Some things should not be public knowledge or AIBU?

[escape]

here daily mail link

I think she is a brave woman for confessing feelings so 'taboo', yet undoubtedly recognised by many, many other mothers..
HOWEVER, no amount of sould searching 'honesty' makes up for the fact that there is alittle girl who knows that her mother doesn't love her. Not only that has told the world she doesn't love her, and had her photographed into the bargain??
WHY Woman, Why??

Wow, that mother is one cold hearted bitch. Not only does she not love her daughter but to do an article like that, she must hate her.

I love the part where she states that she didn't want children so young but didn't use protection. Presumably believing that her PCOS was the best form of protection.

How that child must feel seeing her sister getting all the love she was denied. That is so cruel. Especially as all her schoolfriends will now know.

That's helpful, Two.

I love the way people are saying 'there must be women out there who feel this way' when there are at least two on the actual thread, who most of us are presumably pretending don't exist because they are afraid they might catch something.

Surely it is better to have a general awareness that this happens to some mothers/children, and have ready access to help should it arise, than treat it as absolute taboo.

That's not to say I think the article isn't cruel and awful for the little girl involved - it's a disgraceful thing to publish in this format.

Sadly there are barely any admissions of a difficulty bonding with a child, on this thread or elsewhere - in pregnancy the occasional poster says 'I am scared I won't love my baby' and is quieted with cries of 'It will come, you will be fine, never fear'

However there is very little sympathy expressed toward the actual mother who admits such a failing. Unless she has brief, temporary PND of course in which case it's fine and acceptable.

I'm not saying it is right that any child goes through this. Just that it should be recognised as perhaps a commoner problem than most of us are willing to dare admit, and thence more help might be available to prevent people going through their whole lives sensing that their parent did not love them but having recourse to no acknowledgement.

A lot of Daily Mail articles are made-up and the "people" are models.

Just saying.

I hope you're right, UQD

There are loads of people who feel like this, I personally know 5.

And I think the article is very hopeful towards the end.

I don't think anybody is saying she's awful for the way she feels. As has already been said many, many women feel this way and to highlight it in the hope that it may help others who feel like they are the only ones can only be a good thing BUT she is utterly heartless for allowing her childs picture to be published.

The childs identity should have been protected at all costs.

It is so shocking it must be a posed photograph

I think these feelings should be looked at and made less taboo. I don't think the mother should be condemned for having these feelings - it is desparately sad and I hope things improve for the sake of the whole family.

BUT - I think it's absolutely effing outrageous to publish the article with a photo of the "unloved" child, who after all is old enough to understand it. I am praying that this is a made up article with "models", otherwise everyone involved with this article should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves

If the mum in the article is getting a fee for her story, I hope she has it in a therapy fund for her daughter - who lets face it, is going to need it

What a repulsive woman for stelling her story like this, obviously she was not remotely motivated by wanting to 'help' others like her, but by getting a grubby bit of cash (probably only about £100 too). It's not even the printing of the photo of her dd that's appalling, it's the taking it in the first place - she could have easily sold the story without her daughter knowing and she (the dd) would have at least been spared the knowledge of this.

And is she really only 33?!

Actually I think this must be posed.

Surely the Daily Mail would be breaking the PCC code of conduct by printing a picture of the real mother and daughter?

Does anyone know? Becuase I would be mightily tempted to lodge a complaint with the PCC if there were grounds to.

Re the article itself, of course it's good that problems like this are discussed. But I don't think anyone reasonable thinks it needs to be discussed by exposing a child to this level of emotional abuse.

Even if the photo is posed, that's not going to help much seeing that they give the child's full name and village.

Might be a false name though.

If the names had been changed, the article would have said. Same with the photo - if they'd used photos, they would have had to say they weren't the real people.

So so sad for that little girl,what will happen to her when all her friends know about this. what a selfish thoughtless woman

I have just sent the following to the Daily Mail through their website (feedback tab at the top of homepage)

I am stunned that in an edition which villifies Jonathan Ross (again - yawn) for Sachsgate, not to mention villifies a single mother for the neglect of her child, you think it appropriate to print a story about a mother who confesses she does not love her child, and then illustrate the article with a photograph of said mother and child.

I cannot believe that your editorial process, slack as it must be considering half the rubbish you print, could allow such a gross invasion of the privacy of a young child. You have colluded and enabled the mother's public humiliation of her daughter.

I sincerely hope this young child has at least one adult in her life who considers her best interests, and sues you.

Of course it's her real name and it's a real photo - they would have to say otherwise

the DM's modus operandi is to get "real" people to 'fess up to things and photograph them. Teams of hacks are set to work to find people who'll confess to whatever story the features editor thinks will titillate the public and, more to the point, keep the editor happy. Agencies exist to find these "real" case studies, which sign vulnerable folk up, promising them cash and a glamorous photo shoot in return for a cosy chat with a cuddly journo.

The woman probably said a lot more which didn't get printed and her words will have been taken out of context to a certain extent. She will have been paid a couple of hundred squid. She will not have a leg to stand on if she complains as her words will exist and it is not a crime to quote selectively. The DM get calls all day from people furious at being "stitched up" - the nicer hacks leave because they can't take it after a short time, the less nice ones stay and treat the whole thing as a game.

But even by their murky standards, this is a new low

I saw this today and was so sad, that poor little girl is going to go through hell at school now, there are nothing so evil as children sometimes and she is going to get a lot of your mummy does not love you taunts.

Ok if mummy felt she had to tell the world how she feels fine but names could have been changed and no need for a photo.

She should remember one day that daughter might be choosing her nursing home!!

They have used model photos in the past.

The original link not working

perhaps withdrawn ?

If it was a model they have to say "picture posed by model" - you'd be able to tell anyway, because the people in the picture would look like models

looks like a lot of people were outraged so they've quietly withdrawn it, the feckers. Too late though for poor little girl, probably {sad]