Woman forcibly given a C-Section and baby taken into care

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10486452/Child-taken-from-womb-by-social-services.html

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”

Wow, I wonder how this will all turn out. What do you guys think will happen to this kid?
I feel sorry for the women, wonder what her "mental breakdown" was =/

Are we giving far too much power to Social Services? Should we allow forced C-sections?

(edited 10 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Kiss

That's shocking even coming from social services. Absolutely disgusting.

That's horrible.

They couldn't wait huh?

Reply 4

Flauta

That's awful, I wonder how much worse this whole event has made her mental health

Reply 5

marinajelly

Forced c-section? Disgusting, how can they separate a mother and baby before they've even seen how the mother will care for her child?!

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 6

ArtGoblin

We don't know enough details to label this case 'disgusting' yet. They got a High Court order to do this - it is not a decision that would have been made lightly. While at the moment it seems like an extreme option to take, we should wait to see if further details emerge before condemning social services for their decision.

Reply 7

Summaiya123

That's the most ridiculous thing ever, women tend to go through some weird phases whilst pregnant Im sure. You just cant force someone to have a c-section, they could have given her the help she needed and waited until the baby was born to judge the situation but instead they seperated her from her premature baby which probably did more harm to both of them than good! :mad:

Reply 8

tehforum

Well this is interesting.

Reply 9

glombardo222

Wow, this is so unethical and discriminating; they're not even giving her a chance by the sounds of it. If they all cared so much about everyone's well-being maybe they should have offered her, her child back on strict conditions that she would allow visits for a necessary amount of time to ensure the child's safety under the care of the mother is maintained, rather than taking the easy way out and just removing the child which I'm sure isn't in the mothers' best interests in terms of her mental health.

Reply 10

Gjaykay

Original post by ArtGoblin

I agree with you in the sense that if they got the High Court involved then the women must have had an extreme enough mental breakdown.
But it raising the question of giving that much power to social services. The baby wasn't even technically born yet!

Reply 11

Studentus-anonymous

Original post by Gjaykay

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10486452/Child-taken-from-womb-by-social-services.html

Wow, I wonder how this will all turn out. What do you guys think will happen to this kid?
I feel sorry for the women, wonder what her "mental breakdown" was =/

Are we giving far too much power to Social Services? Should we allow forced C-sections?

Absolutely repulsive, social services should not have that kind of free reign over peoples lives and I don't care if it's in the interest of avoiding more media storms over some "Baby-P" or "Toddler-X" or whatever.

I hope the social services are pursued by all legal means necessary until their arses ache from the massive legal and civil sodomization they earned.

I mean it just breaches all sorts of common sense. Why wasn't her family contacted? Why is Britain dictating the destiny of an Italian citizen (her mother and her baby)? Why is despite all that, her mother having recovered and friends and family of the woman having come forward to offer to care for the child, the social services clinging to the child that they will maltreat and neglect in the British broken care system?

And also classy as usual, the fascist secret courts of the UK Social Services aren't commenting on the issue, and remaining silent. I imagine if the Italian woman was in fact British she'd be gagged like British victims of the system usually are.

The family courts tasked with judging on people deemed 'unfit' to decide for themselves or their dependants have too much ****ing power, too much secrecy and likely too much corruption.

They need to be reformed drastically.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 12

Razzamoly

It really does makes sense that the initials for social services is "SS". Very fitting indeed.

Steps need to be taken to curb their power. State sanctioned criminals. This feels like something China would do. Have we really fallen that far?

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 13

Bill_Gates

This country is worse than China. I am moving to China at least you have a more free market.

Reply 14

Thisisgirlworld

http://news.sky.com/story/1176124/womans-baby-taken-from-womb-by-court-order

"A pregnant woman was sedated against her will and her baby removed by caesarean section and taken into care after instructions from social services, it has been claimed.

The Italian woman, who already has two children, was visiting Britain to attend a Ryanair hostess training course at Stansted Airport in Essex when she suffered a panic attack.

Despite speaking to the woman's mother in Italy on the telephone, who explained the mental health problems, police took her to a psychiatric hospital.

John Hemming MP
John Hemming will take up the woman's case in Parliament

She was sectioned under the Mental Health Act and five weeks later she was sedated - despite her protests - and her child removed and taken in to care.

In February the woman, who is back on her medication, returned to Britain seeking the return of her daughter but was told by a judge at Chelmsford Crown Court that her child would instead be put up for adoption, the paper says.

The High Court in Rome has questioned why British law has been applied to an Italian citizen."

Ok so I know there's a bit to read there but what are your thoughts? I'm really quite shocked that this has been allowed to go on in the UK.

Reply 15

Pastaferian

Original post by Kiss

That's shocking even coming from social services. Absolutely disgusting.

Original post by techno-thriller

They couldn't wait huh?

Original post by Studentus-anonymous

Quite right - Social Services should have waited until the mentally-ill mother had harmed the baby. Only then should they have stepped in :rolleyes:

Social Services often take a bashing, and sometimes rightly so. However, they don't get to decide if someone is unable to make decisions for themselves about medical matters - that is the province of lawyers and medics. In this case, the Italian High Court was satisfied that the woman "had no capacity to instruct lawyers" so until there is more info we should probably assume that was indeed the case. And if it was the case, Social Services had a responsibility for the baby as well.

The majority of births involve some form of medical procedure (eg, pain relief) and some require emergency intervention. Doing a C-section seems very drastic (although statistically it is very safe) but consider the alternative... trying to deliver a baby without the active co-operation of the mother. Would the 'normal birth' option be safe for mother or baby? Would it be pain-free? Would it even be possible? AFAICS, the C-section option seems the lesser of two evils.

Edit to add: Christopher Booker is well-known for preferring rhetoric over facts. Here's an example of a previous foray into the world of social services and family courts (read from paragraph 185 onwards - quite unprecedented! http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2011/B8.html
I haven't managed to find his retractions or groveling apologies online however.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 16

Yawn11

There must have been a good reason this happened though.

This **** don't happen everyday man, it's all disgusting and unethical now, but I question what the alternative would have been? Perhaps there would have been a possible outcome that would have everyone thinking it was "disgusting and unethical" that social services didn't do more to prevent it.