Reading the adoption judgement linked... the tone does feel compassionate & no doubt, the professionals & court involved would've been mindful of the furore that this situation would cause once it hit the press (which it has). I can't see any other way the situation could've ended, from the report I've read.
On the other hand, have been reading more & more about different scenarios of forced adoption & ill-treatment from social services within the UK.
I don't think we'll ever know the full truth about a lot of things, which is a good thing for the vulnerable people involved but maybe not such a comforting thought that some things are witheld.
It makes me think of the huge responsibilities placed on all the professionals involved. It can't be easy. A lot of them **** it up. A lot of mistakes have been made & children have died (Baby P, Khyra Ishaq, etc.) But these people are faced with life & death decisions on a day to day basis, usually in caseloads that are far bigger than they should have, that are held up to public scrutiny & I really don't think the whole lot of them are out there to ruin families lives on purpose or be nasty to people.
So I'm sad for them as well as for the mother. & for everything, really.
One scenario I've heard for the increased right wing press attention on social service is that the Conservatives wish to privatise the whole of social services and so need to soften up the public's opinions before they attempt it.
Obviously I have a completely different interpretation- that she did not "terrorize" her daughter directly, but in being unwell and witnessing this and being able to understand this the child was "terrorized" and "traumatised" in the observation.
Terrorising and traumatising, whether it's direct or indirect in intent, is still terrorising and traumatising. The reasoning as to why it happened doesn't undo what has actually happened.
The systems we have in place aren't perfect, simply because people aren't perfect so how can we expect anything we implement to be such? But I do honestly think that people are trying to do the right thing, and I think they're going about it in the right way.
Take a look at page 15 of this document: https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...h-and-work.pdf
It states that 60% of people with a common mental disorder are not in work. It also says that only around 10% of those with a serious mental disorder are in work. The 70% you state is worse than the stats for common conditions but much! much better than the stats about psychotic disorders. It's sad, but I don't think their statements are unlikely to be true. And I say that as someone earning less than half of what I was when I was well.
That's fair enough, there's a great deal of people with mental illness who aren't 'in the system' and won't admit to having a problem through fear of being fired. Which I think would throw of the stats a bit if they knew about all that.
I was also told I was showing signs of mental instability because 'my roots were showing and my hair was dry'.
I didn't dye it again because my hair was in bad condition! What a mistake that was :P
I'm fine! Totally fine. I don't know why it's coming out all loud and squeaky, 'cause really, I'm fine!
Its all speculation for the most part, very few people are aware of the reasons behind why this was authorised, however there must have been reasons behind it, substantial ones at that. These courts might be private but they do have to answer to people, as do social services.
The issue with SS is they are damned if they do, damned if they dont. Dont take a hard line, cases like baby P become more prevalent, become too cautious and heavy handed and things like this happen. I honestly cant imagine what its like to be a social worker, to go home at the end of the day knowing that a child could die because you cant intervene, or being blamed for torn apart families.
I'm not entirely sure comparing Bipolar and so on with alcohol/drug addiction is a very good comparison either. In fact I dont think anyones case can really be compared to anyone elses, different situations and different people handling the cases.
I feel sorry that they have targets for taking children from their families (if that is the case) I cant imagine how horrible it would be to have that pressure on my shoulders and I guess like in everything after a while most SS people probably become numb to it.
I think the judge for this part of the case made the right decision, his reasoning was measured and calm and it sounded like he was regretful that he had to come to the decision he did.
I dont believe they gave her a c section for no reason, I think there must have been circumstances that we arent aware of and may possibly never be aware of.
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
That's fair enough, there's a great deal of people with mental illness who aren't 'in the system' and won't admit to having a problem through fear of being fired. Which I think would throw of the stats a bit if they knew about all that.
I was also told I was showing signs of mental instability because 'my roots were showing and my hair was dry'.
I didn't dye it again because my hair was in bad condition! What a mistake that was :P
My old GP wrote in my notes that "her hair is now red but she shows no signs of mania"
So you can't have it either way
It's funny how hair can [apparently] be so indicative of your mental state!!! :P
Thing is, a few weeks ago I was on a ward and used the exact phrase to the psychiatrist "my hair is a barometer of my mental health, right now I haven't washed it in a month"! So really I've no right to moan about my GP, but this is way, way off topic.
“The only way that we can live is if we grow. The only way we can grow is if we change. The only way we can change is if we learn. The only way we can learn is if we are exposed. And the only way that we are exposed is if we throw ourselves into the open.”
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
So, forced caesarean due to a risked uterine rupture and the mother saw her baby on the day of it's birth and the following day. I'm wondering how those two facts will change people's opinions. Not that they'll ever be widely publicised, the tabloid press have no interest now they've finished vilifying social services!
Exactly!I dont think people will necessarily care or even read it to be honest!When I searched for that it was pretty buried!x
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
1. It's the press, you are never going to get the full story, just one that sells.
2. I agree with Heidi.
3. Again with the press thing. Some details will have been left out on purpose just to provoke a reaction.
In the words of Forrest Gump 'That's all I have to say about that.' (Can you tell what one of the books I'm reading at the moment is much?)
The world is just illusion always trying to change me.
You will find wonder wherever you can, and spread joy whenever you are able.
I felt emotions of gentleness and pleasure, that had long appeared dead, divide within me. - Frankenstein.
So I've read both of the official court documents, and I have to say I agree with the decisions made.
At first, when it was reported in the press, it seemed very heavy handed and outrageous that a woman could be sedated and a baby forcibly removed from her, but many of the key facts were not reported.
It was clear she was severely mentally ill, suffering from psychotic delusions at the time she was sectioned, and they clearly stated she was too unwell to look after the baby on a mother and baby unit. Plus she could not give birth vaginally due to 2 previous C sections, and the risk of a uterine rupture. They said if she spontaneously went into labour it would be hard for them to monitor the baby's vital signs if she became uncooperative, which would obviously place the baby in danger, and they said if she went into labour she may even hide that fact which would mean the labour would not be monitored until it became evident she was actually in labour.
It's a really tricky case because it plays on a lot of people's emotions and fears, but it seems like a fair judgment at the end of the day. It's not your run of the mill situation, it was an exceptional case, and hopefully not something that will routinely be carried out.
Isn’t it funny how day by day nothing changes but when you look back, everything is different…
you once called your brain a hard drive, well say hello to the virus.
The hair thing is a load of rubbish, one woman I was on a ward with was said to be obviously manic (and she really was) because she wore lipstick every day, and normally she didn;t wear makeup. She wasn't overly done up.
mental health is more than just depression, it really annoys me how some people (not professionals, usually lay public) assume you have to be depressed and suicidal to be ill. This woman was strict muslim and would never hurt herself as it was against her religion, she was just Too Happy, she wasn't a danger to herself, but she was on a section 3.
