Munchausens mum jailed for child cruelty.

[champagnesupernova]

why would you DO this?

(sorry for DM link )

It is possible to entertain a third view Nana:

That this is not just a case of invidual professionals getting things wrong.

Nor that the behaviour does not take place- it evidently does.

But that there were problems with the idea of treating this type of behaviour as a single medical syndrom with which a parent could be diagnosed even before there was any evidence of actual child abuse having taken place.

If you remember, there was a list of "symptoms" circulated among medical professionals by which you could supposedly diagnose a Munchausen parent even without evidence of actual abuse. Some of the criteria were pretty contradictory, iirc they involved "is rude to medical professionals" and "is very polite to medical professionals"; also "appears very worried by child's condition" and "appears cold and unmoved by child's condition" (can't remember exact wording).

It wasn't entirely David Southall's fault that he thought he could tell if a parent had been abusing a child merely by watching him on television (without needing to check if the man might actually have an alibi for the night in question). Such ideas were prevalent at the time. And they are very closely linked to the concept of Munchausen's as one specific mental illness, which can be diagnosed by symptoms, instead of criminal behaviour which needs to be proved through evidence of actual wrongdoing. This is not to say that most people acting in this way are not mentally ill; I am sure you are right and that they are. The problem was assuming that it worked the other way: I believe this person to be mentally ill and that proves they must have been hurting this child.

But I imagine there is an awful lot less of that these days.

Cory I think you have made some very interesting points in yourlast post with which I agree. I think you are more knowledgeable about this than I am - I do remember some of the concerns at the time about parents being falsely accused.

You mention David Southall and deciding someone was guilty by watching him on TV. Was this linked to one of the cases of alleged Cot Death - was it Sally Clarke or maybe Angela Canning.........those cases were truly awful - how can anything be worse than finding your baby dead and then to be accused of murdering him and later found that not to be true. Small wonder that poor Sally Clarke could not live with the aftermath of this trauma.

Nighbynight - sorry but I wasn't describinbg you at all - I have never heard of you before and what you describe sounds very very distressing for you.

There have been some posters whose names I will not mention who I believe have been quite irrational about this issue of MSBP and have used it as yet another way of "bashing social workers" -

Edam - I agree that one such case does not negate the occasions when parents were falsely accused but times have changed, lessons have been learned and lets hope no other parents are put through needless distress by these matters.

How did she get away with saying he had CP for 7 years!!!?? It took me 2 years to get a diagnosis with DS1 and he has CP, Noticed in the pics that the lad had the boots and a frame, how on earth did the 'professionals' not notice, surely they did checks on his feets, legs etc?? confused.com

cory is exactly right about the problems with the word "syndrome".

There still are, however, allegations of MSbP being bandied around without evidence.

David Southall is the doctor who believed that it was ethical to make babies breathe Carbon Monoxide to see what happened.

Nana, it was the Clark case. Prof Southall accused Sally Clark's husband Stephen of murdering their two sons after having watched a television interview with him and decided he fitted the profile of a child murderer. He was subsequently banned from working in child protection, but not struck off.

I think what this thread shows - once again -is how important it is not to extrapolate from one case to another. Many of those accusations were no doubt dodgy- but the woman in the OP is still guilty. That is exactly where prof Southall went wrong, generalising without looking at the specific details of the case.

I am wondering if the bizarre features of the present case might also be due to generalising and hence an unwillingness to suspect the mother (because such suspicions have proved wrong in the past, of other mothers).

Scary for those of us who have to rely on doctors being willing to take our word for symptoms which are impossible to prove or disprove. (ds unable to get up this morning due to subluxated hip- I can't bloody prove that!).

Nana

I was a student nursewhen Allittwasconvicted.It led to an anti MH issues witch hunt in the schioolI attended,the (IMO) best student nurseof all was chucked out (this isnt hearsay- he did a full briefing with a lecturer beforeleaving as he was so angry and wanted his side out) becuase of a history of MH issues that hadn't shown for years (decade IIRC).Others left around that time becuase aclear message was given that if you have any related MH problems(and depression wasin that) you were not wanted.

I do think that relates to the case and indeed MSBP / FI becuase whilst weknow that there are extremecasesof peopledamaging others out there, they are rare and generalising it to population can be harmful- whether its one person's career, the suspicious attitude that can already be seen by some professionalstowards children etc.

The key has to be knowledge: we have to understand the disorder better and brushing it under the carpet and constant relabelling won't help that.

Sparkly - It is a bit of a puzzle how the mother in this case managed to convince drs that her son had all these conditions. However we don't know the full facts of the case - re the special boots and frame - it would have been perfectly possible for the mother to have purchased these things herself wouldn't it to confirm her own "diagnosis" - I don't profess to understand the motives of such people but maybe they are aware enough to know that certain symptoms can be tested by the medics and so steer clear of these symptoms, and stick to ones that cannot be evidenced. Just a thought. this might tie into your point Cory about symptoms that can't be proved or disproved.

Peachy - how sad that there was this awful kneejerk reaction about mental health issues following the Beverley Allit case, that you lived through and have described here. I imagine managers must have been in some sort of panic mode but it doesn't excuse their totally disproportionate reaction about mental health issues.

I am not entirely surprised though. I suffered a very severe depression following the death of my very close friend and i needed to be hospitalised for several months but thankfully recovered. I have been a social worker for over 30 years though am now retired and work independently. When I returned to work after my illness, my awareness about mental health issues had been considerably raised due to my experiences. I noticed that when considering prospective adoptors/foster carers there was disquiet among my colleagues if someone had suffered from depression or was on medication etc. I am ashamed to say that before my own experience I had probably been the same, but I began to challenge these views and slowly slowly I began to influence my colleagues.........but I was amazed (and still am) at how the stigma in relation to mental illhealth is alive and well, even among the caring professions.

I so agree with the last line of your post. We clearly do not understand in any way shape or form what is behind this type of behaviour (I wonder if anyone does possess that understanding) but as you say constant labelling does not help. I suppose for me I have to think of it as some sort of mental health issue (something psychotic as in a thinking disorder, rather than something like a mood disorder)as it seems the only likely explanation. Nonetheless it is a strange manifestation of mental illness isn't it - I suppose the mother in the case should be pitied too.

It is true that the mother might have purchased the items, never thought of that, Nana. After all, I've done plenty of that myself. Only reason dd has been able to get to school as often as she has done these last few years is that I went to a shop and bought a wheelchair.

However, I think the feelings among the MNers of children with CP is that it ought to be able to disprove in a way that you can't really disprove e.g. my children's condition.

My oldest has diabetes which was diagnosed when she was 3 and a half. During the 6 or 7 months before this she was really poorly, losing weight, dark eyes and tired to the point that she wanted a nap after only half an hour of being up, also her bahviour was DREADFUL - when she really had been the sweetest easiest child.

I went time and time again to the docs, i knew something was wrong, i felt it had something to do with carbohydrates, maybe coeliacs (which it has turned out she and her sister have) but i got nowhere. I ended being told by a female doctor that if i carried on with hassling them perhaps i needed some help to come to terms with a badly behaved child rather than try to find a medical explanation... eventually when i saw her drinking as if her life depended on it the penny dropped. As i worked at a hospital, i had a pack of urine dipsticks in my uniformand tested her urine. The stick came out black with so much sugar.

Even when i went back to the doctors that morning and explained what i found the doctor gave me a lecture on self diagnosis..... after he did a test she referred us straight away to the hosptal and by the afternoon she was back at home with a specialist nurse with insulin etc. From there it has been plain sailing re. her treatment.

I rebooked an appointment with this doctor a week later and told her exactly what i thought (she also did not manage to diagnose very serious thyroid problems in me when i was pregnant even though i was incredibly symptomatic) - she has left the practice now.

She didn't say sorry even though my daughter has obviously suffered for months as the disease progressed.

It is hard to get DLA and all that and you do need docs to write on your behalf and this woman went to extraordnary lengths to make all these things happened. Dreadful and terrifying for that boy too, how will he ever get over the fact that his mother deliberately harmed him to draw attention to herself. She does need extreme punishment for this, it is the grossest breach of trust,shame on her.

Sorry to hear of what you went through THHs (incidentally your username doesn't seem to fit with you as you IYSWIM..)

I think you have highlighted an important part about some GPs. In general I don't believe that many GPs have the knowledge and expertise that many people invest in them. This isn't necessarily a criticism, I think it's more to do with our expectations. Of course like everyone else they differ and I have come across the "all knowing/dismissive ones" like the one that you describe. I have also come across extremely helpful and insightful ones who are secure enough to say they don't know what the problem is, rather than dismissing it or having a vague guess.

The mother in the case under discussion was obviously very persausive and managed to convince a great deal of people (not only medics) that she was genuine and authentic and that her son had real problems. Maybe she believed it herself and that was why she was so successful in convincing others. Thing is we will never know (or understand) what her motives were or the root cause of this kind of extraordinary behaviour. I'm just not so sure that it was all to "draw attention to herself" as this seems a bit simplistic to me. There are other ways of getting attention - I don't know any more than anyone else does, but I think there must be underlying mental health problems of a very serious nature involved in this kind of behaviour.

Whatever the true incidence of Fictious and Induced Illness, this sort of high profile case can only make things harder for parents of sick children.

I may be wrong but based on experienced I would guess that most parents of chronically and/or seriously ill children have had at least the odd comment/look directed at them.

If you appear to know a little too much about your child's condition (unavoidable and understandable) you are liable to face a certain level of suspicion.

I was told 'you seem to know a lot of the staff here. That is not usually a good sign if you know what I mean' by a young doctor. 'Hmm thats a lot of knowledge for a non medic isnt it? Why do you need to know all that?' by another.

FFS what was I supposed to do? Sit back and let it all wash over me? I was only caring for the most important person in the world!

All that said, if I met this woman I would be hard pressed not to give her a slap. The thought of someone subjecting their child to the pain and fear that long term, serious illness causes for NOTHING enrages me.