Baby P

[GeraldineMumsnet]

Hi, to make it easier for people who are finding this subject very distressing, we're going to keep all Baby P posts in one thread. If you'd like to discuss this subject, then here is the thread to do so. We'll go on the other threads and link to this one. Thanks very much.

This case is being discussed on Radio 4 atm - Moral Maze

Dammit. Missed the Moral Maze. Did you listen to is, LittleBella? Was anything brought up that hasn't been mentioned on this thread?

I've just read the Peter Hitchens article in the Daily Mail online and now wish I hadn't. I detest that man. His politics are so right-wing he makes Hitler look like Mary Poppins!!! What may have started out being valid points have been completely obscured by his determination to blame everything on left-wing politics and a belief that the world would be fine if everyone stayed in traditional nuclear families. I am a single mother and I bitterly resent the way he is blaming Baby P's demise on her being a single mother. She wasn't. Any mother with a live-in lover is by definition not a single parent. He has completely ignored the fact that abuse was rampant in Victorian society, for example, when the married nuclear family was the norm. Not to mention the fact that many children grew up being abused in previous generations but it wasn't reported, because to the outside world it looked like the family was respectable as the parents were still married. Many people were abused because it was unacceptable in past eras to be a single parent, so escape was not possible. Can he not accept that, for people like me, becoming a single parent is actually BREAKING the cycle the violence and protecting our children from abuse? Aaarrggghhh. Have we not moved away from this reactionary twaddle? Has he no respect for Baby P to think that it's okay to hijack the case as an opportunity to launch his own scary brand of right-wing politics?

I think it would be very helpful if SS and people like Peter Hitchens would take a leaf out of MN. Quite naturally on here is seems that people are agreeing on a distinction between working class (i.e. less well off) and underclass (i.e. removed from the norms of society, with different standards of acceptable behaviour). We do have an underclass, without a shadow of a doubt, but it is a sweeping generalisation for people like Hitchens to imply that anyone who is on benefits or a single parent is a part of the underclass.

On the plus side, for a brief moment in time, anger at Peter Hitchens has replaced the awful sadness and impotence I feel about poor Baby P.

You can listen again www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/religion/moralmaze.shtml

Thanks Perty. Am listening to it now.

Yes thats outrageous but not that surprising coming from PH. Its about time people shut up about single parents, so many of them are fantastic parents and are single for many reasons, quite often choice and a courageous choice it is too. Had that woman been single theres a good chance none of this would have happened. I hate when people try to solve the worlds evils with these inaccurate sweeping statements.

Oh Melanie Philips and Michael Portillo have used this case to take a swipe at single parents as well.

It is infuriating and quite disgusting. They seem utterly unaware of the fact that lots of women become single parents precisely becuase it is a better option than living in a dysfunctional family. They automatically have single parents down as dysfunctional, when in fact my family is far more functional now than it was when I was living with my xp. They are so effing blinkered, it's just a source of irritation to listen to/ read them.

so these experts would prefer women to stay in an abusive relationship would they ?

fucking stupid comments from Portillo and the like

Well, had a listen to Moral Maze. What is the basis for this assumption that everyone who is married is in a stable, loving, healthy relationship that is going to bring up wonderful, well-balanced children? You've only got to look on the message boards to see it's just not true!!!! I don't like to judge others as a general rule, but to make my point on this I am going to. I have friends (well the wife is) who have been married for donkeys years. Three kids. Dad works FT, mum works PT. To people like Melanie Phillips, they embody what we should all be aiming for. However, I happen to know that behind the facade there lies a deeply unhappy and dysfunctional marriage, where he constantly controls his wife, occasionally (though rarely - so it's well hidden) with violence. The children are growing up with very strange values, already learning that it's ok to treat mum (and others) with a complete lack of respect because that's what they see dad do. The y have firm, outdated ideas that a woman's place is in the home and to do all the housework while the man is waited on hand and foot. These children are going to grow up having highly dysfunctional relationships, if you ask me. My children, because I left their father, will grow up learning to treat all human beings with respect, regardless of race, gender or background, and will be taught about how to form cooperative, functional happy relationships with people, something I can teach them precisely because I am not with their father.

We need to get away from this dangerous assumption that married families are all wonderful and great. Many are, but many are not. It's got nothing to do with whether the family are married and everything to do with the qualities of the human beings involved in that marriage, and you're either a decent human being (whether single or married) or you're not. You can't suddenly just become one on your wedding day!

I shouldn't have done, but I couldn't help it - I have avoided reading about BabyP but I've just read the news of the world.

Absolutely fecking disgusting - how could a mother do this to her baby? I feel she doesn't deserve a life, there's enough nastiness and crap in life without torturing a helpless baby. I've nothing to say about her BF, hope he rots in hell. Poor, poor baby but at least he's better where he is now.

Ive never hear of that Peter guy but quite clearly either he has not been paying attention to the story or he has gotten seriously mixed up at some point.

Re the its because she was a single parent, does he not realise that its because she WASNT a single parent that poor Baby P died?

Its that kind of ignorance that gets everyones back up, Until I was 5 my mum was a single parent because she was worried my dad would start on me, I have nothing but find memories of my childhood people need to realise that single parents are not 'lower class' theya re probably doing the best for their children!

I agree with OptimistS. I believe that disfunction is the common factor in cases such as this, regardless of whether someone is married or whatever.

My views on this might be controversial but here goes. I believe in forced sterilisation as an available punishment for cases such as this which are extreme, against children and where guilt is absolute. The God given right to have children should be taken away.

It might be easy to blame social workers, doctors etc etc and I am not saying they are not responsible in different ways (in my opinion people should lose their jobs over this). However, the ultimate responsibility lies with the mother. She allowed this to happen to her child and she is responsible for allowing these men access to her child.

It was her job as a mother to ensure that any man she chose to live with, respected and loved her child/children and she failed miserably to do that. In fact, she encouraged it simply by allowing the abuse and not only that, but to actually bring another child into the relationship. It makes me sick as it does everyone on this forum.

To put it mildly, the guy was always gonna be a Nazi worshipping scumbag but no-one forced her to sleep with him or live with him. People only do what you allow them to do and she allowed him and the other guy to do these horrendous things over and over. The punishment should be extreme for all of them, and, if there is a worst one out of these three people - in my opinion it is the mother for not protecting her child.

My heart goes out to the remaining siblings who have to live with this trauma.

As a side issue, can anyone explain why there was a lodger in the house? Does that mean that this woman was sub-letting a council house for extra income or did the council house the other family there?

NewlyMarried, I posted this link on another thread.

The Dutch Parliament are considering a bill to force 'unfit mothers' to take contraception: here

It is not enforced sterilisation but enforced contraception. If arguably the most progressive Parliament in the world is debating these issues, it is an indication that policymakers are beginning to go into areas which were previously taboo. You are not alone in your thoughts.

I don't know the full extent of what is being discussed by the Dutch Parliament, but I would think that 'unfit fathers' should be included in the debate.

ladyworsley- the lodger was the mothers boyfriends brother and he had left his wife I think and took his children to live with the 15YO in their house.

Does that make sense

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/651358-Light-a-candle-for-Baby-P-and-all-the-other

I am sorry I didn't realise there was a specific thread. I have posted this and would urge anyone that can take part. Thank you.

Indeed Blueshoes, couldn't agree more, very interesting link.

On a side note - I've also read that in America, some male paedophiles are forced to take an equivalent of the female contraceptive pill to inhibit their sexual desires. I am not sure of the exact success of this treatment but as a comparison I have read generally that the pill is responsible for some womens loss of sexual desire.

I'm fairly sure that the 4-bed house was allocated to the mother and her children and that the two men were not supposed to be there for housing / benefits purposes. You'd hope that the courts could extend the maximum sentence for the crimes by adding a fraud charge...

Thanks mamadiva. But why did social services allow this? Children on the "at risk" register with at least one already known to have been abused, suddenly living in crampt conditions due to the arrival of another family? Including an under age girl? Did they never inspect this property, especially with all those dogs? The mind boggles.

I hope that the various bodies are looking into this as part of their investigation into Haringey. Pure negligence I would have thought. I sincerely hope there will be sackings/resignations when the reports are published.

It's good to hear that the various "taboos" about are being challenged in other Parliaments. I would like to see an investigation proven child abuse and the provision of various child benefits.

Newlymarried I expressed similar views (about sterilisation) in the thread I started before but a few thought this barbaric. I wasn't entirely convinced - not for extreme cases like this 'mother' and 'family' anyway. One thought would be to pay 'families' like that to not have children (either paid voluntary long-term contraception or sterilisation). What do you think? I've heard that these kind of people view children as more money coming their way in terms of child tax credit, income support etc, so why not pay them to not have children, and save loads of suffering for these children later, the social work/legal costs - taking the children into protection later etc? Just a thought.

Very interesting idea skydancer. My first thought is "No, don't give them money".....but when I think properly it makes sense. Maybe a scheme where women can be paid and/or moved up the housing ladder for attending a contraceptive injection scheme? At least then, if they want to sleep with scumbags, there's not gonna be a child brought into the mix?

The lodger moving his 15yr old girlfriend in with his kids makes no sense to me. Wasn't there a concerned mother/grandparent/sw involved with those kids either? If they were in hiding as I read somewhere, was nobody looking for them?
I dont know what the solution is to stop people having children and neglecting/abusing them but surely social services/society can do better than this.

Baby P not an isolated tragedy