Taking newborns

I first started this post in reaction to 6th March’s Daily Wail Mail article, social workers arrived at hospital to take woman’s baby while she was in labour.

A mother is demanding an apology from social services after her baby was taken away from her as soon as she was born.

Kelly McWilliams, 36, claims that social workers arrived at her bedside while she was in labour and took her newborn daughter Victoria into foster care.

I’d already posted about this subject before (AMBER ALERT! Missing child snatched!) and wanted to look at it in more depth. However, due to my entire crapness at getting things done, the post has been sat here as one of my many unfinished drafts.

Friday just gone (5th April), there appeared yet another post about a Social Services (Staffordshire, again) snatching (literally) a newborn from its mom. This time, it’s an extremely harrowing video showing the newborn being snatched from its screaming mom’s arms.

Sadly, this is the same family as appeared in my previous reblog where the SWers were waiting in the delivery suite for the mom to give birth so they could take the baby away from its mom straight away.

While I, like all the other adoptee advocates I know who’re campaigning for changes to the Institution of Adoption, realise there are people out there who’re harmful to the wellbeing of the children they create, I am absolutely convinced that unless a newborn is in immediate physical danger from its mom, then it should not be removed at birth.

Heck, it’s even advised that puppies are kept with their moms for up to the first eight weeks, or else there is a greater risk of separation anxiety, yet Social Services (and especially Staffordshire) – despite all the evidence of the need of babies for THEIR OWN mothers – in their accumulated ‘wisdom’ are happy to wade in and disrupt those very important early weeks.

SWers cite “concerns” for the baby’s welfare for actions such as this, yet unless those “concerns” are that the mom will be an IMMEDIATE threat to the baby’s physical safety, these SWers are acting contrary to scietific research that demonstrates why newborns should NOT be removed from their mother.

I’d already done the following research when I first started this post, and so because I’ve got to go out, and because I want to get this done in time for inclusion in this week’s #WASO hosted by The Boy’s Behaviour, I’m leaving you with the list of posts that I’d already filtered through that relate to those important first weeks in which yes, even people NEED THEIR OWN moms UNLESS that mom is going to be an immediate physical danger to the kid.

The First Hour Following Birth: Don’t Wake the Mother!

The First Hour After Birth: A Baby’s 9 Instinctive Stages

Care Practice #6: No Separation of Mother and Baby, With Unlimited Opportunities for Breastfeeding

Ms McWilliams, from Scawthorpe, Doncaster, says that she was separated from her baby for three months and allowed to see her for only six hours a week under close supervision until a court ordered that Victoria should be returned to her mother.

The Fourth Trimester – AKA: Why Your Newborn is Only Happy in Your Arms

Developmental milestones: Separation and independence

Attachment And Separation: What Everyone Should Know

Margaret Mahler and Separation-Individuation Theory

The Mother-Baby Bond @ Scientific American

Pre and Peri-Natal Psychology: An Introduction Part 1 by Thomas R. Verny MD, D.Psych, DHL, FRCPC
http://www.adultadoptees.org/forum/index.php?topic=31192

Found some videos by Dr. Thomas Verny on prenatal and perinatal psychology. I found them very interesting. It’s too bad this stuff isn’t common knowledge.

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJBO0C1iYp8
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUb_5F12V6A

---

---

UPDATE: 12 April

There’s been another video released; Father Of Snatched Baby Speaks Out

Paul Roberts and his wife Asha had their one day old baby taken last week by Staffordshire Social Services personnel assisted by the police. He spoke to Brian Gerrish about the circumstances on today’s UK Column Live.

ARTICLE | APRIL 11, 2013 – 5:23PM

---

---

UPDATE: 06 September

In an effort to protect their own villainous behaviour, Staffordshire SS attempted to get the first video in this post banned. Thankfully, as reported in the much maligned Daily Fail, I mean Wail, um Mail, sensibility has prevailed, and it’s now no longer banned.

Can UK Social Workers truly have “the best interests of the child” at the heart of their work

On Saturday 9th June this year, I went to the Birmingham Child Stealing by the State conference. I (kind of) gave a short presentation voicing some of the issues faced by adoptees (didn’t get to use my .pptx^[1] ‘n’ got cut short to let John Hemming, MP go on :p). Whilst there, I heard it suggested that Social Work is a dying profession. This argument could be said to have merit, especially after the University of Southampton ended its degree programme in the subject, with a statement announcing:

the quality of the research being produced by the university was not of a high enough level to sustain the courses. It said it had not been able to reach a position where it could ensure that “internationally excellent research can be found in this academic discipline”.

Errors in judgement after errors in judgement after errors in judgement impact both public and professional perceptions alike – leaving it little wonder why the title has earned itself the rephrasing to Social Wreckers.

Whilst contemplating my personal attitude towards the Social Work profession, a timely reminder as to the nature of “social work” was posted by The Declassified Adoptee. “Social Wreckers” reminds the reader that not all social work is about taking kids. I actually am aware of this, but when caught up in the furore against wrongs, it can get difficult to still see some of the rights. Other Social Workers go nowhere near kids, and instead deal with the elderly, ensuring they get checked on when there’s no-one else left. Yes, I admit it, not all Social Workers are bad, or evil. ;)

Yet in this climate of fear these are people facing budget cuts, or other job threats for varying reasons. How can those who are in the child snatching adoption industry possibly have “the best interests of the child” at the heart of their work when their very jobs depend so very much on hitting the targets so recently drawn up by the Government in order to eliminate targets?

I honestly don’t think it’s possible that it can be – especially since it’s been known for decades that adoption is not “for the best”. That’s why in Australia, they’ve got it down to the sorts of figures it should be running at (if it must run at all). Perhaps somewhat more astoundingly, the Australian Government has issued an apology to those separated by forced adoption – yet in this country, forced adoption is on the rise.

Why?

It doesn’t make sense to me.

Of course, somehow or another, a paradigm change has happened over in Aus., and adoption is now seen as the last option, not the first. This is as it should be, because let’s not forget that despite “child protection” supposedly being about protecting kids; that child only exists for 18 years at most. Adoption stays inflicted upon us for the rest of our lives though.

If the Government are going to keep aiming to annihilate more and more childrens’ heritages, then they need to give the adult that child grows into the option to nullify their adoption. “As if” it never was.

ETA on 16 Sep
Another course bites the dust: Closure of MSc in MH Social Work at Institute of Psychiatry.

---

Footnotes:
[1] {THIS} is the .pptx that never happened, and {THIS} is the script I was stumbling over. And {THIS} little piggy is the snippet of a cam. copy of The Avengers, with the bit where “everyone” laughs when Thor says “he’s adopted” about Loki.

AMBER ALERT! Missing child snatched!

While this isn’t my re-blog blog, I am re-blogging this particular post as it details the most horrific of crimes, perpetrated by those who are SUPPOSED TO be responsible for protecting the young. The actions demonsrated within this post are abhorrent. For me, today, they are especially appalling, as – for part of my research – I have again been reading some of Nancy Verrier’s words on the neural and limbic connections forming in the newborn, and the necessary dependence of the baby upon its mother.

I simply do not have the words to describe how utterly sickened this action has made me feel, and how horrified I am for the poor baby whose only want, need, and desire is for ITS OWN MOTHER!

This is a heinous crime, perpetuated against one of the youngest members of our planet!!

Staffordshire Social Services

Thi is the picture of  JENNY Sahota social worker waiting in delivery suite to snatch child.      AMBER ALERT mising child snatched from delivery suite at Burton Hospital by Marian Richards et al team denying a child of its breastmilk is against the childs HUMAN RIGHTS justice munby.

View original post