Too Stupid To Have Children.

inforfun · 23-01-2010 12:52PM

Mixed emotions about this.
I am all for taking kids away from parents who can not raise them properly.
But I don't know if that (raising kids) has anything to do with being smart or not.
Social standards are more important in my opinion.
I worry more about kids that are raised by parents that have been in court more often than a normal person goes to the shop than i worry about a kid whose parents might not be the brightest bulbs in the box but at least know the difference between right and wrong.

Prof.Badass · 23-01-2010 02:06PM

Ok, leaving aside the whole question of mentally disabled parents,

What about the father?

Is he mentally disabled too? Doesn't seem to say anything about it in the article. Why does he not have an automatic right to his child?

Could he not just be given sole responsibility of the child?
As an artist he could probably keep his job and work from home.
It seems like a stange move from a state that has no problems fully endorsing single motherhood.

Is there something we're not being told about this story, or is this just evidence of their sexist views on parenting and their complete apathy towards fathers?

Overheal · 23-01-2010 03:15PM

MaybeLogic wrote: »

That's heartbreaking watching that.
I don't see how this is a good decision in any way.
Since when does the level of someones IQ indicate how good or bad they will be at bringing up a child?

Social Welfare Services should be busy enough trying to enforce Reactionary measures: why in this one case are they taking preventative measures? Stinks of something.

Lollymcd · 23-01-2010 04:17PM

vinylmesh wrote: »

What about the father?

As I said earlier, they are not married he has zero rights, social services prevented them from marrying as they claimed the mother could not understand the importance of the ceramony. If they were married the father could have kept the child. He will probably have to go through the courts and provide DNA to attempt to be given custody.

It's very said but perhaps there is more to this case than we will ever know.

Smokenfold · 24-01-2010 01:33PM

Been reading the posts here on Kerry Robertson, interesting mixture of views. UK SS will make things up (has been proven in other cases) in order to get a newborn from it's parents. Infants under 3 are worth ££££s to the authorities, and the targets are always the sick, the vulnerable, and now the so called 'stupid'! Did you know that the UK is the only place that your baby can be removed at birth and put up for adoption, without your say so? This couple are just one of thousands. The media often get slated for publishing 'fairy stories', however, did you know that they have to do their research first...and this case was certainly well researched before the story was told. You are correct in saying there is more to this.....but nothing bad about the parents, just stuff about the SS that the papers cannot print...yet!
There are many who do not deserve to have children, but they will never see the inside of a court or a contact centre. This case is very accurate, the mum has lost her child because they say she has a low IQ....there is nothing hidden. Google 'forced adoption' or try Fran Lyon, Sam Thomas, Mark and Nicki Webster,Angela Wileman....and if that doesn't tell you what the UK social services are capable of, nothing will.

Dudess · 24-01-2010 07:38PM

That's a very sad story.

Although I agree: there's surely more to it. The exclusion of the father is depressing too - that's how things are for unmarried fathers unfortunately.

sherdydan · 24-01-2010 08:05PM

in fairness she does seem as thick as f**k, a 25 year old knockin up a 17 year old is a bit sick. so i think the social services are right. I agree that in reality she could be fairly able to take care of the child and all the rest, but if anything happened, it would be uproar about why this child wasnt taken into custody.

Dudess · 24-01-2010 08:17PM

Nothing sick about it - she's not underage and that really shouldn't have any bearing on the social services' decision.

I'm just surprised a lack of stupidity is considered a prerequisite to be a fit parent. First I've heard of it, to be honest. The couple must be in an awful state - poor things.

AckwelFoley · 24-01-2010 08:21PM

who's to judge?

and where is the line drawn?

sherdydan · 24-01-2010 08:21PM

just because shes not underage, and legally all is fine, i think personally its disgraceful. I personally cant say that these people could or couldnt raise a child, but they're obviously a higher risk of taking bad care of the child than the norms of society therefore the child should be taken. As i said previously, there would be some uproar if something did happen to the child!

Lola92 · 24-01-2010 08:30PM

sherdydan wrote: »

in fairness she does seem as thick as f**k, a 25 year old knockin up a 17 year old is a bit sick. so i think the social services are right. I agree that in reality she could be fairly able to take care of the child and all the rest, but if anything happened, it would be uproar about why this child wasnt taken into custody.

sherdydan I really don't see how you or anyone else can make that assumption, especially based on a clip on youtube where there is such little insight to the person involved.
She was clearly distraught in any case so its hardly be the ideal time to asses anyone, learning disabilitiy or no learning disability.

An 8 year age gap is hardly the end of the world is it?:rolleyes:

IMO this woman seems to have the full support of her partner, who will be able to help her, as any partner should, in raising their child together.

Regardless, I think the splitting up of any family unit is upsetting. Especially in a case like this where it seems unjustified.

If they had been allowed to marry in the first instance then this situation would never have occurred. The father would have a piece of paper to give him custody rights, not that he should need it but that story is for a whole other post.:(:mad:

Smokenfold · 24-01-2010 08:31PM

Just wondering what it is about Kerry that prompts you to say she is thick as **** ....

Dudess · 24-01-2010 08:35PM

sherdydan wrote: »

As i said previously, there would be some uproar if something did happen to the child!

Well obviously - that would be the case no matter who the parents were.

sherdydan · 24-01-2010 08:37PM

lola92, an 8 year age gap is not that big is it not? well then i guess it would be perfectly fine for a 16 year old to head down the playground and pick himself up a few 8 year olds.

and what you ask makes me think shes thick? well firstly she has a learning disability and secondly from those 2 seconds of speach on that youtube clip you can see the labour that was actually required for her to blurt out a few words. i swear to god political correctness is ruining the world!

Smokenfold · 24-01-2010 08:42PM

The girl had problems with speech as a kid, that doesn't make her thick...was a physical thing not mental.

January · 24-01-2010 08:43PM

sherdydan wrote: »

lola92, an 8 year age gap is not that big is it not? well then i guess it would be perfectly fine for a 16 year old to head down the playground and pick himself up a few 8 year olds.

and what you ask makes me think shes thick? well firstly she has a learning disability and secondly from those 2 seconds of speach on that youtube clip you can see the labour that was actually required for her to blurt out a few words. i swear to god political correctness is ruining the world!

No, because that would be illegal. Do you reckon my ten year age gap with my partner and our one year old child is sick too? Or is it just because she has a learning difficulty that it's sick?

Your arguement is very very flawed.

Dudess · 24-01-2010 08:44PM

sherdydan wrote: »

i swear to god political correctness is ruining the world!

/bangs head against desk repeatedly

That is not why people are questioning the decision to take the baby away...

I swear to god: lack of compassion ("because that's for PC weaklings") is ruining the world!

MaybeLogic · 24-01-2010 08:49PM

sherdydan wrote: »

lola92, an 8 year age gap is not that big is it not? well then i guess it would be perfectly fine for a 16 year old to head down the playground and pick himself up a few 8 year olds.

and what you ask makes me think shes thick? well firstly she has a learning disability and secondly from those 2 seconds of speach on that youtube clip you can see the labour that was actually required for her to blurt out a few words. i swear to god political correctness is ruining the world!

The 8 year old gap between 16 and 8 year olds is cavernous compared to that between 17 and 25 year olds.
The girl in the video seems rather emotional about the expected loss of the child within her womb and perhaps this is a factor in her mode of speech.

Lola92 · 24-01-2010 08:51PM

sherdydan wrote: »

lola92, an 8 year age gap is not that big is it not? well then i guess it would be perfectly fine for a 16 year old to head down the playground and pick himself up a few 8 year olds.

and what you ask makes me think shes thick? well firstly she has a learning disability and secondly from those 2 seconds of speach on that youtube clip you can see the labour that was actually required for her to blurt out a few words. i swear to god political correctness is ruining the world!

Thats a great way to put it yea...:rolleyes: An age gap in a relationship is hardy the same as paedophilia tbh.

A learning difficulty, by the way can be classed as anything from very mild dyslexia to severe autism or downs syndrome. There have been no details that I can find saying how severe or otherwise this womans 'disability' is.

Surely no psychologist, even one as talented as yourself, would dream of assessing someone in her current state of mind (thinking of having her child taken away from her) exclusively from a few seconds of video tape?

sherdydan · 24-01-2010 08:54PM

adrieanne__x wrote: »

No, because that would be illegal. Do you reckon my ten year age gap with my partner and our one year old child is sick too? Or is it just because she has a learning difficulty that it's sick?

Your arguement is very very flawed.

so you judge sickness on whether or not the act is ilegal? no i am not saying that an 8 year gap is always terrible... i am just saying that its not always right either. eg, my original 8-16 thing is wrong but say a 25-35 both people are mature enough etc. im saying the age gap is a bit young as although she is almost an adult in the eyes of the law, in reality people are still maturing from 17-25. you adrieanne seem to be working just on black and white areas, while forgetting there is a grey area also.

sherdydan · 24-01-2010 08:57PM

Lola92 wrote: »

Surely no psychologist, even one as talented as yourself, would dream of assessing someone in her current state of mind (thinking of having her child taken away from her) exclusively from a few seconds of video tape?

its the only bit of evidence we have im afraid! But i am quite confident in my own talent and experience thank you very very much!

Ickle Magoo · 24-01-2010 09:06PM

sherdydan wrote: »

....they're obviously a higher risk of taking bad care of the child than the norms of society therefore the child should be taken....

Are you seriously suggesting that everyone social services deems to be at higher risk of "taking bad care" of a child should have their child forcibly removed at birth? Not to wait and see if they actually are "taking bad care", just assume that only people within a particular IQ range are going to be able to care for a child and anyone outside that range has their child forcibly adopted without ever being given the chance to prove what kind of parent they would make? :eek:

the_syco · 24-01-2010 09:07PM

sherdydan wrote: »

in fairness she does seem as thick as f**k, a 25 year old knockin up a 17 year old is a bit sick.

Depends how you look at it. 9 months ago, she may have been 16. This would be seen as statutory rape in some countries.

IMO "mild learning difficulties" really does mean sweet f**k all: what is "mild"? ANd how does this stop ger from being capable as a parent?

I wonder are the SS in the UK going by a report done, and deemed her unfit as a parent due to past problems with other people that have "mild learning difficulties" who tried to raise their kids by themselves?

Smokenfold · 24-01-2010 09:28PM

Lola92 wrote: »

Thats a great way to put it yea...:rolleyes: An age gap in a relationship is hardy the same as paedophilia tbh.

A learning difficulty, by the way can be classed as anything from very mild dyslexia to severe autism or downs syndrome. There have been no details that I can find saying how severe or otherwise this womans 'disability' is.

Surely no psychologist, even one as talented as yourself, would dream of assessing someone in her current state of mind (thinking of having her child taken away from her) exclusively from a few seconds of video tape?

The young lady had a cleft palette, her speech didn't make the usual progress as a child...other than that she is fine and far from thick.

Mrmoe · 24-01-2010 09:36PM

It is stories like this that make me wonder if public officials were purely created to screw people over. We may be missing a lot of facts but on the surface and looking at what is presented social services look like very sadistic and cruel.

Lollymcd · 24-01-2010 10:16PM

I don't really want to turn this into a rant against social services but I'm aware of several children who have been reported to social srvices a number of times as being at risk under the HSE's own Children First guidelines and nothing has been done about it. I admit I don't know EVERYTHING about this case but on the surface it would appear to me to be a disgrace.

Wagon · 25-01-2010 12:44AM

When they were here they were getting a place to live, he has a job, she was going to the doctors for checkups, they had clothes for the baby, support from the family at home etc... To be honest, they seem like pretty compitant parents from those actions alone. And she seems normal from the video, apart from the speech being a tad slow but then that doesn't neccessarily have to equate to mental dificincies...

I mean according to the internet my IQ is 115 and i cant sleep anything with more than 4 syllables.

There has to be more to this. If not then social services have a lot to answer for.

Lab_Mouse · 25-01-2010 12:56AM

sherdydan wrote: »

so you judge sickness on whether or not the act is ilegal? no i am not saying that an 8 year gap is always terrible... i am just saying that its not always right either. eg, my original 8-16 thing is wrong but say a 25-35 both people are mature enough etc. im saying the age gap is a bit young as although she is almost an adult in the eyes of the law, in reality people are still maturing from 17-25. you adrieanne seem to be working just on black and white areas, while forgetting there is a grey area also.

You are talking through your arse:rolleyes:

Dudess · 25-01-2010 01:07AM

sherdydan wrote: »

you adrieanne seem to be working just on black and white areas, while forgetting there is a grey area also.

It's funny you should say that...

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 25-01-2010 03:39AM

Jay P wrote: »

Heartless social workers?
They're doing the child some good by taking him/her away from a Mother who doesn't have the mental capacity to raise him/her properly.

Who are you to say she doesn't have the mental capacity to raise the child properly? You seem to be the only one who has come to an absolute conclusion, because the SS still have to decide.

Dudess wrote: »

That's a very sad story.

Although I agree: there's surely more to it. The exclusion of the father is depressing too - that's how things are for unmarried fathers unfortunately.

The power of the church still has us by the balls... Scum of the earth they are...

sherdydan wrote: »

in fairness she does seem as thick as f**k, a 25 year old knockin up a 17 year old is a bit sick. so i think the social services are right. I agree that in reality she could be fairly able to take care of the child and all the rest, but if anything happened, it would be uproar about why this child wasnt taken into custody.

Are you taking the piss? Nothing wrong with a 25 year old and a 17 year old... Nor does she seem thick as fcuk...

sherdydan wrote: »

so you judge sickness on whether or not the act is ilegal? no i am not saying that an 8 year gap is always terrible... i am just saying that its not always right either. eg, my original 8-16 thing is wrong but say a 25-35 both people are mature enough etc. im saying the age gap is a bit young as although she is almost an adult in the eyes of the law, in reality people are still maturing from 17-25. you adrieanne seem to be working just on black and white areas, while forgetting there is a grey area also.

You have made the dumbest analogy I have ever seen.

Too Stupid To Have Children.

Comments