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.

Please FO

Aren't you delightful

OP said more than once that she declined many times and they still forced her and threaten to take baby away.

She said she refused to let midwives in her home for the baby's 5 day check up.

And they didn't force her they said they'd make a referral to SS, which they did, and OP then decided that meant they were threatening to take her baby away, which they weren't.

They referred her because they couldn't carry out critical care for her child, and SS closed the case quickly.

There's a lot of dramatics happening on this thread and people need to take a breath and read what's happened properly.

I think that refers to threating to take a baby away if refusing home visit.

Fling Oranges?

Forget Osaka?

Fool Oscar?

If you want to tell me to Fuck Off, just do it. Swearing is allowed on MN but not comprehending what the OP has said and then getting sweary when it’s pointed out might not be the best look.

Agreed. This is the problem and I'm guessing why it was flagged as a concern in the first place.

Yes exactly. At no point did the OP say they threatened to take her baby away. They told her that lack of co-operation with home visits could lead to a social services referral and investigation, that's all. She chose to assume that meant they'd try to remove her child and see it as a threat rather than them informing her of the consequences of her decisions.

To be honest, I completely understand why it would trigger SS referral if you refused essential midwife checkups after birth.

How do they even know that your baby is still alive if you refuse to present your baby to ANY outside agency?

Don't you think, as a parent, that it's best for a baby to have several eyes on them during this vulnerable time in their life?

I'm glad that I had midwife checkups after birth, it helped to reassure me that a medical professional said that everything was fine with me and the baby.

A lot of people do assume that at the mere mention of social services though

@endofthelinefinally the point I have tried to make repeatedly on this thread and with which many people have disagreed, is that whilst the HV service has an obligation to offer HV services to all children and families with children between 0 and 5, those mothers and families are not obliged, statutorily, to accept those services.

When I had my first baby, this was not transparent. My HV did not provide clarity and neither did the manager of HV's. That clarity only came when I lodged a formal complaint with the providing Community Health Trust.

I continue to find the lack if transparency and the fear mongering or gas lighting in relation to the provision of the HV service reprehensible. I found establishing that hard as an educated, articulate new mother who approached things professionally and was in a very stable married relationship with a lawyer. I did not need an HV who was inexperienced and not very competent to dictate to me and to speak to me as though I was a nit wit, notwithstanding that when I reviewed my son's notes, she had not accurately recorded my concerns or associated details.

The on-going lack of transparency about the delivery of HV services remains unacceptable.

I am a member of the Free Speech Union. If they started to ‘take up’ cases like this, I would withdraw my funding. This is not about free speech, it is about someone behaving in a concerning way, fighting to keep her ‘right’ to behave in a concerning way.

I hope your DC are okay, @RawBloomers

I agree with this. Whilst it may not be pertinent to the OPs issues which are much deeper, this conversation around HVs is inportant. And this thread alone shows that people think that HVs are mandatory and anyone not using them is a problem when that’s not always the case.

OP issues are separate, refusing midwives completely is dangerous and neglectful, but HVs are not a necessity and there are other ways for mothers to get support if they require it.

Hysteria refers to a condition relating to the womb.

I'm afraid OP is not giving the full picture, deliberately or otherwise. Refusing visits is not, in itself, grounds for concern.

I did home visits for years as a member of different healthcare teams. The vast majority of people who were not in / refused a visit were just a paperwork exercise.

But if we had any fear there was an issue or danger to the person or others, then yes, we would follow every procedure to gain access. Including court.

If we didn't, can you imagine the outcry if a fatality happened? Oh, but you don't have to, because it always does.

I think from your posts and tone that there is a reason they want to come

a 15 minute visit shouldn’t stop you bonding with your baby..bizarre

Actually she said she declined the MW visit when her baby was first born. I can’t see anywhere where she has stated she has declined the 1 year check with the HV yet.

Makes me laugh when people question if other posters have read the thread when in reality they haven’t read it themselves!

I think you are terribly out of order to compare to china and Russia and dimish what citizens are subject to in those countries

OP, did anyone actually say they might take your baby away from you or is that what you think?

What on earth are you hiding?

No they don’t, a health visitor is an optional service and not a safeguarding concern to opt out. A midwife appointment is a health appointment for the baby and that should happen , however it has to be optional where it takes place.

I think this is essentially at the core of this thread - the misinformation. The public don’t know what is essential and what is optional and what the outcomes of doing or not doing some of these appointments can mean.

Maybe they can if the problem is not the refusal itself but the way it's done. Let's be honest, many comments here have pointed out that the way you are expressing yourself suggests a problem. If you expressed yourself in a similar manner then yes, you could quite easily have raised a red flag.

Also, midwives doing the 5 day check is not an optional service. So they probably can make a referral on you refusing that.

I don't blame you OP.

I'm in a different country where our individual rights are taken very seriously. I find it chilling how the government there can force their way into your homes for no reason, under threat of removing your children if you don't comply.
What I find more chilling is how so many people go along with it, 'for the greater good'.