Need advice Socials are against ex partner so are family but I want to be with home now I'm pregnant

[Butterflypink02]

Hi long story short socials Habe been in my family for the last 2 years be aise my ex husband had made up that I was in a DV relationship with my partner. My partner at the time has a colourful past and we have argued and police Habe been involved. At the time I hate him and end up doing statement against him. He hasn't been charged with Nothing but was put on bail that lasted 9 months as CPS were taking ages despite me complaining I didn't want this. Socials Habe been involved since and have done a risk assessment saying he can not be in a relationship with me or have Contact with my children from.my.ex husband. My ex husband has some his share of abuse and has taken the children out of school when or was agreed or was my day with the children.
Wind to last year socials were in agreement they were going to step down and everything is going good then an incident happened that I had no control over and my kids were present. I needed the relationship. Socials continues to call me a lier and put my children on co plan. This has now ended. And I have seen him on and off the past year. Socials Have made it clear that he is a risk. So anyways a few weeks ago we needed up having a night of S which has now turned into a positive pregnancy test ( we was trying for over a year and I had tests and we found it was him that couldnt get pregnant). So now I've found out I'm pregnant and I don't know what to do. How will socials react? Are they allowed to stop contact of I tell them I want to resume?

I will never understand women who put men before their kids.

Still in the system. And only with both parents consent. Including the father.
And still pre building a person with trauma from birth.

The OP is unstable. The father is unstable.
The OP could abort. Clean slate and focus on sorting her life out.

there are multiple reasons why a woman might put herself first

Selfish , self centred , mentally abnormal
Is one reason

High sex drive

Low self esteem, low self confidence and a desperate need to feel loved and worthwhile is another much sadder reason - and is what I get from this poster

If you continue to see a man that Socials say is a risk, they might take your kids. My friend had Socials involvement and I spoke to them for her. They told me this:

"Socials are not here to help the adults. They are here to protect the children. They will tell the adult what needs to be done but they wont help them. If the adult doesn't do it, they will take the kids to protect them."

So you should be aware that you need to do EXACTLY what Socials tell you even if you think it is unfair-- if you want to keep your kids. Hard but there it is.

They are there to protect your children, not magic up a wonderful relationship for you.
It has been decided your partner is a risk to your children so you have a choice — him or your children. You know what will happen if you choose him.

Actually no, a court order can be made to take newborn into care.

You need help OP. As a PP said, if you can't see why this situation is bad for your children then you need help in understanding why you value a relationship with a dangerous deadbeat over your children's safety.

Prioritise your existing children, always.

None of which excuses not putting her kids first.

You're risking all of your children being taken away from you for this relationship.

Because your partner is either a paedophile or domestic abuser, they will have this information on his police file, does that answer your question!!! Stop with the he is a good man as the police and social services know different

@Butterflypink02 you said in your original post that Social Services "have made it clear that he is a risk", therefore by staying with him you are putting your unborn baby and current children at risk, and again are also at risk of them being removed from you completely.

You have gotten a lot of great and honest advice on this thread and I don't think you're willing to rationalise with any of it.

Maybe you need to speak to a professional who can help you understand and prioritise.

Well, this sounds chaotic. Poor children. 💔

I understand that’s what should have happened and possibly did, but I work in the world of safeguarding and it’s not always detailed so clearly.

Yes, I know of 2 women who had their babies removed from birth.

Yes. I am a retired midwife and I've known this to happen as well.

Honestly, you're on thin ice here.

You make bad decisions. Your priority should have been keeping your kids safe. That would have been breaking up with your partner and spending some time alone. Instead you were actively trying to conceive with this man everyone has been telling you is dangerous.

They will know you've been lying to them about continuing to sleep with him. They won't trust a word that comes out of your mouth. Your kids (and new baby) will likely be deemed back at risk and put on plans. They could seek to remove them from your care.

You say you don't want social involvement but they're about to get even more involved. The one thing you could have done to get them out of your life would be to go no contact with your partner. But instead you decided to have a baby with him.

OP do you think Social Services are basing their advice solely on the word of your ex-husband?

Your facts are incorrect.

A baby can be removed by social services at birth against the parents' will.

They can also be adopted against the parents' will if a court determines it is in the baby's best interests.

You can also decide before birth to give your child up for adoption, and hand the baby over to the adoptive parents at birth, although you cannot sign the final agreement until the baby is 6 weeks old.

Parents have responsibilities, children have rights.

When I had DS the woman in the bed across from me was having her baby removed by Social services. Her elder children were already in care and she knew the baby would also be removed.

I didn't understand how she had more children knowing they would be taken into care at birth

I too know of a couple who had their baby removed at birth. Again older children already in care. Mum was allowed limited supervised access while the baby was in hospital but dad was allowed no contact. Your right in that it doesn’t make sense that parents would have more children knowing that they will be removed at birth.

Yes. Removed. If your read properly you would see we were discussing relinquishing the child for adoption. Which must be approved by both parents.

Reading is a skill.

So what’s this then? Also you’ve said your kids never witnessed anything- were they there with their eyes closed? everything is going good then an incident happened that I had no control over and my kids were present.

im sorry, but it sounds like the relationship is abusive even if you don’t recognise it as such. It is clearly at a minimum visibly chaotic with enough arguments that the police have been called. Would you risk your children for the sake of being with this man? Will he still feel worth it when the police are called because he’s yelling at you and your children are taken away? I think you should let him go.

Actually you’re wrong. In cases of voluntary adoption only the mother’s consent is needed if the father has not been granted parental responsibility by a court nor is present on baby’s birth certificate. Neither of those circumstances have happened or will be likely to happen in this case. If both parents have PR then yes, the consent of both parents would be needed but this is subjective and not a blanket rule, for the reasons I mentioned above.

For relevancy to this case, by the time the baby is born social services will be heavily involved and as the chances of neglect or abuse are high, the need for parental consent will unlikely be a factor and will be negated by a court order. This is due to the fact that OP so far seems hell-bent on continuing to do nothing to protect her children and instead continuing a relationship with a man deemed dangerous to her children. If she continues as she has been in total denial that she’s put her children at constant risk and not adhering to social services instructions then there is a high chance of them removing the baby at birth. Thus, rendering your point irrelevant and not completely factually correct to begin with. You came across patronising and smug which really wasn’t the clever and witty comment that I expect you were going for.