|
|
Post by serrakunda on Jun 14, 2016 13:17:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by corkwing on Jun 14, 2016 18:21:03 GMT
A while ago there was a segment on the radio about the project that's mentioned. It sounds positive. In the radio interviews, though, the mums didn't seem to accept responsibility and some of the stuff they said just didn't add up. It was all very sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by serrakunda on Jun 14, 2016 18:33:28 GMT
Very sad for everyone concerned, it seems these children were removed over a 30'year period. Incredible
|
|
|
|
Post by lilyofthevalley on Jun 14, 2016 21:31:59 GMT
I have just seen this: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36477849The statistics only apply to England. I live in Scotland and my daughter-in-law's mother had all 8 children taken into care. The first 4 children to one father and then later on another 4 children to a different father. My DIL is a carbon copy of her mother. She and my AS have had 6 children. The first 4 children were taken into care and they have the two youngest children living at home with them. She has sisters and cousins who have had up to 6 children removed and taken into care. To her family there is nothing unusual about this. Similatly there is nothing unusual about the men in the family being unemployed, involved in criminal activity or in prison. The local city newspaper once had a feature on its front page with the provocative headline 'Is this the worst family in *?' It's very sad as it is intergenerational.  Lily |
|
|
|
Post by chotimonkey on Jun 15, 2016 13:20:43 GMT
Bm was taken into care late (early teens) with sister, sister has had at least 4 children taken into care and bm has had at least 6 children taken into care has had several miscarriages and shows no sign of stopping... It's v v sad
|
|
|
|
Post by elderberry on Jun 15, 2016 15:43:36 GMT
DD has a friend whose older sister, mid-20s, said she had four children, but we had never seen any of them. A bit of snooping on Facebook soon confirmed my suspicions. Sister got pregnant again, we saw her getting bigger, I saw her posting scan pictures on Facebook. And then suddenly she wasn't pregnant any more, and there was no sign of the baby. Just the sister, drinking and smoking and appearing in a CCTV shot of a shoplifter in the local shop. I suspect DD's friend will go the same way in due course (I hate to admit it, but I'm pleased that they have fallen out for the moment).
DD herself is the youngest of five (some abortions/miscarriages along the way, too), born to four different fathers over 20 years, all removed eventually, and the third child has now had her two children removed. BM was horrifically abused by her father, spent her teenage years in care, has never held down a job. Rest of the family much the same. And so it goes on.
|
|
|
|
Post by monkey on Jun 15, 2016 20:16:50 GMT
This thread just prompted me to check LO's BMs Facebook page under my pseudonym and guess what ......she's popped another! That's 9 babies (that we know of) in 12 years - unbelievable.
|
|
|
|
Post by elderberry on Jun 15, 2016 23:27:16 GMT
I also checked Facebook after my post and discovered that one of DD's friend's cats has given birth again. That makes at least four litters of kittens in the past two years, maybe more. The kittens are having kittens and our street is increasingly filled with white cats with black markings. And even though I lent the mother my cat carrier and never got it back, none of them have been neutered. I am now actually wondering whether to call the RSPCA.
|
|
|
|
Post by daffin on Jun 16, 2016 14:06:03 GMT
The BM of our 2 has had 9 children removed. One died soon after birth. She's currently pregnant with No. 11 (she has had miscarriages, too) and is still in her 30s, so theoretically could have another 4-5. I had hoped that she'd stopped, or couldn't hold into any more pregnancies, but no..... Tragic and awful. At least social services have started removing them at birth now - Mouse was the first not to go through the neglect and abuse the others faced.
|
|
|
|
Post by milly on Jun 16, 2016 18:11:43 GMT
Dd2 is one of at least 6 children of her bm (we don't have up to date information, this is from 9 years ago). All but two have different bfs. But her family seem more stable and have cared for the older ones at least. Dd is the only one adopted that we know of.
Dd1's bm claimed dd was her only child only a couple of years ago - certainly she still lives locally and ss don't know of any. Very unusual. Bm and bf also grew up with their birth families and only bms were known to social services. So doesn't fit the "pattern".
|
|
|
|
Post by lilyofthevalley on Jun 16, 2016 20:42:15 GMT
I think that there are reasons that these mothers keep on having babies, even though their children have been taken away, and the new baby will likely be taken away at birth. Here are some that spring to mind:
1) As this thread shows there is often a generational family history of children being taken into care. It is just a fact of life and not abnormal for these families.
2) I was very struck by my daughter-in-law's behaviour when she got pregnant again. It was obvious that she LOVED being pregnant. She would dress more and more skimpily, flaunting her pregnant belly for all to see. This made her the centre of attention and even elicited nice comments from total strangers, wishing her well on the imminent birth.
3)Even if the mother/couple have had their previous children taken into care and even if they have been told that future children will be taken into care at birth, there is always the chance that eventually they will be given the opportunity to look after the baby themselves. They only have to look around to see that this can happen. Even if the social workers remain hard hearted, others begin to exert pressure for the family to be given a chance with support. This is what happened with my AS and DIL. The Children's Panel Members and the Sheriffs were finding it very difficult to keep taking the babies away.
4) Over time the parents become canny. They learn what to say and what to do to please those that make decisions. They learn how to jump through the hoops. They attend the meetings, the parenting classes, the groups, the interviews. If the child is taken into care at birth they can religiously visit on all occasions as required. However these visits may not be very demanding to them and may in fact be like outings.
5) There can be a strong motivation to have a child at home. In the case of my DIL the only purpose of a woman is to have babies. She does not value education or employment. Children can also be good bargaining counters for services such as getting a tenancy or moving tenancies, getting furniture and fittings, getting holidays paid for etc. You don't get these things so easily if you are single and childless.
A rather worldweary Lily x
|
|
|
|
Post by lilyofthevalley on Jun 19, 2016 12:17:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lilyofthevalley on Jun 19, 2016 12:24:02 GMT
|
|
