's not just a few bad eggs, though that's bad enough. It's systemic failures that need to be rooted out.

I can see how a profession like social work would have to build a very strong culture of supporting your colleagues, in order to function, both because of the conflict with clients that the role will entail and the external Daily Mail-ish 'social workers are the root of all evil' attitudes.
However, do members of the profession not see that it actually gives you far more faith in the system when you see social workers being willing to question and think about it? There have been one or two comments on the Fran Lyon case along the lines of 'I'm a social worker and this is terrible; I know how mistakes can happen' and they make me have far more respect for them than closing ranks does.

Me too Kathy- sadly they are in the minority I think- to challenge the system from within is very hard & closed ranks are difficult to batter down sometimes. When I challenged a SW recently about the need for an overhaul to restore the public faith in the SW system the reply was " SW is not a popularity contest"

*scuse the typos!

good posts Edam, quite.

I saw Miss Lyon on TV today!

Her case is going to be on ITV, I think it's Monday.

Will look for it.