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

Watch
Gjaykay
Badges: 11
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-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?
0
reply
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 8 years ago
#2
That's shocking even coming from social services. Absolutely disgusting.
5
reply
h198gb
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 8 years ago
#3
That's horrible.
0
reply
techno-thriller
Badges: 14
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 8 years ago
#4
They couldn't wait huh?
0
reply
Flauta
Badges: 9
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 8 years ago
#5
That's awful, I wonder how much worse this whole event has made her mental health
2
reply
marinajelly
Badges: 10
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 8 years ago
#6
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
2
reply
ArtGoblin
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 8 years ago
#7
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.
11
reply
Summaiya123
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 8 years ago
#8
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:
1
reply
tehforum
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 8 years ago
#9
Well this is interesting.
0
reply
glombardo222
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 8 years ago
#10
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.
0
reply
Gjaykay
Badges: 11
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#11
(Original post by 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.
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!
0
reply
Studentus-anonymous
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 8 years ago
#12
(Original post by Gjaykay)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-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.
4
reply
Razzamoly
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 8 years ago
#13
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?
0
reply
Bill_Gates
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 8 years ago
#14
This country is worse than China. I am moving to China at least you have a more free market.
0
reply
Thisisgirlworld
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 8 years ago
#15
http://news.sky.com/story/1176124/wo...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.
0
reply
Pastaferian
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 8 years ago
#16
(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)
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.
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.
1
reply
Yawn11
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 8 years ago
#17
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.
2
reply
chocolatesauce
Badges: 18
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 8 years ago
#18
is this legal?
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 5
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 8 years ago
#19
I'm waiting until we get the full story. But if the mother has claimed, or tried to take her own life then fair enough.
0
reply
thunder_chunky
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report 8 years ago
#20
I want to believe they had an adequate reason for this, however these are rather extreme measures even by standards of extreme measures.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What is your favourite revision method?

Taking notes manually (53)
21.63%
Note taking apps (6)
2.45%
Flashcards (47)
19.18%
Revision guides (15)
6.12%
Past papers (116)
47.35%
Something else (let us know in the thread) (8)
3.27%

Watched Threads

View All