Is this fair?

Avatar Image
enigma | 16:50 Thu 06th Sep 2007 | News
13 Answers
I Stumbled across this story after clicking on a link on AB and was gobsmacked by what I read. Is it fair that this woman's child should possibly be taken from her immediately after birth, given the fact that one of the most crucial mother/baby bonding times is immediately after birth? Should she be denied the chance to at the very least hold her newborn baby on the basis of what she MIGHT do? Given that logic, should we just lock up half the population on suspicions of what they might possibly do? It is fair to say that Social Services have come under fire on nunmerous occasions for children who have slipped through the net and suffered in the most horrendous ways through acts of brutality, often at the hands of their own parents but surely there is a line? It seems farcical that on one hand we are seeing headlines about a single woman who is a junkie and on methadone being allowed funded IVF treatment and yet an educated woman, who due to having suffered an horrific attack at 14 years old and who subsequently self harmed as a coping mechanism, is being persecuted for previously suffering mental health problems. What do you think? rticle.html?in_article_id=480201&in_page_i d=1879


1 to 13 of 13rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by enigma . Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
What an awful situation to be in. How terrible that people can make decisions like, without looking at alternatives. Seems laughable when you see stories of children who have slipped though the net. Does this mean anyone who had taken antidepressents or pill for stress will suffer the same fate.

I realise we may not be reading the full story, but I do see this as OTT!
-- answer removed --
Question Author
Totally agree Andrea and I also believe that there will be more to this story than is being presented ehre but regardless of her personal troubles, I firmly believe that they should be looking for ways to help this poor woman - who let's face it has suffered so much already - rather than punishing her for not havinf 'adequate' coping mechanisms after her rape ordeal. I know women who have suffered similar ordeals and yes, subsequently self harmed, who have gone on to be fantastic mothers. To say that bouts of previous depression may lead her to develop Munchausen's Syndome by Proxy - a statement rejected by her psychiatrist and independant psychiatrists, seems ludicrous. So because she previously self harmed , she poses a risk to mothers and newborn babies in the hospital and possibly won't ever get to hold her own newborn baby. All tha hard work of labour and no reward at the end. How cruel. Sticks in my throat to read stories like this when there are hardened criminals who may give birth under the watchful eye of prison wardens but are still allowed bonding time with their child. This seems needless and cruel and I accept that it has been sensationalised by the fact that she is well educated and from a good family but it doesn't setract from the cruel and in my own opinion, unjust way in which she is being treated.

Triggerhappy - Her psychiatrist has rejected this suggestion and there seems to be no evidence to support such a claim. Should we treat everyone who has ever popped a prozac or valium in exactly the same way? Trundle their babies away before they get the chance to say Pampers? It seems ludicrous, especially in light of all the 'See me, i'm a person' kind of advertising drives and Mental Health campaigns which strive to change the attitudes of individuals regarding mental health. This just undermines it all and it's a damn shame if this poor woman, who is a victim of circumstances, can't even hold her own child after birth.
Question Author
I meant detract not setract - ditto for other mistakes written in haste!
-- answer removed --
Question Author
*Triggerhippy* .

If you had read it, you would have seen what a miserable life this poor girl has had and she is being treated as the guilty party. Damn shame.
-- answer removed --
she should take the ferry here to Ireland and have her child.

This kind of thing sickens me. If that's allowed happen - what next? Take kids from epileptics in case they fall when they hold them? Or from people with IQs of under, say, 100 on the basis that they're less intelligent than the average and that could hinder their kids? Or obese people etc etc?
This should be decided on her likely ability as a mother stated by her psychiatrist not by someone who has never met her,or even an independent psychiatrist appointed by a solicitor. The court of human rights will have a field day with this one!!!
I am disgusted. I was raped when I was 15 and went through a very difficult time afterwards. But I am now a young woman, and I am old enough and responsible enough to make my own decisions and actions. These people are so busy playing god that they do not realise what this woman has been given. This is yet another chance for her to be grateful for life and accept that good things do happen to good people. It is another chance for her to be happy.

These people are more likely to see this young woman die as a result of LOSING her baby, than her baby die as a result of the past. What a load of sh!t. I am disgusted. Utterly, utterly disgusted.
Question Author
I couldn't agree more DiddleyDonk. I'm so sorry to hear about what happened to you in the past and I do hope that you have had support from loved ones in getting through difficult times. It happened to someone in my family and we all went to hell and back as she fell apart trying to cope. We tried to reach out to her but for so long she shut us out and suffered alone but thankfully, is getting stronger with time. She still has her dark days when she feels a bit low but is a mother now and I couldn't even imagine her having had her child taken off her because she had previously self harmed. She stopped doing so long before she fell pregnant (she was a lot stronger then) and in fact, her child is the best thing which could have happened to her. She has someone so precious to her, a love stronger than the love for even a partner - a child's love and that bond is second to none. So reading this heartbreaking story really got my blood boiling because that poor woman has suffered so much already and is STILL being made to suffer. What makes it even more maddening is the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support the fact that she presents a danger to anyone, including her own child. I just hope that things work out for her.
I sympathise with the young lady in question, however I suspect there is more to this than meets the eye.
Contrary to popular believe, Social Services cannot remove children or babies on a whim. There is an arduous legal procedure to follow, subject to many checks and balances. The only time a child can be removed immediately without a court order is if the police feel the child is likely to suffer immediate significant harm and then only for 36 hours to a place of safety. Any further time must be authorised by the court. For removal in a pre-planned way at birth there must be a court order in place,
The decision to remove a child is never taken lightly.

And some others have commented, you see what happens when you see stories of children of others have slipped throught the net.

Unfortunately , society cannot have it both ways
I totally agree with you DiddlyDonk.

This woman is basically being punished for being a victim of rape. She has this chance to turn her life around (indeed according to the article she managed this a long while ago).

Surely her psychiatrist should carry far more weight than that??

1 to 13 of 13rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Is this fair?

Answer Question >>