Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Original poster

Keeping my son in hospital against my will

434 replies

TaashenMartian · 16/12/2017 01:36

My son was born at 34 weeks on the 14th October with a heart condition. For the duration of his life (2 months) we have been in different hospitals. He is now stable enough to go home until his operation but because me and my sons dad had an argument in the hospital social services are involved and they won’t let us take him home. I have another child (a3 year old) who is still in my care and they have no plans to take her away. I want to know if they can legally keep my son in hospital due to safeguarding issues If my daughter is still in my care? Can I legally self discharge him if he is well enough to go home even though social services are involved? They have no reason to take my children from me as all it was was an argument, hence why my daughter is still in my care. But they are refusing to discharge my son until the case is resolved. Can they legally do this? What rights do I have? I feel if there are real safeguarding issues and my son can not be in my care then surely my daughter can’t either? Any advice would be much appreciated. This is incredibly stressful and I just want my son home for Christmas

OP posts:
Neiflette · 19/12/2017 16:11

I'm also nowhere near middle-class. Never will be either.

Neiflette · 19/12/2017 16:14

And for what it's worth I genuinely fear SS and hold bitter resentment towards them due to their involvement in my own childhood... I'm not ignorant and certainly don't have rose-tinted glassesConfused

Bubbaleo · 19/12/2017 16:34

And how unfair on OP right now when her baby is so ill and she's worried about dd, to now have this extra fear. I just hope she has the strength to keep going! Two months in hospital, she must be dying to get home to dd with baby. I really feel for her.

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 16:36

Unfair on OP? It's not about being fair to OP, its about the welfare of the child.
There must be serious concerns for this child, try and think about him and not the dissembling OP.

Bubbaleo · 19/12/2017 16:50

Well, there wasn't serious concerns about my family, they just made them up and then the ones who suffer are the children.

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 16:52

Sure they did.

Bubbaleo · 19/12/2017 16:54

And as I said before to OP, people who haven't been through it can't understand and probably not able to believe.

Bubbaleo · 19/12/2017 16:58

The anxiety caused to OP, is at this very moment, being transferred to baby. He needs his mum strong.

mrspatel77 · 19/12/2017 16:59

Seems strange that social services are involved because of an argument? There should be regular meetings so that you fully understand their involvement and their reasons for not allowing him home.
I don't know if many cases that are open due to an argument.

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 17:00

And as I said before to OP, people who haven't been through it can't understand and probably not able to believe

And people who have been through it acted like OP as well, and can't understand it from the other side and are not able to believe.

mrspatel77 · 19/12/2017 17:04

@Bubbaleo social services would need grounds to be involved with a family and they don't simply make things up! We don't know the circumstances so it's not fair to make a judgement. The OP needs to challenge this with the social worker and ask for written notes of their involvement.

LoverOfCake · 19/12/2017 17:04

My DP's mother will insist until she is blue in the face that they never did anything to warrant SS involvement. Even to the point her younger children have bought into it.

DP is permanently disabled because of the abuse he suffered at her hands and she had three other children permanently removed.

Bubbaleo · 19/12/2017 17:06

Well I know of three that were opened due to arguments and ours was opened for disagreeing with a Head and making complaints. Earlier this year a barrister on MN confirmed that the emphasis is on removal rather than support.

ChequeredPasta · 19/12/2017 17:08

Yeah, I can’t imagine many admitting to being a less than ideal parent, or a risk to their child.
There’s no smoke without fire.
Bubba and killer - you both seem a bit unhinged to be honest.

Killerfairy · 19/12/2017 17:10

Yes I agree bubbalo especially when they see very young/infants

It's not taken very well on MN when this is being discussed.

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 17:11

Well I know of three that were opened due to arguments and ours was opened for disagreeing with a Head and making complaints

you know of three people who said theres was due to arguments and that is what you are presenting yours as. I expect the SW's had a different view of why you were being looked at.

thing is, people don't want to admit the truth when they have SS involvement. Far easier to blame it on someone else....if you listen to the clients everyone of them is being persecuted unfairly, not a one of them deserves the attention, they say.
Not likely is it?

Killerfairy · 19/12/2017 17:17

curry sadly your opinions isn't our truth. There just that 'opinions' both bub and I have said we have had experience/indirect experience of unfair treatment but you disbelieve it. We must be liars. Coming in a thread to offer support and lie. 😒

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 17:20

Well your opinions are not my truth, so I guess that makes us even.

Killerfairy · 19/12/2017 17:20

In fact after curry reading your post it's actually quite scary that people have such tunnel vision about their opinion, to the point you actually accuse posters of lying about their truth.

Can you imagine if a SS was the same. Wow.

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 17:23

In fact after curry reading your post it's actually quite scary that people have such tunnel vision about their opinion, to the point you actually accuse posters of lying about their truth

You're describing yourself there, you do realise?

Bubbaleo · 19/12/2017 17:24

Well, a family law barrister named spero said on MN, the emphasis is on removal rather than support. That's a barrister, not me.

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 17:25

They said they were a barrister. Could work down the chipper for all you know!

Honestly, stop believing everything you read on here. People lie. Everyone lies.

Killerfairy · 19/12/2017 17:26

But it's not an opinion. It's an observation and experience of what I helped a family member through, when I chatted to my friend who left SS, and when I made a off the cuff remark to a GP and by the time I spoke to her the next she'd basically set up group of people ready to set the ball rolling for my dd to be talked to/ examined for sexual abuse - which I was horrified at and totally untrue.

It happens. But I'm probably lying.... yeah?

ChequeredPasta · 19/12/2017 17:26

How do you know they were a family law barrister?!?! It’s an anonymous website!
Every case is based on risk. There’s no desire to remove children willy billy, do you have any idea how expensive that would be?!

CurryWorst · 19/12/2017 17:26

and even if they were a barrister, they wouldn't be involved in cases of support would they, they would only see the ones about removal. Why would you need a barrister if you were getting support? You wouldn't.

Critical thinking skills are totally lacking here.