[Parlay44]

Welcome to the New World Order ...it's a Police State out there.

Pregnant woman has unborn baby forcibly removed from her womb by social services

http://metro.co.uk/2013/12/01/pregnant-w...s-4208673/



Social services forcibly sedated a pregnant woman and removed her baby by caesarean section, it has been revealed.

Officials in Essex were granted a court order to take the baby from the Italian woman after she suffered a mental breakdown while in Britain on a work trip.

The council said it was acting in the best interests of the woman.

According to the Sunday Telegraph, social services are refusing to give the baby girl, who is now 15 months old, back to her mother – despite the woman claiming she has recovered.

The case is set to be raised in Parliament next week, with the woman’s lawyers claiming the council should have consulted her family first and Italian social services should have been put in charge of the child.

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, came to Britain last July to attend a training course at Stansted Airport.

During that time she suffered a panic attack, which her family claim was caused by a failure to take medication for her bipolar condition, and after calling the police was taken to hospital.

According to the Telegraph, the woman later tried to return to her hotel but was restrained and sectioned under the Mental Health Act as social services acquired a High Court order to remove her baby.

Brendan Fleming, the woman’s British lawyer, told the newspaper: ‘I have never heard of anything like this in all my 40 years in the job.

‘I can understand if someone is very ill that they may not be able to consent to a medical procedure, but a forced caesarean is unprecedented.

‘If there were concerns about the care of this child by an Italian mother, then the better plan would have been for the authorities here to have notified social services in Italy and for the child to have been taken back there.’

The woman says she was not made aware of what was happening and woke up to find her child had been delivered by caesarean section and taken into care.

A council spokesperson is quoted by the BBC as saying: ‘Essex County Council does not comment on the circumstances of ongoing individual cases involving vulnerable people and children.’

[bojangles]

This was disgraceful. The woman has 2 children already and she was only visiting the country

[Dr. Howard]

The whole story is incredible, most incredible was that she isn't even a UK citizen.

[Flavius Aetius]

When you live in a police state like the UK you better get used to it. This happens in China everyday. Unmarked van comes by, 3-4 men in uniforms pop out abduct a woman on the street or from her house, drug her with sedatives, and take her to a forced abortion clinic. Why? Because she violated the state's one child policy. That is how China treats its slaves. At least the brits are not slaves--yet, just subjects of the crown.

The US is becoming a police state too, but at least the citizens have guns!

[Mikev75]

Doesn't the UK have enough of its own citizens receiving various forms of social services? How badly did they want another kid under state care?If she was really looney, they could have hospitalized her until her relatives could make arrangements to have her sent home or the baby was born naturally, whichever came first.

[runsonmagic]

Jesus, that poor traumatized child.

[eradicator]

Quote:

The woman arrived in England last summer, while pregnant, for a training course at Stansted airport. During her stay she suffered an episode of ill health, and was sectioned.

A judge in the Court of Protection, the routinely secretive court that makes decisions for incapacitated people, ruled in August 2012 that she should undergo the forced caesarean.'

Apparently she had no representation because the court that ordered the c section was a secret court?! I am bipolar, it can be difficult to get refills on meds when I am in another country, but to have her institutionalized and give her a c section without telling her and then take her baby and not give it back seems to be pretty insane. There may be more to the story, they havent released the woman's name, but her lawyer is googlable. Brendan Fleming seems to be a real lawyer at least.

[TheMachinist]

A porn star by the name of Holly Halston had her 2 kids taken from her last year by the UK government while she was just their visiting. Her kids were forcibly removed from her and she nor her kids are UK citizens.The government placed her kids in foster care and they refuse to let her have contact with them.She got in a tiff with one of her teenage daughters because she wouldn't allow the kid to smoke pot.The kid ran to the police and claimed abuse and told them that her mom was an "unfit" mother.The UK .gov realized she was a porn star and declared her unfit to be a mother. She had to come back to the U.S. without her kids and start back doing porn so that she could raise enough money to fight the UK government and try and get her kids back. They won't even tell her where her kids are.She's got no contact with them. When I heard about it I was floored that something like that was even possible.I looked into and the shit is some what common over in the U.K. If you have kids over there and lead a lifestyle that the .gov doesn't agree with no matter if your kids are in danger or not they can and will take them from you.

[stg devil]

(12-03-2013 08:30 PM)TheMachinist Wrote:  

A porn star by the name of Holly Halston had her 2 kids taken from her last year by the UK government while she was just their visiting. Her kids were forcibly removed from her and she nor her kids are UK citizens.The government placed her kids in foster care and they refuse to let her have contact with them.She got in a tiff with one of her teenage daughters because she wouldn't allow the kid to smoke pot.The kid ran to the police and claimed abuse and told them that her mom was an "unfit" mother.The UK .gov realized she was a porn star and declared her unfit to be a mother. She had to come back to the U.S. without her kids and start back doing porn so that she could raise enough money to fight the UK government and try and get her kids back. They won't even tell her where her kids are.She's got no contact with them. When I heard about it I was floored that something like that was even possible.I looked into and the shit is some what common over in the U.K. If you have kids over there and lead a lifestyle that the .gov doesn't agree with no matter if your kids are in danger or not they can and will take them from you.

I'm a fan of her work. I had always wondered why she was off her game after her hiatus post-divorce. This story explains a lot

[Parlay44]

Morality Police. Tell me again how this different from Sharia Law?

[Teutatis]

How is this even legal and can she sue the UK for a bazzillion pounds?

[Glock]

Mind-blowing. This was a crime.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Babies are not living things before they are born so they can be aborted without any qualms, but simultaneously they're living things that need protection from their unfit mothers. Great logic.

[Benoit]

Slightly more nuanced details on the story:
http://heresycorner.blogspot.com/2013/12...y-and.html

I think most social workers in general make the world a worse place, not better, but it's not quite the "police state Britain" story the Mail makes it out to be. There was apparently a good reason for the government to be involved, but the extent of their interference is jaw-dropping. Did they really think that they could do this without reproach? The delusion of these busybodies is sickening.

It definitely highlights the major problems with the secretive family courts in the UK, and their inability to deliver genuine justice.

Quote:

One thing the case does clearly demonstrate is the dangers posed by secrecy in the family courts and in the Court of Protection, not just to the administration of justice but to the reputation of the legal system. Where little is known about what actually takes place behind closed courtroom doors horror stories are apt to spread and to be believed.

Nor are the problems imaginary. President Munby has repeatedly acknowledged the inadequacies of the family courts system and in particular the attitude of some social workers. In one case he noted "the slapdash, lackadaisical and on occasions almost contumelious attitude which still far too frequently characterises the response [by social workers] to orders made by family courts" and complained of "a deeply rooted culture in the family courts which, however long established, will no longer be tolerated". These are strong words indeed: so strong that, had they been voiced by Booker or Hemming a large section of respectable legal opinion would immediately have cried foul. Indeed, an official of the British Association of Social Workers has accused Munby of, among other things, giving encouragement to the Daily Mail. "Lord Justice Munby’s pledge to ensure greater transparency in the family courts has been heralded as a triumph by those opposed to the current restrictions in reporting on care proceedings, but I was left horrified," she complains. One might almost think she had something to hide.