Human rights health visitor

[Erlisk]

I have seen it here before but the posts are old. Before my baby was born i told my midwife (UK) that i did not want any visits at home. I just like my privacy and want to be able to decide who enters my home. They offer visits as a service so i just decided to not let them in. I was happy to go for appointments.

Then in the hospital when the baby was born, they told me "someone was going to come into my house even if i do not want that". I kept saying no. They kept saying they just wanted to see where the baby would sleep etc. i said no. Then the midwifes came to the door and i told them i did not want them in my house. So they reported me to social services. Social services called me and threatened with official investigation if i do not let the midwifes and later health visitor in my house. Also for the one year visit.

I texted them many times i did not want. I also told them in person. So i have a lot of proof. Ok long story short i let them in.because they threatened with social services investigation = trying to take your baby. I had to let them in, they said everything was fine, and closed the case. But instead of bonding with my baby i was stressed that they were trying to take her away.

So. It is ten months ago so the one year visit is coming and I DO NOT WANT THEM IN MY HOUSE. So i decided to go after them. And yes, it is human rights violation. It is not normal in civilised countries that someone comes to your house without your consent and without a warrant. If you do not let them in they basically threaten to take your baby.

I am not looking for the comments that they are just helping etc. I am not interested in that 😉. What i am looking for here is other moms who went after them. I am researching where to complain. I am also making a list of solicitors who would help me. And maybe some group court case? I will make complaint to NHS. I believe we only have one year for this kind of thing so only people who experienced this last year. Or if you went through going to court and have a good no win no fee lawyer (London or Kent). They are violating human rights you everyone so no, i will not let it go.

I remember your previous posts, and honestly can't believe your still wasting your energy on this, let it go and enjoy your life with your child, after 1 year check you will never see them again.

@C8H10N4O2 that sounds very similar to my experience, sans the waterbirth but the facility was much trumpeted. Newly built hospital with other services provided just over the river?

Just remember they have your baby's best interests at heart. To not do this would enable some babies who need help to slip under the radar. They probably have experience sadly of people behaving as you are not looking after their babies appropriately. They can't let another potential one slip through. Just help them do their job and stop giving them red flags if there are none. They don't have time for needless red flags.

Agree. I suspect it’s OP’s behaviour that is causing concern rather than the principle of not allowing home visits.

How are they advocating for their infant?

Every one should be visited and I would be pretty suspicious if some was so determined to prevent it.

The child's right to have its safety checked on comes before anything and that includes you.

What about your child's human rights. This is to ensure your child is safe. My HV was a moody bossy bugger but still, this is something that I believe is a positive thing. HVs and midwives can sometimes pick up on postnatal depression before you yourself know you have it. I don't understand your reticence of wanting a 15 minute visit that's to protect you and baby.

Human rights come with attendant obligations. Your baby cannot escape their home environment if there’s an issue. They are totally at the mercy of their carers. Anyone could be living in dangerous conditions, there could be something far wrong in any home. For most of us that’s not the case but we accept it is for some children and young people, accept the help and guidance offered even if we feel it’s not necessary and go on with our lives.

We all know that a couple of visits can’t preclude harm to every child but the initial visit is only as big a deal as we care to make it.

I wouldn’t encourage you to pursue a case, because from what you’ve said you’ve not been unfairly treated, you’ve suffered no loss, your stated reason is ‘because I said no’ and I can’t come up with a valid human rights argument from ‘they didn’t do what I said.’ They’re not required to go away because you said no. You’ve given them reason to flag up a concern by not co-operating. I get the sense had this been handled differently by you then you may have had a different outcome. Not liking an outcome is not a breach of your human rights.

If you came to see me I’d advise you to cooperate fully with social services and perhaps, not having met you, I’m only guessing, I’d be concerned for you. I’d suggest you try to approach this reasonably and de-escalate. If I felt it would assist your child’s well-being (by assisting yours) I might at a push be willing, with your express permission, to help express any valid concerns you hold - by representing you as a professional who is there to help people defend and enact their rights - why you didn’t initially want medical professionals in your house. Perhaps if you have an anxiety diagnosis or any relevant history of trauma. But I’d have to warn you - that in itself could escalate matters. You seem articulate so are probably intelligent enough to realise that people who don’t want to let health visitors into their house to the extent that they’re willing to consult a solicitor over it are not the norm.

Can you accept it’s impossible to know your true motivations for going to such lengths to exclude health care staff from your home? They see a wide variety of domestic settings. They don’t care about decor, clutter or perceived affluence, simply that the baby is appropriately housed and cared for ie. not kept in conditions that may pose a risk. They visit mansions and domestic abuse shelters and everything in between.

So while a solicitor could explain that you feel it’s invasive/ not the norm in your home culture, that also doesn’t mean that the midwifery services/social services haven’t validly identified an area of concern.

I think it sounds like your obsession over this is concerning, at best it’s misplaced mental energy and if it’s genuinely having the described effect on bonding I’d suggest it’s worth thinking about what the real issue is. Perhaps accessing MH help if you can’t rationalise this and see this is a disproportionate reaction. You and your baby have many years of interaction with child welfare professionals to get through. School, for example. Your GP would be a good person to speak to.

Ofcourse they did because their priority is safeguarding children. Major red flag if someone is showing your behaviour

But instead of bonding with my baby i was stressed that they were trying to take her away.

Well that's entirely on you. All that energy expended on stressing about losing your child to SS when simply engaging with a HV visit, for what....20 minutes of your life, once in a blue moon would have removed the need for any concern at all.

They are not the enemy and people like you should stop being so fucking paranoid. People who are obsessive about not letting anyone in their homes ever are a bit of a worry, frankly, and HVs and SS probably know this. Do you have friends or a partner or family who you let in? Would you let a plumber in if you had a broken loo? Because if so, then you can let a health visitor in. Wanting 'privacy' is no excuse. We all like privacy at home but most people recognise that we need to let people in the door for a short while sometimes.

If you really claim not to understand why Health visitors doing HOME VISITS are so useful and important for the safety and wellbeing of babies, children and their mothers, then you you are probably exactly the sort of person they'll want to keep a closer eye on. Either because you are potentially quite vulnerable or potentially quite dangerous.

It’s not mandatory. They didn’t force you.

They pointed out that your refusal (combined, I suspect with the way you communicated it if this thread is anything to go by) would raise concerns and they would have to follow the appropriate procedure to address those concerns.

If they had reported you to social services, all that would have happened is social services would have visited, ascertained that there was no cause for concern and closed the case.

Do what you like on the legal case but I think you have next to no chance of succeeding - the state can very legitimately interfere with private and family life to the extent reasonable to safeguard children. That extends to a home visit by social workers if your behaviour raises concerns of your HV team.

Why was my post deleted?
I wasn't offensive.

Troll hunting is against the rules.

Perhaps that's because all the ones who it did protect don't end up as horror stories in the news?

Honestly, OP, if your demeanour here is remotely like your demeanour with them, I can fully understand the concern and the reason for referral. I haven't read the full thread, but do you live alone? What support do you have in real life?

But for one baby P you have hundreds of mums who are helped. My daughter had an unsafe swallow and was found to have mosaic down syndrome, thanks to my midwife. She got me a room in the hospital so I could come to terms with it all, and got me all the info I needed and she's still a good port of call now my beautiful girl is three. Stop trolling flaky.

But I agree with OP in that sense - why should her refusing an optional service mean she gets reported? If that’s the case then make health visitors mandatory. Don’t make it optional and then penalise people who refuse. They can’t have it both ways? It’s an optional service and IF there have been no other concerns raised then OP shouldn’t be subjected to threats. It makes no sense.

Health visitors have likely experience with post-partum psychosis. 100% linked to hormones.

One of my best friends suffered this, and had no previous MH issues and was a NHS nurse. She has bi-polar relative and there is some link.

She was masking well, her inner thoughts which she kept to herself were alarming. She thought her baby was controlling traffic lights, and the color of cars and could cause accidents - she rarely walked outside to keep her baby from doing this. She only went out when the new baby was sleeping. She was very paranoid and stayed indoors to keep baby safe.

She did eventually realise she had a problem and called her mum who took her for help. She stayed with her mum for a few months while her husband and her sisters helped with baby til she was well again.

im not sure a health visitor would have seen her struggles, but maybe if asked the right questions.

I have not once even mentioned HVs. OP’s problem also has nothing to do with HVs. As I have repeatedly said, OP refused to allow postnatal midwife care for her baby and this is why she was reported.

the midwifes came to the door and i told them i did not want them in my house. So they reported me to social services.

Don't be daft.

Let it go and enjoy your DC and your life.

That’s why I rather suspect the OP’s behaviour will have been a factor here.

The preference for no home visits in itself might be a minor red flag. The determination to prevent them however is a massive red flag. If OP communicated with HV services like she does on here, then I would fully understand why they would have concerns raised.

Why would OP even need a midwife so soon after anyway? She's in for a few days, then released, then midwife shows up on her doorstep immediately? For what reason? If she had problems then they shouldn't have released her (damn, typing this as someone in the loungeroom is watching Call the Midwife on the loungeroom tv, and I can hear a woman in labour - rather convenient timing for this thread). Should only need a follow up GP or clinic appointment around a month after the birth, as long as there are no complications.

Ah, this is different situation. I have misread this and thought it was health visitors. I agree with you that refusing midwife checks is unacceptable. But we had to go to our midwife appointments, no midwife has ever stepped foot in my home. The day after DC was born we walked to the clinic to get checked. I wonder why they went to OPs house?

Why would the midwife not check you over before you were discharged from the hospital? None of this makes sense. Here you aren't discharged until midwife checks you over and gives you permission to be discharged.

You sound like a case where it is imperative medical professionals do need eyes on your baby for its own protection. Huge red flags.

Disagree - Australia is currently like the UK was in 2005. I’ve worked as a doctor in both contexts and Australian postnatal care provision is dreadful, as are exclusive breastfeeding rates at 6 months.