Taking her baby away
 

This is just outrageous! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...6/nbaby126.xml

[quotej]A pregnant woman has been told that her baby will be taken from her at birth because she is deemed capable of "emotional abuse", even though psychiatrists treating her say there is no evidence to suggest that she will harm her child in any way.

Social services' recommendation that the baby should be taken from Fran Lyon, a 22-year-old charity worker who has five A-levels and a degree in neuroscience, was based in part on a letter from a paediatrician she has never met.

...The case adds to growing concern, highlighted in a series of articles in The Sunday Telegraph, over a huge rise in the number of babies under a year old being taken from parents. The figure was 2,000 last year, three times the number 10 years ago.

Critics say councils are taking more babies from parents to help them meet adoption "targets".

[/quote]

Based on abuse and a rape when she was a child, they deem that enough to take her baby?!

Minority Report?

Do we have any social workers at LoT? I'd be interested to hear if this could/does happen in the U.S.

wow-That's horrifying- like sci-fi engineered society scary.

Unbeliveable! It's stuff like this that makes you worry just to even spank your child. Which could explain why there are so many kids out of controll out there.....

Hmmm.... sounds like someone needs to take a little trippy-trip across the pond.

If they start taking babies away from parents because of the possibility of abuse, there will be no children left with birth parents anywhere. EVERY parent has the potential of abusing their children.

Moving toward Handmaid's Tale.

That's scary.

Why would a country have "adoption targets" anyways?

Well, according to the article, it was about getting kids out of foster care and into permanent homes. But that doesn't seem to be how it's shaping up.

biting tongue so hard...starting to bleed...must resist providing accurate information...useless battle...

Ahhhh...it's passed now. Please continue with horrible cps thread.

Hey T - I don't think he's saying that spanking is the solution. I think he is saying when a kid is going to be taken away for what the parents might to - it makes parents awfully scared to do anything.

It would make an interesting asylum case. I wonder how many people come here seeking asylum from Great Britain.

I'm pretty sure it did say that somewhere, but I totally get the fear thing. CPS in America runs rampant. I've heard of people getting kids taken away for natural pattern breastfeeding (aka natural weaning, or "extended" nursing), home/unschooling, having babies at home (that were healthy and perfectly fine!), messy houses - not shards of glass on the floor messy, more like mom had the flu for a few days messy, etc. They have way too much power and people don't know their rights. If CPS shows up at your door, you do not have to let them in without a warrant. It's perfectly acceptable to tell them that now isn't a good time for you, but you would be happy to schedule an appointment for a later date. I think if more people knew that then fewer kids would get taken away for silly things.

The case in the OP though, is so far beyond ridiculous that I would be extremely surprised if they succeed. I think public outcry will force whatever cps is called in GB to back off.

And I don't for a second believe it's true, just because it appeared somewhere on the internet.

Is it automatically false?

I tend to give a grain of credibility to the source in this case. I believe that there is more to the story, but that there is a measure of validity to the story.

But that's me.

Things like that happen here in AZ, as dear Tracilicious will attest to, I'm sure. Our CPS - well, if it isn't the worst, I can't imagine how any other state could have a worse one.

And on the subject of spanking.....I was spanked. I have spanked my children. It is rare, it is never done in anger, and is always done as a known consequence for an action, such as "if you do that again, you will be spanked". I turned out fine. My kids are great and love me and I love them. They don't fear me in the least, and in the way we've practiced it, it has never been abusive. It is never done in a bullying way. It is set up as a choice for the child and reinforces that there are often very undesirable consequences for deliberate actions.

Tori has been spanked (one swat, each time) two times in her life, and both times it was for behavior that we had tried to address verbally and were unsuccessful. She has never done those things again, and we have never even felt remotely like spanking her at any other time. We're lucky- she's a good kid, but I also think that it's because we are consistent and we take the time to explain things to her in a manner that she can understand.

Anyway, spanking policies aside, if this report is accurate then I will be interested in following up on what happens. My mom is a whacko but I think I turned out to be a decent parent, so there goes that argument. I know a lot of people that are wonderful parents in spite of their own unhappy childhoods, and maybe even because of it.

You've never heard of the Daily Telegraph? Or did you just not click the link? Did you not even look at the source before posting this?

And I suppose I should believe it just because it appeared in the Daily Telegraph?

Like Kevy says, that doesn't mean it isn't true. But just because it's published in a purportedly reputable rag doesn't mean it is either.

Pfft, considering all the total crap that's been printed in the NY Times, I really don't believe anything this outrageous from merely one source. Any source.

reality is over rated - I mean how can you experience it save through your senses which are all subjective inputs. Believe nothing.

Fingers in ears- *lalalalalalalalalalala*

No one on LoT is real- I mean, you're on the internet so.....;)

Weren't we warned about those crazy people on the internet?

If I'm not real, can I go home now?

Soooo....you're going to post this in every single thread with a link? :rolleyes:

No, just in every thread that alleges something this outrageous. The O.P. acknowledges it's outrageous.

It just happens to be so outrageous that I don't outright believe it without lots more proof than it being a story in a newspaper.



In other words, I find it unbelieveable and outrageous. So objectionable I can't let myself believe it without further evidence than its appearance in the Daily Telegraph. Worse canards have been published in more reputable newspapers.

Short of sending you there to talk to the people involved yourself, what would be necessary to overcome the unbelievableness of this story?

Personally, I don't find it all that unbelievable. Bureaucracy has a way of producing very out-of-touch behavior, especially when given a mandate to predict and protect the "common good." Forced sterilizations, eugenics programs, unethical medical experimentation, etc. I don't have a problem at all believing that some committe somewhere looked at statistics and said "abuse as a child has an XX increased risk of abusing their own child so it makes policy sense to shift those children." Which is probably true, in a purely abstract world.

Most of the absurdities of the modern world seem to stem from absolutism.

And absolutism almost always seems to involve "thinking of the children"

I'd believe it in Iran, less so in the U.K.


Published stories of further investigations into this outrage, with quotes from the bureaucrats in question affirming their purported Nazi stance, confirmed by other news organizations ... that would go a long way for me.

Do multiple news sources make a difference? I'd say at least that this is getting some press and has something to it.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...281689,00.html

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/skynews/200...45dbed5_1.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1879

http://technorati.com/posts/tag/hexh...n%27s+services (though I'm sure you would discount the blogosphere entirely)

All I did was type "Lyon hexham baby" into Google. It would be nice of you to do some research before you post dismissively on any topic - otherwise, you come off as trollish, which ain't fun at all.

With all due respect, CP ... I don't have to click on links. This is a message board, and we're all just talking here. I barely have time to be on the LoT, much less do some internet research.

This is a thread I feel like posting in ... and if my opinion is less informed than it might be, that's just the breaks.

If it's your opinion that's trollish of me, you are more than entitled to it.






Too bad I'm not a moderator around here anymore, or I'd look into your allegation.

I don't believe half of what innerSpaceman reads.

Interesting how some things never change

I've phrased and rephrased a response, but in the process I have come to the conclusion that negativity for the sake of negativity is simply not worth my time.

Someday when we're old and persnickety we'll hear "well back in my day..."

I already say that.

I say it in my best Gabby Hayes voice.

I don't believe in innerSpaceman....but Santa came over for dinner last night.

The KKK took my baby away.