Log in

View Full Version : Child taken from womb by social services



Quail
1st December 2013, 21:18
A pregnant woman has had her baby forcibly removed by caesarean section by social workers.
Essex social services obtained a High Court order against the woman that allowed her to be forcibly sedated and her child to be taken from her womb.
The council said it was acting in the best interests of the woman, an Italian who was in Britain on a work trip, because she had suffered a mental breakdown.
The baby girl, now 15 months old, is still in the care of social services, who are refusing to give her back to the mother, even though she claims to have made a full recovery.
The case has developed into an international legal row, with lawyers for the woman describing it as “unprecedented”.
Related Articles
'Operate on this mother so that we can take her baby’ 30 Nov 2013
They claim that even if the council had been acting in the woman’s best interests, officials should have consulted her family beforehand and also involved Italian social services, who would be better-placed to look after the child.
Brendan Fleming, the woman’s British lawyer, told The Sunday Telegraph: “I have never heard of anything like this in all my 40 years in the job.
“I can understand if someone is very ill that they may not be able to consent to a medical procedure, but a forced caesarean is unprecedented.
“If there were concerns about the care of this child by an Italian mother, then the better plan would have been for the authorities here to have notified social services in Italy and for the child to have been taken back there.”
The case, reported by Christopher Booker in his column in The Sunday Telegraph, raises fresh questions about the extent of social workers’ powers.
It will be raised in Parliament this week by John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat MP. He chairs the Public Family Law Reform Coordinating Campaign, which wants reform and greater openness in court proceedings involving family matters.
He said: “I have seen a number of cases of abuses of people’s rights in the family courts, but this has to be one of the more extreme.
“It involves the Court of Protection authorising a caesarean section without the person concerned being made aware of what was proposed. I worry about the way these decisions about a person’s mental capacity are being taken without any apparent concern as to the effect on the individual being affected.”
The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is an Italian national who come to Britain in July last year to attend a training course with an airline at Stansted Airport in Essex.
She suffered a panic attack, which her relations believe was due to her failure to take regular medication for an existing bipolar condition.
She called the police, who became concerned for her well-being and took her to a hospital, which she then realised was a psychiatric facility.
She has told her lawyers that when she said she wanted to return to her hotel, she was restrained and sectioned under the Mental Health Act.
Meanwhile, Essex social services obtained a High Court order in August 2012 for the birth “to be enforced by way of caesarean section”, according to legal documents seen by this newspaper.
The woman, who says she was kept in the dark about the proceedings, says that after five weeks in the ward she was forcibly sedated. When she woke up she was told that the child had been delivered by C-section and taken into care.
In February, the mother, who had gone back to Italy, returned to Britain to request the return of her daughter at a hearing at Chelmsford Crown Court.
Her lawyers say that she had since resumed taking her medication, and that the judge formed a favourable opinion of her. But he ruled that the child should be placed for adoption because of the risk that she might suffer a relapse.
The cause has also been raised before a judge in the High Court in Rome, which has questioned why British care proceedings had been applied to the child of an Italian citizen “habitually resident” in Italy. The Italian judge accepted, though, that the British courts had jurisdiction over the woman, who was deemed to have had no “capacity” to instruct lawyers.
Lawyers for the woman are demanding to know why Essex social services appear not have contacted next of kin in Italy to consult them on the case.
They are also upset that social workers insisted on placing the child in care in Britain, when there had been an offer from a family friend in America to look after her.
An expert on social care proceedings, who asked not to be named because she was not fully acquainted with the details of the case, described it as “highly unusual”.
She said the council would first have to find “that she was basically unfit to make any decision herself” and then shown there was an acute risk to the mother if a natural birth was attempted.
An Essex county council spokesman said the local authority would not comment on ongoing cases involving vulnerable people and children.
Source. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10486452/Child-taken-from-womb-by-social-services.html)

Yuppie Grinder
1st December 2013, 21:57
That's a violation of someone's bodily autonomy and reprehensible.

Magic Carpets Corp.
2nd December 2013, 17:21
That's a violation of someone's bodily autonomy and reprehensible.

Oh, what about the child's right not to be raised by a pyscho? Either way what does autonomy have to do with it when 2 people are involved?

Quail
2nd December 2013, 17:51
Oh, what about the child's right not to be raised by a pyscho? Either way what does autonomy have to do with it when 2 people are involved?
Verbal warning for prejudiced language. People with mental health problems can and do raise children. Even if the woman isn't capable of looking after the child right now, it doesn't necessarily mean that she won't in the future.

Besides, whether or not she can look after the child now is kind of irrelevant to the way that it was delivered by c-section without consulting the woman or her family.

adipocere
2nd December 2013, 18:18
Way to hand the neo-libs another public sphere to "reform" on a silver fucking platter. I don't even know what to say here....

servusmoderni
2nd December 2013, 19:40
I don't think a paragraph is enough to judge a woman. She may be a psychotic mother or she may be a fully-recovered-no-longer-psychotic-mother. Either way, there's much more to learn before keeping or giving back the kid.

EDIT: Changed the word "psycho" for the actual medical term. "Psychotic."

Quail
2nd December 2013, 20:29
I don't think a paragraph is enough to judge a woman. She may be a psycho mother or she may be a fully-recovered-no-longer-psycho-mother. Either way, there's much more to learn before keeping or giving back the kid.

Verbal warning for prejudiced language to servusmoderni and anyone else who might post in this thread.

Can we seriously stop using the word "psycho" to refer to a mentally ill woman?

Magic Carpets Corp.
2nd December 2013, 20:41
Verbal warning for prejudiced language. People with mental health problems can and do raise children. Even if the woman isn't capable of looking after the child right now, it doesn't necessarily mean that she won't in the future.

Besides, whether or not she can look after the child now is kind of irrelevant to the way that it was delivered by c-section without consulting the woman or her family.
What the fuck is this asinine bullshit? Since when can't I use the term psycho? You have a fucking moderator with that username on this site. What disgusting, shameless hypocrisy.

"Even if the woman isn't capable of looking after the child right now, it doesn't necessarily mean that she won't in the future." It doesn't mean that she will be able to in the future either.. Reproduction, after all, is a social function, and as a proper communist, I believe society should have oversight. Parenthood isn't an inherent right, it's a responsibility and an earned privilege. If a mentally ill woman is deemed incapable of raising a child, it's pretty sad and all, but it's probably a necessarily evil and it won't ruin my day.

Anyway why does it even matter that the childbirth was conducted through a c-section? In the US, a third of the children born this year were delivered through a caesarean. In some EU countries like Italy, the number is something like 40%. In the most populous country on earth, China, half of all child births are c-sections.

Quail
2nd December 2013, 20:49
What the fuck is this asinine bullshit? Since when can't I use the term psycho? You have a fucking moderator with that username on this site. What disgusting, shameless hypocrisy.
You just called a woman a psycho because she has mental health problems... It should be obvious why that is not acceptable. It is an undeniably derogatory use of the word.


"Even if the woman isn't capable of looking after the child right now, it doesn't necessarily mean that she won't in the future." It doesn't mean that she will be able to in the future either.. Reproduction, after all, is a social function, and as a proper communist, I believe society should have oversight. Parenthood isn't an inherent right, it's a responsibility and an earned privilege. If a mentally ill woman is deemed incapable of raising a child, it's pretty sad and all, but it's probably a necessarily evil and it won't ruin my day.
I think you complete missed the point of the article, but I was responding to the implication that people who have mental health problems are "psychos" who shouldn't raise children.


Anyway why does it even matter that the childbirth was conducted through a c-section? In the US, a third of the children born this year were delivered through a caesarean. In some EU countries like Italy, the number is something like 40%. In the most populous country on earth, China, half of all child births are c-sections.
The point was not the fact she had a c-section, but the circumstances in which she was given it.

Meanwhile, Essex social services obtained a High Court order in August 2012 for the birth “to be enforced by way of caesarean section”, according to legal documents seen by this newspaper.
The woman, who says she was kept in the dark about the proceedings, says that after five weeks in the ward she was forcibly sedated. When she woke up she was told that the child had been delivered by C-section and taken into care.

servusmoderni
2nd December 2013, 21:05
Verbal warning for prejudiced language to servusmoderni and anyone else who might post in this thread.

Can we seriously stop using the word "psycho" to refer to a mentally ill woman?

My reaction (http://www.troll.me/images/jackie-chan-whut/are-you-serious.jpg)
(http://www.troll.me/images/conspiracy-keanu/is-she-fucking-serious-thumb.jpg)

Quail
2nd December 2013, 21:19
My reaction (http://www.troll.me/images/jackie-chan-whut/are-you-serious.jpg)
(http://www.troll.me/images/conspiracy-keanu/is-she-fucking-serious-thumb.jpg)

Here's a warning for trolling. If I see another of your troll posts in any thread I will infract you.

Yuppie Grinder
2nd December 2013, 21:35
Oh, what about the child's right not to be raised by a pyscho? Either way what does autonomy have to do with it when 2 people are involved?

Two of my sisters are bi-polar and they're great people. One of the two is schizoeffective bi-polar. Bi-polar people have their disadvantages but with help from family and friends a lot of them live very fulfilling lives and have a big positive impact on people around them. I know my sister would make a great mom.

RedAnarchist
2nd December 2013, 21:38
"Infract" is not even a word.

It is a word, now please stop derailing the thread.

servusmoderni
2nd December 2013, 21:38
Two of my sisters are bi-polar and they're great people. One of the two is schizoeffective bi-polar. Bi-polar people have their disadvantages but with help from family and friends a lot of them live very fulfilling lives and have a big positive impact on people around them. I know my sister would make a great mom.

Unfortunately, not every psychotic individual is peaceful. I knew one who took a pair of scissors and stab herself in the head to remove a so-called chip the government had planted.

servusmoderni
2nd December 2013, 21:41
It is a word, now please stop derailing the thread.

Well, it kind of means to violate or destroy and I don't want to be destroyed or violated.

I don't want to derail the subject. I'm sorry.

#FF0000
2nd December 2013, 21:47
Unfortunately, not every psychotic individual is peaceful. I knew one who took a pair of scissors and stab herself in the head to remove a so-called chip the government had planted.

Uh, well we're dealing with a specific mental illness, though. I mean, in the article it says she had a panic attack that may have been caused by not taking medicine for a diagnosed bipolar disorder.

So, uh, there's a whole lot of steps they skipped before they jumped to "take that baby out and keep it"


Anyway why does it even matter that the childbirth was conducted through a c-section?

Are you stupid as a career or is this an amateur gig?

That isn't the issue. The entire "forcibly sedating someone because they had a panic attack and without involving the person's family or Italian social services" thing is what makes this bizarre and ethically dubious in a major way.

adipocere
2nd December 2013, 21:49
Unfortunately, not every psychotic individual is peaceful. I knew one who took a pair of scissors and stab herself in the head to remove a so-called chip the government had planted.

Yes but not every mentally ill person is psychotic. Which goes back to Quail's point. Most mentally ill people are not violent or psychotic. Psychosis is really very rare, however, diagnosing people with a myriad of mental disturbances and stuffing pills down their throats is quite prevalent. Cutting fetuses out of wombs and snatching infants because a woman is off her meds is lunatic. On the other hand, there is no telling how much of this article is hyperbole or what really the circumstances were. It certainly sounds bizarre but it might just be more run-of-the-mill irresponsible journalism.

servusmoderni
2nd December 2013, 22:12
Yes but not every mentally ill person is psychotic. Which goes back to Quail's point. Most mentally ill people are not violent or psychotic. Psychosis is really very rare, however, diagnosing people with a myriad of mental disturbances and stuffing pills down their throats is quite prevalent. Cutting fetuses out of wombs and snatching infants because a woman is off her meds is lunatic. On the other hand, there is no telling how much of this article is hyperbole or what really the circumstances were. It certainly sounds bizarre but it might just be more run-of-the-mill irresponsible journalism. I'd like the source of "Most mentally ill people are not violent"

BIXX
2nd December 2013, 22:22
I'd like the source of "Most mentally ill people are not violent"

There is a huge range of mental illness. A minority of those make someone violent, and of the people afflicted with those mental illnesses, not all of them are violent.

I will source my claims later, but you reek of ableism.

Remus Bleys
3rd December 2013, 04:14
This is a quite frankly appalling story. When I heard this I became physically distraught.
And you fuckers (servusmoderni (http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=108180) and carpets) reactions are quite frankly appalling.

Wait a second - Stalinists being reactionary? Why I would never.

sosolo
3rd December 2013, 05:01
I'd like the source of "Most mentally ill people are not violent"

This is obvious ableism. Mental illness is constantly stigmatised, and I'm really fucking sick of it. I have bipolar disorder, and I've never been violent because of it. I work a full time job, I have a great marriage, and my medication helps me not swing too far in one direction or the other.

BTW, this bullshit about the woman refusing to take her meds is fishy. The vast majority of psych meds cannot be taken during pregnancy.

Oh, and someone refuted the fact that this woman's bodily autonomy was violated due to there being TWO people involved. Last time I checked, foetuses are not people, at least to any true leftist. Actual people matter more than potential ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

servusmoderni
3rd December 2013, 05:44
This is obvious ableism. Mental illness is constantly stigmatised, and I'm really fucking sick of it. I have bipolar disorder, and I've never been violent because of it. I work a full time job, I have a great marriage, and my medication helps me not swing too far in one direction or the other.

BTW, this bullshit about the woman refusing to take her meds is fishy. The vast majority of psych meds cannot be taken during pregnancy.

Oh, and someone refuted the fact that this woman's bodily autonomy was violated due to there being TWO people involved. Last time I checked, foetuses are not people, at least to any true leftist. Actual people matter more than potential ones.

Whatever, I absolutely have no qualifications in medicine, I only have a degree in Macroeconomics. I'll let the experts talk...

Art Vandelay
3rd December 2013, 05:49
Whatever, I absolutely have no qualifications in medicine, I only have a degree in Macroeconomics. I'll let the experts talk...

Well you asked for a source for mentally ill people not being violent, which quite frankly I'm not going to bother to provide, since it should be common sense to anyone with a history of interacting with people who suffer from mental illness, that they are no more inherently violent than anyone else. Anyways, as someone who is diagnosed with MDD, I can see how your comments would be considered insensitive and would think it would be smart to perhaps gain some understanding of mental illness, before painting the 'mentally ill' (I kinda hate that term, regardless of how ironic that is) with such a broad brush.

e: I should probably also mention that as much as I dislike people insinuating, that people who struggle with mental health, are inherently violent/bad parents, I also dislike people equivocating said conviction with ableism. Mental illness is not a 'disability.' I'm just as capable living my life as any 'normal' person, despite suffering from depression, I'm just more prone to feeling like shit. Also as someone who works with individuals who suffer from developmental disabilities, I think it somewhat takes away from what people with actual disabilities have to go through, as compared to people who suffer from mental health problems, when the two are equivocated.

#FF0000
3rd December 2013, 07:49
Whatever, I absolutely have no qualifications in medicine, I only have a degree in Macroeconomics. I'll let the experts talk...

Well, keep in mind that mental illness runs the gamut from relatively common things like anxiety disorders, depression, etc. to very severe things like schizophrenia. People with specific disorders might have violent outbursts, but to say "people with mental disorders are violent' as a general rule simply isn't true.