Fran Lyon to keep baby

[ElfPolarBear]

Looking for a link
Not sure whether she's coming back
Fantastic news IMO for Molly and Fran

What is the potential problems in having an open family court ? Does anyone know and can explain it to me in simple terms ?

Is there any reason whilst the childrens names/indentifying details can still be kept secret but the case still debated and decided on in open court, like rape cases in the criminal court ?

I know nothing about legal matters but it seems to me the only known advantage to having a secret family court seems to be to give a strong balance of power to support SS seperating babies from families and adopting them straight away to reach targets. It doesn't help the children and it doesn't help the parents so why continue it ?

Hexham Social Services believe Fran Lyon suffers from Fabricated or Induced Illness Syndrome because she claims to have/has an accute and difficult to diagnose illness.
She needs proper help and monitering.

If people who claimed mysterious illnesses were not allowed to have kids, our family tree would have died a very long time ago!

One in three people have mental illnesses at some point in their lives. Surely social services are not going to take away one in three children?

Or I think a lot of mumnetters will be heading for Europe.

The power wielded by the family court and by individual cafcass officers is truly terrifying. It's really hard for people who haven't had dealings to appreciate how much they get away with. You couldn't make it up.

The press should be allowed to report on family court proceedings to make social services and judges realise they are public servants.

Problem with press in family court is confidentiality but there are rules, laws and ethics to which the press - even the less reputable outlets - willingly and consistently comply. Already report in criminal cases of child abuse, rape etc without breaking confidentiality.

The sooner the better, the family court system is scandalous

BE the closed family courts are ostensibly to prevent children fron being identified but that's a load of guff too as criminal courts can apply gagging/anonimity orders too so why can't family courts.(there may be legal technicalities so obviously I'm happy to be corrected on this!!)

The problem is there are only so many "expert witnesses" prepared to stand up& be counted. So the pool of knowledge is quite small.If they are particularly fanatical or have dodgy research in an open court it can be challenged by another professional & more research/theories discussed. In closed courts "expert witnesses" in child protection are often controversial but unchallenged.

The "no warning" before taking a baby away bit is the most frightening for me. Especially since it might then be illegal for the mother to go to her MP or even discuss what had happened with her counsellor!

With a documented history of depression, and currently trying to concieve, this is seriously making my DH and I consider whether we would be best living outside the UK. I know the risk of something like this happening is very tiny, but any possiblity of something so appalling could influence our long term plans.

Thanks BB

chemicalsissters doctors have made a formal diagnosis of Fran's physical condition. Therefore speculation that she has created her illness is just that. It is easy to do, I agree, of course when you hear someone has had loads and loads of emergency admissions [especially a woman] it is easy to think she is an attention seeker or munchausen's sufferer. but it is not actually supported by any evidence.

Haven't had time to read all posts but just wanred to say fantastic news, here's to a wonderful life for Fran and her Molly.

chemicalsisters, as Ruty says, Fran has a diagnosed medical condition. So have I - had several emergency admissions during pregnancy (pregnancy makes the medicine I use less effective). Doesn't make me a monster or a threat to ds.

I know of one woman whose children were taken away and adopted because she had a hard-to-diagnose condition. It was real - very rare so diagnosed late as doctors in the UK work by excluding the most common causes of symptoms first. She is now in a wheelchair. But by the time it was identified, her children had been adopted. The judge gagged her so she couldn't go to her MP or even instruct a solicitor to clear her name. Even worse, the court sealed her medical records so the doctors treating her were working in the dark. Then SS lied about the terms of the adoption and disobeyed the terms of the court order.

All this heartbreak and injustice was caused by one 'expert' who was very persuasive but wrong, and who has since been discredited. For making stuff up, amongst other things. He never met her.

No-one has ever apologised. In fact SS, knowing the expert had been discredited and that she was finally taking steps to clear her name years later, continued to make false allegations about her to her children.

In the case I am talking about, and in Fran's, it looks as if SS are downright vindictive if anyone dares to challenge them. Which is terrifying.

that is truly terrifying edam. Why on earth are proper investigations into the SS's behaviour not done?

was reading about Angela Cannings and the mess her and her family's life has been made because of what happened to her.

Very best wishes to you Fran and Molly.

ruty this is what I can't understand either?

There are many many wonderful social workers doing unutterably awful jobs with good results. Why don't the badduns that there are get weeded out & retrained or sacked? There is no self-regulating mechanism that leads to this & also to help keep up standards by spreading examples of good practice.