This time there was talk of ‘failure to thrive’. Eventually with a
change in feeding pattern from feed on demand as previously recommended to a
feed every four hours. The baby was once again returned to the family home. The
father refused to help to collect his daughter from hospital it was left to the
mother to arrange transport with a friend as she does not drive. It is also
noteworthy to remember that the father had already moved out of the family
home. However, he was ordered by a judge to move back in to help with the child
care. A few days after the return home the mother phoned the police.
You may ask why the police and the local authority became involved
yet again. The father of the baby assaulted the mother and for her and the
baby’s protection she phoned the police. She did so in the belief that the
police would at least protect her and her daughter. Instead they snatched the
baby and handed her over to the local authority and this small baby was handed
to a foster carer. The police did this on the instructions and with the
collusion of the local authority. In addition they lied to the mother when they
took the baby. There were two witnesses to these lies. During interview with a
witness present the police tried to have the mother make a serious false
accusation against the father. She refused. The police then issued false
information to the Local Authority which they had to later apologize for on
instructions from the IPCC after the mother had made an official complaint. In
addition the police never made any attempt to carry out a proper investigation
into the assault. When the mother approached the local authority the following
day they refused to tell her anything. She had no idea where her baby was or
how she was, she was told nothing. Again I was witness to this.
The mother was then accused by the local authority of being the
cause of her baby girl’s ‘failure to thrive’. The baby had been placed in
foster care with an “experienced nurse”. However, this ‘failure to thrive’
continued unabated. Eventually, four weeks later the baby was taken to hospital
by the foster carer and had a nasal feeding tube inserted. The mother had said
all along that the feeding problem was medically based. This theory was
ridiculed by the local authority and another agency involved. The local authority
in their desire to prove they were correct then jumped at the chance of using
information from the father. This information was passed to them the day after
the father had been arrested for assaulting the mother. Were they interested
that the father’s information may have been tainted by his arrest and an eight
hour incarceration in a police cell? No, they had no interest in that side of
the affair. I also suspect they do not have the intelligence to look at claims
such as this as being spurious. Their interest was simply to prove their original
thoughts as being right. They never asked the mother for her side of the event.
They were not interested in looking at this from both sides. The truth was the
last thing they wanted to surface.
So here they had information in line with their own thoughts. They
could use this against the mother. Whether it was the truth or not was of no
interest to them. An assessment was ordered by the court through another family
organization. Again what happened during this assessment was the staff involved
where totally ignorant of what they were doing. Again there was no compassion
or understanding that the mother was suffering from untreated PND. Assessors
with no medical qualifications tried to pry into the mother’s past medical
history. As with the hospital staff they acted in total ignorance to what
damage they may have done. It was only the mother’s tenacity and self awareness
that stopped them. To make matters worse at the end of the assessment they
blatantly lied to the mother in front of a witness. The evidence of these lies
surfaced sometime later as the case progressed.
Numerous tests done on the mother over the following year proved
that the information being used against her had not only been suspect but was untrue.
These tests were at the insistence of Cafcass, who admitted the tests were in
violation of the mother’s Human Rights but pressed for them anyway. Then
another blow to their insidious accusations against the mother arose. Cafcass
and the local authority are now working hand in hand to damn the mother. It was
obvious this was now a vendetta against the mother, this was no longer about
protection of the child. They, the social services, eventually, ten months
after the mother voiced her concern that her daughter’s problems were medical, sent
the baby to a specialist who they hoped would confirm their view of the cause
of the baby’s problems. This backfires on both agencies. The baby is diagnosed by
specialists as having a rare incurable condition. One of the main misdiagnosis
of this condition is ‘failure to thrive’. This was discovered ten months after
the mother’s insistence that her daughter’s problems were medically based. It
should also be noted that the mother was not alone in her thoughts. Shortly
after voicing her thoughts a Consultant Paediatrician had issued a report in
which it is stated it would of advantage to have these tests done on this baby.
His recommendation was also ignored by both local authority and the Cafcass
Guardian. Had the mother’s fears been
acted on sooner by the local authority instead of their adherence to their own misguided
agenda, the baby may have been saved from unnecessary pain and suffering she had
experienced in her so far short life. Later a consultant pediatrician asked the
local authority for information that was required to allow the hospital set up
a programme of care for this small vulnerable baby. It took the hospital three
requests over a period of three months to get this vital information released
by the local authority. Proof that the health and welfare of this small
vulnerable baby was of no concern to the local authority, this is in line with
other incidents where the same lazy attitude of the local authority’s lack of
concern for the health and general welfare of this child in their care
surfaced.
This incurable condition was missed at first by three hospital
pediatric consultants although there were some ten indicators pointing to it.
Two chromosome tests were done and both were lost and a third was ordered, this
third general test failed to find the condition. It is also interesting that
the foster carer at one point wished to take the baby to A&E as she was
concerned that the baby had apparently injured her left arm. It was a, as yet
unnamed, non-medical, social worker from the local authority who made the
decision not to have the baby examined. It was discovered some months later
from x-rays that the baby had had a fractured arm and also discovered there had
been various compression fractures to the spine. These had happened whilst the
baby was in the care of the local authority. The local authority although
required by law to inform the parents did not do so. The local authority then withheld
the information on these fractures until it was finally revealed in a doctor’s
report one year later. The fact remains they covered up the occurrence of fractures
and told no one until the doctor’s report was issued. Had this happened when
the baby had been in the mother’s care there is no doubt that she would have
been arrested for child abuse and more than possibly jailed. Was anyone within
the local authority held responsible for not having the baby medically
examined, of course not, the system does not consider this. They are protected
from prosecution by the secrecy that is in place to protect the child! This of
course is wrong - it is plainly obvious that the child was the victim of their
abuse.
Did this new information on the baby’s incurable condition change
the authorities mind and return the baby to the mother. No it did not. The
local authority racked up and increased the pressure on the mother and treated
her in a way that can only be described as humiliating and degrading in its
application. She was treated as low life and as if she was the scum of the
earth. I suspect that they were in some way transferring their own values of
life onto the mother. They saw her as a threat to their warm and comfortable
positions within the system. She had had the audacity to do the unthinkable,
fight back for the sake of her daughter.
They employed a psychiatrist who is known for his misogynist view of
the world. For a massive fee, and I do mean massive, he gave the diagnosis they
wished him to give. So he picks that which no one can challenge, the reason
being is that it does not exist in pure medical terms. Ask for a scientific
medically proven definition and you will find that none exists. That is why the
authorities love it so much. It has become the tour de force behind the
condemnation of many women who have been caught in this insidious trade of baby
abduction by government for profit. If there was any doubt in my mind that the
diagnosis was given for purely financial return it was soon dispensed with by
remarks made outside court. When someone says ‘I go where the money is’ would
you reader consider this to be anything other than what it implies. Remember
the title of this series. Family Court Corruption.
No comments:
Post a Comment