Mail on Sunday Magazine

[lottiejenkins]

I found this article today..........I thought it was very moving,,,, what a decision that lady made... dont think i could do it though!
www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/you/article.html?in_article_id=522925&in_page_id=1908

There was a repeated 'better off dead' thing wasn't there though.

HEr brother who was 'allowed' to die and not made to 'suffer'

Is she in any pain? It doesn't sound like it. So why is she suffering? Why is it that when people can't live a 'normal' life they're deemed to be suffering? DS1 can't live a remotely normal life but he's very happy indeed.

Funny isn't it. This has been really haunting me for some reason. I can' stop thinking about it. I think I keep trying to understand why she made the decision, and why she feels she should tell this story. And I can't put it together.

Nothing on earth would have made me give up dd1 at 5 months (which is coincidentally when we found out about her disability) Nothing. And that's not because I am a 'special' person or a coper or anything. Its because I am her mother. Full stop.

She said in an early paragraph in the Mail thing that she was a 'gutsy capable woman' or words to that effect. She said she gave her up after finding out how hard it was all going to be fighting SS etc because she didn't think she would cope with it. How about trying?? How gutsy is that to just give up at the first hurdle.

The 'brave' thing really got to me too Fio. I mean FFS. There are several 'reviews' of the book on one site (by which I mean comments from her wealthy well connected friends) where they all describe her as brave and courageous. You know I can sort of understand someone who hasn't been in her position thinking that giving up a a disabled child would be an understandable thing to do. But I don't see for one second how it can be described as 'brave'.

But then, I do also recall that word being used frequently on these boards for women who have chosen to terminate because of a disability.

Same mindset. And very very common.

www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio4/F2766779?thread=5170048
www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio4/F2766779?thread=5169648
www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio4/F2766779?thread=5169789
These are the posts that i found.

There is so much missing (the emotions/humanity/ struggles) in this story I think that is partly why it is so disturbing. It does not allow me to empathise (I,ve tried!), without which it is puzzling.
She did say baby Immie screamed constantly and had a lot of tension in her back, and was not able to lie in peace till they sorted out her drugs at a year old. It sounds like they believed Immie was in pain. I can imagine that 5 months of day and night trying unsucsessfully to sooth baby screaming in (assumed) pain would be soul destroying but the details are not there - it is my imagination trying to fill in the gaps and make sense of it.

what a depressing read.
unbelievable that people can think her brave.
coward is a better word or weak.

I keep thinking about this article as well. Little things, like Immie's first birthday being described as "one year from that terrible day" (think I'm paraphrasing slightly). The fact that, also talking about the birthday, she says that Immie finally discovered happiness. Now, if Tania already knew that Immie's "absolute favourite" was chocolate (which also suggests she had other likes as well), then surely that would indicate that Immie had "discovered happiness" before the birthday, but perhaps Julia didn't realise it.
Have Immie's birth parents ever told her that they are proud of her, that she is wanted? That they don't regret having her? Or have they thought it doesn't matter to tell these things to her and instead to laud others for being "brave" and for "coping" with Immie? .

fio she couldn't even be bothered to secure the child future finacially.
as for it being a long battle . what crap the solicitors do the battle.

I don't know why this case is obsessing me so much! LIke others, I just can't get it out of my mind. I was interested in Julia's own contribution where she is attempting to blame the maternal services for Immie. Obviously we are to understand that her perfect genes and her perfect pregnancy could not have contributed to the problems ( I know very little about the causes of CP so I am not attempting to second guess). Regarding a claim for compensation, she asserts that she has established negligence but not liability. How is legally possible ? If there is an act of negligence which is proven in law, a liability will arise. Compensation is a separate matter. Any amount awarded will take account of the circumstances and in some cases, contributory negligence can reduce or even nullify a compensatory claim. There is a common thread - vicars, doctors lawyers, they all agree with me even if what i am saying is nonsense.

if thye proved proved negligence it would follow that someone would be liable.
then Immie would have been awrded emough money to have a good life.
I wonder if the reson she stopped was then there would be no reason for immie to stay with tania. as the biggest part of the pay off is to cover care. so then the woman would have had to have immie back. and then employ carers herself.

Yes I think that's right. It is an obvious unfairness in the system that if you can prove a breach of the duty of care you will get compensation ( even if the problems caused are minor ones) but if the injury is deemed congenital or arose through pregnancy problems that no one can prevent or foresee, there is no financial assistance regardless of the severity of the problems, But the lawyers would say this is not a legal issue, it is a public policy issue regarding the care provided for severely affected children who have no one to 'blame'. I personally believe that no fault compensation should be available to all affected parents.

I am trying not to be too judgemental but it is not easy. I have a son with disabilities but he is able to walk, talk, read and laugh with me at things that amuse us.

He attended a special school and many of the pupils there were as handicapped as the child in the article. I often wondered how I would react with a child as disabled as that. The school was in an inner city area and many of the mothers had little in the way of education or career before they had the child. But they COPED. This woman has had a top education and glittering career but seems unable to do the same.

like i said moira if she had one. she might have had to take Immie back.

They are still Immies legal parents (not the state) so I would guess that they are financially responsable for their childs care and securing the funds for her care just as every parent is. Perhaps thats what the book is raising funds for! If Tania had adopted Immie she would have become financially responsible (in the case of a child with profound disablilty) supported by an adoption allowance (paid by the state). (I dont know how shared guardianship works)

don't ss pay for foster care?

2shoes - you are spot on. She is WEAK and what is so galling is that she is dressing up an undoubtably traumatic experience as a triumph of bravery and courage. She is weak. She gave up on her child. After 5 months!!! Like the rest of you this is preying on my mind.
Not just the fact that she did it. But that she is seen to be some sort of heroine for doing it. And of course that is how she is selling the situation to herself - otherwise why write a book about it?
I hope you are right magso, and that the funds raised from this round of press interviews, and from the literary mastepiece itself are going towards funding a life of comfort for Immie and took make Tania's life as easy as possible. I would be interested to know.....

I found her comments about negligence and the legal case were ambiguous- by saying that the lawyers established negligence she may just mean that she had an expert medical report saying there had been negligence. the nhs trust might equally have commissed expert medical evidence that found the reverse. so if it went to court it would be a case of one lot of evidence versus another, and up to the judge to decide. also of course even if there was negligence it may have made no difference to Immie's problems (the cauation hurdle).

I wonder though whether it can/should be soley up to the parents in this sort of situation to bring the claim on Immie's behalf. As surely it would be fairer on Tania if Tania could get whatever support money could buy in.

I read this at the weekend and it affected me deeply (as well as the sadness of the story, my dd is also called Imogen). I felt immediate disgust and horror that she could abandon her child in what appeared to be a very cold hearted manner (is there a warm hearted way to abandon your child?). I also felt that she gave no time to trying to develop a relationship with Immie which gave even more weight to my opinion that Immie didn't fit into her life and so she needed to be recycled.

However, I fought with myself afterwards because I have two nt children and I felt that I shouldn't and couldn't judge what this family experienced in trying to come to terms with this event. I spoke to some friends about it and we all felt unable to judge as we had not walked in her shoes.

Except that now I come on this thread and read about you lot who actually have experience of this situation and now I feel that I had the right idea in the first place. I am not worthy ladies - serious respect to you all.

What I don't understand is the fact that she decided she wasn't going to pick up Immy from hospital and the doctors seemlingly said "oh ok then." If Immy had been nt, then surely ss would have been round to check up on the welfare of the remaining children in the house? so considering Immy isn't nt, why did ss not come round? why? . .

Because wannaBe, a huge number of doctors and medical professionals see disability simply as a problem to be eradicated.

As I said earlier, my friend was asked if she wanted her baby put into care, apparently almost in the same breath that she was told he had disabilities.

Doctors have a really weird attitude to disability often imo. Especially learning disabilites. Presumably because they can't just fix it.

Preying on my mind too. I thought of the person on the BBC website who said she'd obviously researched it thoroughly. She researched for a week, ffs. That's not research. People spend longer deciding where to go on holiday.