myoldman Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Is her name Shannon by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahamaad Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I know where you got this from - and I will go against the grain. Despite you and I thinking we know what is best for the child - I think the child has a fundamental right to be with it's natural mother. We don't know whether the mother will change her behaviour after being reunited with her child. Labels such as 'junkie whore' are all well and good - but she is still the child's mother. I can't speak for anyone who is adopted - but there surely must be some curiosity as to who the natural parent(s) are? It certainly isn't as black and white as ' we should never return the child to a woman who is not a fit parent'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted July 24, 2008 Author Share Posted July 24, 2008 Is her name Shannon by any chance? Who is Shannon? No, her name is not Shannon, nor is it Madeline (McCann). Her name is Amanda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahamaad Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Just seen what blandy put and I'd say that is where I stand on the matter. Is this a scenario from a recent Hollywood film perchance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsky_11 Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I know where you got this from - and I will go against the grain. Despite you and I thinking we know what is best for the child - I think the child has a fundamental right to be with it's natural mother. We don't know whether the mother will change her behaviour after being reunited with her child. Labels such as 'junkie whore' are all well and good - but she is still the child's mother. I can't speak for anyone who is adopted - but there surely must be some curiosity as to who the natural parent(s) are? It certainly isn't as black and white as ' we should never return the child to a woman who is not a fit parent'. also know where this is from. also said b. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GasGasGas Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I'll be apathetic here, just leave things as it is and imagine I never saw it. It's none of my business anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 as I knwo it you are not allowed to remove children from the natural parents unless they either give permission or Social services decide no idea on this but neither options are applicable as at some point the social services need to get involved and decide if the guardians can be the uncle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 24, 2008 Moderator Share Posted July 24, 2008 Option A. There's too much emphasis put on the rights of parents who should have no right to be a parent in the first place. We always 'think of the children' yet in this case, those who would call the cops aren't thinking of the child at all. Short-term maybe, but certainly not long term. The critical part of it is also the part in brackets "(where she is happy)". If that hadn't been there I might have thought about it but now no decision to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 so where is this from then ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Just seen what blandy put and I'd say that is where I stand on the matter. Is this a scenario from a recent Hollywood film perchance? Ah yes, I know which one. I was planning on renting that out, thanks for spoiling the ending :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I went for the second one. But I'd make sure I got the police involved, so they knew what was going on with the mother and a close eye was kept on her, with the threat of her kid being taken away again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 24, 2008 Moderator Share Posted July 24, 2008 I think there's also an issue here where some of you trust that the system works and I don't. That's part of going for option 'A' too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robitee Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 social services are useless, they don't remove children from homes unless it is seen by them as a last resort! I live next door to a drug dealer' his wife and a 10 month old baby boy as Im write this the mother is screaming at him for no real reason other than the fact he is a baby and babies cry! The social services DO NOT WANT TO KNOW!!! Some people don't deserve kids-simple as that. If you bring oner into the world you are moraly bound to do your best for it,those that don't should have them taken off them and not returned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 24, 2008 Moderator Share Posted July 24, 2008 I think there's also an issue here where some of you trust that the system works and I don't. That's part of going for option 'A' too. Fair comment. The way I looked at it it though was not to consider the "system". The system sometimes works, sometimes it "fails". It's not the same everywhere. Some areas are better than others. I think once you start trusting (or not) systems, you lose sight of the individual people and circumstances. The question is a massive simplification of complex issues. It's an interesting way of getting a tabloid kind of summary of a sample of people's outlooks. But as a genuine question about what would be the best thing to do it's such a scant level of information that any answer, in a "real" situation, would be horribly ill informed and would stand a greater chance of being wrong than right (including my answer). People can't be put in neat categories like that. And when you involve multiple people it all gets much more complex, still. Personalities count for a lot - Does the mother want to give up drugs? would the loss of her child make her worse? ruin her chances of recovery from drug addiction? Why limit the choices to just those offered - what about other myriad options? Like I said, to me the thing is interesting, but it's not the question itself that's interesting, but the way people either jump to an answer based on almost no information, taken at trust, or dither about like me saying "I need much more understanding" Anyone who actually worked on the lines given in the question would be a terrible arbiter of the child's future and of the future of the other people in the example. "yeah simple, druggy mother = keep child away" "yeah simple, law says child with mother" Such situations as the question just aren't black and white like that. Judgements reached so instantly, aren't judgements on the situation, they're indications of the way people's minds, experiences and prejudices come together to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted July 25, 2008 Author Share Posted July 25, 2008 so where is this from then ? I have PM'ed you, as don't want to spoil anything for anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylo Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 Well if anything should wake the mother up to the futility of her life choices then it would be searching for her lost daughter - so in the time that has passed if she has stopped taking the drugs or at least made an effort so that her mind is clear to help find her daughter then I would consider giving the kid back - if she hasnt changed or even noticed that her daughter has gone then I wouldn't. I know addictions are hard to kick etc but it would be the easy choice for her to say my daughter has been kidknapped, I am distressed so I am going to shoot up to take away the pain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT_1993 Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 it takes more to be a parent than just giving birth, if the scenario is exactly as described then id leave her with the new family Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 25, 2008 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2008 I think there's also an issue here where some of you trust that the system works and I don't. That's part of going for option 'A' too. Fair comment. The way I looked at it it though was not to consider the "system". The system sometimes works, sometimes it "fails". It's not the same everywhere. Some areas are better than others. I think once you start trusting (or not) systems, you lose sight of the individual people and circumstances. The question is a massive simplification of complex issues. It's an interesting way of getting a tabloid kind of summary of a sample of people's outlooks. But as a genuine question about what would be the best thing to do it's such a scant level of information that any answer, in a "real" situation, would be horribly ill informed and would stand a greater chance of being wrong than right (including my answer). People can't be put in neat categories like that. And when you involve multiple people it all gets much more complex, still. Personalities count for a lot - Does the mother want to give up drugs? would the loss of her child make her worse? ruin her chances of recovery from drug addiction? Why limit the choices to just those offered - what about other myriad options? Like I said, to me the thing is interesting, but it's not the question itself that's interesting, but the way people either jump to an answer based on almost no information, taken at trust, or dither about like me saying "I need much more understanding" Anyone who actually worked on the lines given in the question would be a terrible arbiter of the child's future and of the future of the other people in the example. "yeah simple, druggy mother = keep child away" "yeah simple, law says child with mother" Such situations as the question just aren't black and white like that. Judgements reached so instantly, aren't judgements on the situation, they're indications of the way people's minds, experiences and prejudices come together to work. A lot of the reactions on here would be done in a kind of 'given what I'm telling you, make a decision' kind of way and I'd hope (and think) that given a real scenario to make a decision on where your decision actually affects people's lives, people would need more to go on. But in the spirit of the thread going on what we know, we can jump to these decisions with no ramifications for anyone. Getting back to the discussion of option A or B. I agree that people are losing sight of the issue and the people involved. Those who would like to ring the police and have it done 'properly' (whatever that means) are essentially wanting the same outcome but for it to a) take longer be more emotionally damaging for all involved (because it becomes traumatic for everyone and turns it into a confrontational thing) and c) waste resources effectively getting the result that we currently have. Why people are so hung up on using official ways and means I'm not sure. It's a societal thing but in reality if we step back and look at it purely from a humanitarian standpoint - the child is where he/she needs to be, the parents through their life choices have got their 'reward' and everyone is a winner, more importantly the child is a winner. Going back to square one in an attempt to get back to where we are at present only in a far more traumatic (but legal, yawn) way for me is lunacy and is IMHO the act of a brainwashed society who have lost the ability to act properly without asking for permission first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsonp Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 Is there a reward from a red top national newspaper at all :notsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts