if this mother wasn't coping then wtf didn't she ask for help rather than paying someone 20 f****ing quid to look after her child?

[wannaBe]

so very very for this little boy. here

The boys mother is NOW 21, by my calculation she would have been 15/16 when she had him.

I firmly believe that having the attitude that respectable middle class families would seek the "proper" support is a very dangerous line to take if we want to protect all children.

None of the reports I have read have suggested that BOTH the people responsible were crack addicts.

she presumably placed her child into the care of her friend (relative?) to ensure he wasn't neglected while she was struggling

am not persuaded that her life experiences to date fully equipped her for making the best possible choices, but it looks as though she was doing her best - not sure how, in that respect, she differs from most of us here

I believe that she was young and stupid, not that she was malicious.

I believe that she may not have had a normal understanding of what is appropriate or not given that she has spent time in care.

I beieve that she left her child with people that she trusted and they killed him.

I do not believe that she should be prosecuted for neglect. I do not believe that she bears responsibility for the death of this child.

it reminds me a bit of when people say women bear responsibility if they go out in a short skirt and are raped.

She did not kill this baby. People she trusted killed this baby.

She didn't view the murderers as crack addicted care scum either, but as her friends. They probably made a big show of loving the child.

A 17 year old relative that she barely knew under an interim care order in a dirty bedsit with a crack addict and some dogs.

I'm not arguing that she was anything other than stupid and naive. But she was stupid and naive. That adds up to neglect, whether it was because she was unable to do any better, whether she beleived he was better off there, whatever, it is still neglect when your child dies because you have placed them in a vulnerable position.

Wilful neglect is not the samething as unintentional neglect. But whatever way you slice it, that child was neglected by his parents, and murdered by his "carers". There is plenty of responsibility to spread around here.

People are doing an awfull lot of presuming aren't they?

They are presuming that the mother didn't know these people well. That she knew what was going on. That she saw the state of the house.

I'd imagine that when the CPS decided not to prosecute her, they didn't preume but looked at the facts and evidence they had access to, that we do not.

And what's with all calling for the mother to be prosecuted? What of the father. If the mum was not coping the father had a responsibility to step in and take control no?

This mum made an awfull, terrible mistake. She will forever blame herself for what happened. She now has to live the rest of living knowing that she let her son down. Her son paid the unltimate price, but at the end of the day, the mother is not the one who killed him. She is not responsible for his death.

What of the girls care worker who saw the boy at the flat, why is she taking none of the blame? She could ahve alerted SS.

"dirty bedsit with a crack addict and some dogs" really doesn't sound that far removed from a decomposing, mice-ridden country house overrun by boisterous labs all belonging to a pair of alcoholics in and out of recovery but social services wholeheartedly approved my parents for adoption, never mind short term foster care

thats shit too then. 2 wrongs make a right do they?
Like I said, plenty to go around, theres a nice pile of responsibility for the officials who did nothing either.

but it hasn't been wrong, they've done a wonderful job

nice bit of assumption there runny,

you may well be right, MI's parents may have been dreadful parents.......

ahhh - x posts

(I'm not adopted but my little sister is)

yes but you had the same upbringing I assume

just saying that addiction and a bit of squalor doesn't automatically = child murdering scum

yes and did me no harm, apart from the severe psychiatric disorder but think that was hereditary

ahh well - that can happen to anyone, regardless.

Actually just looking over this thread it's really quite shocking that 2 people have murdered a 3yr old, but instead of talking about what scumbags they were people want to rip the mother to shreds.

it is disturbing really

makes no sense, why would so much outrage be directed at the person who didn't inflict those injuries?

I think its fairly obvious what scumbags they are, what do you need to discuss about that?

I just don't underatand how it can be said that the parents don't have a small part in it though? Aren't all parents responsible for their children and their welfare? Whats so contentious about that?

well most other cases where a child has been murdered the subsequent threads here on MN focue on the perpetrators - not the parents.

but how does it differ from trusting the staff at boarding school, or nursery or your childminder or relatives or friends or even your priest?

people in these positions can and have abused the trust parents placed in them by assaulting their children, are those parents as responsible for that abuse as you feel this mother is for the death of her child?

I'm sure if the CPS had decided she had knowingly left her DS with such scumbags they would have prosecuted her as well.

At a boarding school they are crb checked trained professionals, same for nursery, childminder etc. Relatives, thats a bit tougher, but most people don't give their children to distant relatives with addict boyfriends, and very few people would leave their children in the care of a priest these days!

I see it like a car accident. A parent in a car with a child who they have placed in a proepr seat, belted and secure, with good tyres driving carefully can get hit by a drunk driver and the child killed or injured. Not the parents fault. But if the parent put the child on the backseat with no restraints and the drunk driver hits you, the parent has some responsibility.
Still the drunk driver that killed them, but the parent contributed. Even if they didn't know that you should use a car seat, even if they thought the child would be perfectly fine without one.

Do you see what I mean?

I don't like your attitude to people who have addictions, as far as I know there is yet to be established any sort of causal link between having an addiction and being a sadistic bully who kills children.

I take your point about most people making better choices, or even being aware that there are other options, but it doesn't look as though this mum had those advantages.

Whats my attitude to people with addictions? Do explain, as I can't see anywhere here that I have told you it? Other than- crack addicts possibly not the best people to hand over a child to; shocker!!