Mother 'not clever enough to raise child' has baby snatched by social workers

[Heated]

story
What do we think?

Nothing to do with better or worse, but if a woman is able to breastfeed then she should be given support so that she can keep the baby with her and continue to do so.

Obviously, if she is in any way a danger to the baby then this should not be a factor.

Xposted. Then it's a sad situation indeed if she won't accept help, it depends I suppose in what form that help comes and how it has been phrased. Taking a bf nb from it's mother doesn't sound supportive but threatening. But presumably Fife can't say why they have concerns.

Blogpost here with video interview with the parents

presumably there are many reasons that she has been denied the right to raise her child. Things which the Daily mail and we will not be a party to.

I think we've had this discussion so many times before.
I f*ing hate the Daily Mail..

"social workers marched into the maternity ward" Bollox

The guy from Mencap on GMTV said that half of the children born to parents with learning difficulties are removed from their parents.

Surely this should be about giving parents with learning difficulties more support?

(Talking in general terms, not this particular case)

when I was in hospital when 30 weeks pregnant with DD2, there was a girl there who had a baby boy. She had learning disabilities and the nurses were trying to teach her how to sterialise (sp?) bottles and make up feeds. I went home soon after, but returned at 33 weeks as was in labour. She was still there and still didn't 'get' how to make bottles up. I remember her saying to me 'They won't let me take him home, until I have learnt to do the stupid bottles' Her partner had LD too.
I believe she didn't take him home, as her and her partner were in the papers a few months later after their house was attacked and there was no mention of the baby

The hospital and SS did everything right in that situation, they gave her a chance. Why aren't they letting Kerry have a chance, and showing her how to parent?

Bloody sensationalist crap.

Do you know how awful things have to be before a child is removed? Dire, utterly dire.

And who would be the first in the queue to whine when some poor wee kid ends up in a dreadful state because they are left with unfit parents?

I didn't read it as though a BFing mother was a better parent. It seemed to show that she is actively taking care of the child herself, if the child was bottle fed it may be someone else taking the responsibilty for feeding him/her.
Badly expressed but YKWIM.

because they have hinted she is resisting that support without telling you outright.

oops that was to sparklygothkat!

We had a very similar case locally with a married couple who had their children taken by ss. Lots of articles and interviews with the parents and public outcry about mild learning difficulties and ss snatching children.

Through all of this ss could and would not comment on the particulars of the case.

MIL was one of the social workers involved in this local case. The truth of the situation was so very far removed from the way the media presented it and sad as it is for any child to be removed from its parents, I am in no doubt whatsoever that those children could not have been raised safely and without the possibility of very significant harm by their parents.

SS do make mistakes but I just don't think we can judge or understand the intricacies of individual cases based on their media representation, especially with the hyperbolic and loaded terms spewed forth by the DM.

oh so she is resisting the support? Why would you do that?

It is notable that they haven't really been able to interview the woman on television - surely if she was capable, they would at least be able to edit together a few coherent sound bites from her?

It is all awfully sad.

perhaps she doesn't want to go on tv, not everyone does, maybe she knows she won't come accross well.

There is a very short interview on the blog that I linked to earlier, MP, but the boyfriend does most of the talking.

Impossible to judge by that obviously if she is capable of caring for a baby.

I'm not sure that using words like "snatched" is particularly helpful. Social services can't just take children on a whim. We don't and won't know the other side of this story because social services are unable to comment.

Why was the wedding stopped-so that the father didn´t automatically get parental rights?

Why can´t the father bring the baby up?

Part of me thinks they may have a point (as showofhands says we don't know the facts of the case). On the other hand, if the facts are really as the media presents it is awful and they should get their baby back.

If she is resistant to help then I would definitely be on the side of ss.

Yeah I definitely get the impression that we are being told a third of what is actually going on.

When you compare the facts as presented here with the difficulties ss seem to have in removing children who are living in filth with pet excrement everywhere, addict parents etc. something really doesn't add up.

There is the possibility that these two are just a soft target and that some stats can be boosted via taking the child but I'd prefer not to dwell on that possibility.

It strikes me there is slot we are not being told fir legal reasons. The story is full of holes. I wonder if they already have children in care and what his background is..

isnt this him? ??? apart froma terrible choice of song title and the fact he likes to drink cheap wine, it does not look that bad!

"Mr McDougall added: ?It seems that through Kerry?s medical records ? although we have been on the run she has always ensured she had all the checks and scans on the baby ? Fife Council had been alerted'. "

That quote alone makes me think that they're more capable of looking after a baby than the SS is making out.
Surely someone who isn't capable wouldn't do something so sensible in pregnancy?

I don't think social services are making them out to be bad. They are urging her to take the help she has been offered and have offered their support to the whole family.

From what I can see anyway

Much more to this and might well be to do with the father. He isn't doing himself any favours with his art and may even have previous convictions which can't possibly be discussed.

It is very sad though.

iirc - the father sells 'lesbian art' online. Not that this is a reason to stop him being a parent but having seen it perhaps there is something about him which makes social services worry about him being the main carer for the child?

This is all speculation of course.