As upsetting as the story is, I'm trying to reserve judgement until more is known.
Having known people with acute mental health problems, I know that people are not routinely sanctioned in the UK -- even when police become involved. The fact that they committed her and carried out a forced caesarean makes me think she must have been self-harming, attempting suicide, or a self-induced abortion; in which case, I can fully understand why this was done.
Of course, because of patient confidentiality, the authorities aren't going to disclose the details unless it goes to court.
The facts as reported are almost certainly incomplete - to the point where they completely fail to represent the truth.
This is necessarily so - in the UK we have strong privacy laws to protect both the mother and the child but make no mistake despite the barrier to public review (shall we call it kindly) everyone will have been represented properly by the best available legal, medical and social agencies.
I speak from a little knowledge (not of this case because if I did know something of that then I would be silent) but because my wife and I are foster parents and are regularly involved in the processes that secure the best available outcomes for each child temporarily in our care.
I suspect there is a lot more to this story. Councils tend to avoid going down this route unless there are no other options left to them. Mainly because doing something like this costs them a fortune and councils hate spending money on children services if they can avoid it.
There would have been a lot of people involved in the process and they are very risk averse people for the most part.
5 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 20.9 ms ] threadHaving known people with acute mental health problems, I know that people are not routinely sanctioned in the UK -- even when police become involved. The fact that they committed her and carried out a forced caesarean makes me think she must have been self-harming, attempting suicide, or a self-induced abortion; in which case, I can fully understand why this was done.
Of course, because of patient confidentiality, the authorities aren't going to disclose the details unless it goes to court.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10486452/Child-taken-...
This is necessarily so - in the UK we have strong privacy laws to protect both the mother and the child but make no mistake despite the barrier to public review (shall we call it kindly) everyone will have been represented properly by the best available legal, medical and social agencies.
I speak from a little knowledge (not of this case because if I did know something of that then I would be silent) but because my wife and I are foster parents and are regularly involved in the processes that secure the best available outcomes for each child temporarily in our care.
There would have been a lot of people involved in the process and they are very risk averse people for the most part.