Mother "too stupid" to care for baby

That's a pretty big claim. And completely unsubstantiated.

IQ doesn't equal common sense. I know people with normal IQs who are, literally, too stupid to care for a child.

You have absolutely no way of knowing that their reasons were "false."

That is f***ing terrible.

I see plenty of unfit parents around that get to keep her kid, and by the way it sounds, she's not that stupid.



I'm really beginning to hate this world/society/humanity...

The baby was in ICU in hospital still when they acted. They do not go into detail of her life/finances at that time; which may have played a role in the frequency/length of her visits. (in my opinion)

Another thought I had after reading the link was: I wonder if there is jealous children/ex of the 66 year old man that fathered the baby... maybe someone who would stand to lose a portion of inheritance or something? Maybe it was the father himself that got the ball rolling

hmm,
I truely find it interesting how quickly people can form opinions.

People, even smart people, eat up the opinions that media feeds to them.

Had this article been written with a slightly different slant, we'd have a thread congratulating the government on taking the steps necessary to save a baby from an unfit parent.

They took the baby away because they claimed that she had learning difficulties. Her IQ or lack of common sense isn't the issue. It could be that she gets the child back because she doesn't have learning difficulties and then they'll take her away again but the reason that they stated is false.

According to who, exactly?

If it turned out that she really did have learning difficulties then I would be. The fact is that they did little to verify that. Even the original psychologist has said that she has no learning difficulties. That was the stated reason for removing the child. If she doesn't have learning difficulties then they have no legal ground to stand on with the adoption thing. The reason she wasn't allowed to instruct her solicitor in court and the reason she never got the baby back is because of these "learning difficulties". That's really all I'm pissed about. They've breached her human rights and made themselves look bad again. They haven't even given the mother a chance because they've been trying to cover that up.

Like I've said, if she wins and in a few months they take the baby away because she doesn't have the capacity to care for her, then I'll support it. Until then I'll be pissed at this breach of her rights. They should have had more than psychologist verify her "condition" and if she had no learning difficulties then maybe move to the low IQ argument.

Well the woman herself, the courts and a Lib Dem MP.

I hope the op keeps us updated on what happens in the case, I also hope there will be a positive outcome for all involved.

If you read the articles, you'll see that they quote absolutely no one besides the woman and the MP.

They both use weasel words like "it is understood that" and "Social workers first raised doubts that.."

You have to be super critical when reading these types of articles. If something is completely unattributed, there's a reason for it.

I don't think we can trust her quotes if she's that stupid.

this woman actually must be pretty smart, or at least have gotten some good advice to go public with this... look at us all eating this up, outraged at the child protective officials... the people who deal with their p.r. are definately feeling some pressure now to give this woman her child, and should this case go on the judge/jury will feel the public eye on them and hear everybody ranting about how this woman was treated unjustly...

god i hate the media... it makes the whole world biased to whatever side of the story will sell the best... these things arent even any of our business...

lol

Hey, like I said, the whole thing was aparently based on her non-existant learning difficulties. If so then they have no legal leg to stand on. If she can't adequately care for her baby then fine but they have to prove it. She would not be going to Europe if her case wasn't worth considering.