Runaway mum raps social services over womb baby snatch

Echo: Michelle Kelly Michelle Kelly

A RUNAWAY Essex mum has slammed social services for “forcibly removing” a baby from its mother’s womb.

Michelle Kelly, 28, who fled to Scotland to stop social workers taking her child, waded into the row engulfing Essex County Council yesterday.

Essex social workers have come under fire after they btained a High Court order to deliver a 35-year-old Italian woman’s baby by Caesarean section last August because of “risks to mother and child”.

The woman, who was training for an airline job at Stansted Airport, had been under the care of a health trust for two months after suffering a mental breakdown, but the order was still granted by Judge Roderick Newton, who ruled the baby girl should be put up for adoption.

Miss Kelly, from Laindon, fled with her year-old son when the same judge granted Essex social services an order to take him into care.

She was tracked down by police and arrested for keeping a child away from their responsible person, and handed a 12-month community order.

Miss Kelly is now appealing to the Royal Courts of Justice to stop her son being put up for adoption.

She said: “When I heard about the case, I couldn’t believe it. It’s sick to do that. Not only was she mentally unstable, but she had also been sedated. It’s just wrong.

“I would say to anyone dealing with social services to keep a record of everything, because they will use anything against you.

“The solicitor handling my appeal told me about this woman because it’s the same judge who took my little boy away from me.

“I’m hoping this will stand in my favour, because it shows he is too harsh and makes really bad decisions.”

The country’s top family court judge, Sir James Munby, president of the FamilyDivision of the High Court, also wants more answers on the case and said any further adoption proceedings should be heard before him.

The council claims social workers spoke to family members in Italy before they decided to put the girl up for adoption.

An Essex County Council spokesman said: “The long-term safety and well-being of children is always Essex County Council’s priority.

Adoption is never considered until we have exhausted all other options and is never pursued lightly.”

Comments (32)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:18am Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

Why should we give a **** about the opinion of a terrible ex-mother who broke multiple agreements she had that would have allowed her to keep her kid?

Two cases where social services are getting it right, despite being hugely underfunded.
Why should we give a **** about the opinion of a terrible ex-mother who broke multiple agreements she had that would have allowed her to keep her kid? Two cases where social services are getting it right, despite being hugely underfunded. returnoftheleftie

11:00am Thu 5 Dec 13

annon09 says...

Get your facts right, she is not an ex-mother! And she is entitled to an opinion just the same as anyone else!
Get your facts right, she is not an ex-mother! And she is entitled to an opinion just the same as anyone else! annon09

11:20am Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

annon09 wrote:
Get your facts right, she is not an ex-mother! And she is entitled to an opinion just the same as anyone else!
She gave up on that when she couldn't keep to the agreements she made for the kids safety. She was warned, multiple times of what would happen, so the kid was removed for their safety.

Being a mother isn't just popping out a kid, it's being able to look after it.

Ex. Mother.
[quote][p][bold]annon09[/bold] wrote: Get your facts right, she is not an ex-mother! And she is entitled to an opinion just the same as anyone else![/p][/quote]She gave up on that when she couldn't keep to the agreements she made for the kids safety. She was warned, multiple times of what would happen, so the kid was removed for their safety. Being a mother isn't just popping out a kid, it's being able to look after it. Ex. Mother. returnoftheleftie

11:26am Thu 5 Dec 13

annon09 says...

How would you know that 'she was warned, multiple times of what would happen'?
How would you know that 'she was warned, multiple times of what would happen'? annon09

11:37am Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

annon09 wrote:
How would you know that 'she was warned, multiple times of what would happen'?
....because social services don't have the power to take kids away on a whim, and the details of the case were made apparent though the media, including her taking the kid to see her criminal boyfriend, who then posted pics of it online?
[quote][p][bold]annon09[/bold] wrote: How would you know that 'she was warned, multiple times of what would happen'?[/p][/quote]....because social services don't have the power to take kids away on a whim, and the details of the case were made apparent though the media, including her taking the kid to see her criminal boyfriend, who then posted pics of it online? returnoftheleftie

1:39pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EthanEdwards says...

The moral of these tales is that the state is not now and never will be your friend. Limit your interaction with it accordingly.
The moral of these tales is that the state is not now and never will be your friend. Limit your interaction with it accordingly. EthanEdwards

2:41pm Thu 5 Dec 13

michelle1234 says...

i am michelle i did not brake any arements there was 1 in pace witch says its up 2 me who has contact with jaden at the time thay just used it against me
i am michelle i did not brake any arements there was 1 in pace witch says its up 2 me who has contact with jaden at the time thay just used it against me michelle1234

2:53pm Thu 5 Dec 13

michelle1234 says...

i dont know who you are but you need to get your facts right ive found out about 4 other cases where the ss have taken babies away all there interested in getting thousandsof pounds for each babys i no of 4 but how many thosand of children have they taken who noone knows about with there closed courts and whos getting back handers to put it through i think basildon and essex ss should be exposed because they are all corrupt they take well loved children but not the children being abused and killed all because it is to much work for them
i dont know who you are but you need to get your facts right ive found out about 4 other cases where the ss have taken babies away all there interested in getting thousandsof pounds for each babys i no of 4 but how many thosand of children have they taken who noone knows about with there closed courts and whos getting back handers to put it through i think basildon and essex ss should be exposed because they are all corrupt they take well loved children but not the children being abused and killed all because it is to much work for them michelle1234

2:56pm Thu 5 Dec 13

stu22222 says...

As an adoptive parent, I have a pretty sound understanding of the types of backgrounds that children in foster care and adoption have.
Having personally dealt with Essex Social Services Adoption and fostering team these guys have an enormously challenging job. poorly reported media coverage such as this isn’t constructive or truly represented (there is no details on why Miss Kellys child was removed and has not been reintroduced to date).
There is always a very sound reason why a child is either in foster care or awaiting a forever family (adoption). It has to be really bad to remove a child from their birth family. The support and chances birth family’s get is enormous also there is always a sound rational to removed a child (no one person is involved in the recommendation) which is agreed by a court
Her appeal to challenge the adoption is likely to lack any credibility. I really feel sorry for Miss Kelly son and I hope that he is able to be placed in a stable family as soon as possible.
Social Services aren’t in the business of removing looked after children from their parents if it is not absolutely essential .
As an adoptive parent, I have a pretty sound understanding of the types of backgrounds that children in foster care and adoption have. Having personally dealt with Essex Social Services Adoption and fostering team these guys have an enormously challenging job. poorly reported media coverage such as this isn’t constructive or truly represented (there is no details on why Miss Kellys child was removed and has not been reintroduced to date). There is always a very sound reason why a child is either in foster care or awaiting a forever family (adoption). It has to be really bad to remove a child from their birth family. The support and chances birth family’s get is enormous also there is always a sound rational to removed a child (no one person is involved in the recommendation) which is agreed by a court Her appeal to challenge the adoption is likely to lack any credibility. I really feel sorry for Miss Kelly son and I hope that he is able to be placed in a stable family as soon as possible. Social Services aren’t in the business of removing looked after children from their parents if it is not absolutely essential . stu22222

3:18pm Thu 5 Dec 13

michelle1234 says...

all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money
all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money michelle1234

3:19pm Thu 5 Dec 13

michelle1234 says...

all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money
all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money michelle1234

3:19pm Thu 5 Dec 13

michelle1234 says...

all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money
all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money michelle1234

3:48pm Thu 5 Dec 13

stu22222 says...

I’m sorry, it’s really difficult to understand your dialect. If I’m understanding correct correctly, your saying that fleeing with your son was a positive thing and that this was done with good intentions. I don’t see how that is possible.

Your son was going to be removed because his basic needs were not being met. Fleeing to Scotland wouldnt have addressed the issues Social Services had/have.

The fact the father is not around is not an excuse, as a parent your responsible for meeting your child needs.
I’m sorry, it’s really difficult to understand your dialect. If I’m understanding correct correctly, your saying that fleeing with your son was a positive thing and that this was done with good intentions. I don’t see how that is possible. Your son was going to be removed because his basic needs were not being met. Fleeing to Scotland wouldnt have addressed the issues Social Services had/have. The fact the father is not around is not an excuse, as a parent your responsible for meeting your child needs. stu22222

4:00pm Thu 5 Dec 13

michelle kelly says...

No his needs were ment have u not read the paper my judgement was read out in court if u cant read I thinku should seek help
No his needs were ment have u not read the paper my judgement was read out in court if u cant read I thinku should seek help michelle kelly

4:29pm Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

The dad was not meant to have contact, but you arranged to meet him in London regardless, and lost him, not just due to this, also your previous history of being unsuitable due to drug abuse, and not meeting his needs. You then essentially kidnapped him, again, against the court order, and once caught (probably against the advice of your solicitor) initially claimed you weren't guilty, despite being caught redhanded by Scottish police.

Futhermore, you claim that social services have some kind of profit motive in all this, despite them being desperate for cash, and having to follow an incredibly detailed process to remove a child from a family.

I'm glad your former child will get the chances you obviously weren't offered.
The dad was not meant to have contact, but you arranged to meet him in London regardless, and lost him, not just due to this, also your previous history of being unsuitable due to drug abuse, and not meeting his needs. You then essentially kidnapped him, again, against the court order, and once caught (probably against the advice of your solicitor) initially claimed you weren't guilty, despite being caught redhanded by Scottish police. Futhermore, you claim that social services have some kind of profit motive in all this, despite them being desperate for cash, and having to follow an incredibly detailed process to remove a child from a family. I'm glad your former child will get the chances you obviously weren't offered. returnoftheleftie

4:41pm Thu 5 Dec 13

Tich25 says...

No matter what the Social Services do they are always in the wrong. Baby P shows where action should have been taken but werent So when is it right to take action
No matter what the Social Services do they are always in the wrong. Baby P shows where action should have been taken but werent So when is it right to take action Tich25

4:50pm Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

For those interested in the Italian case, you can read through the judges notes here

http://www.judiciary
.gov.uk/Resources/JC
O/Documents/Judgment
s/re-aa-approved-jud
gment.pdf

which explains in full the situation, and dispels a lot of the tabloid nonsense.
For those interested in the Italian case, you can read through the judges notes here http://www.judiciary .gov.uk/Resources/JC O/Documents/Judgment s/re-aa-approved-jud gment.pdf which explains in full the situation, and dispels a lot of the tabloid nonsense. returnoftheleftie

4:53pm Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

Tich25 wrote:
No matter what the Social Services do they are always in the wrong. Baby P shows where action should have been taken but werent So when is it right to take action
The inquiry found that most of the problems in that case came from underfunding and lack of workers to deal with it

http://dera.ioe.ac.u
k/8646/1/12_03_09_ch
ildren.pdf
[quote][p][bold]Tich25[/bold] wrote: No matter what the Social Services do they are always in the wrong. Baby P shows where action should have been taken but werent So when is it right to take action[/p][/quote]The inquiry found that most of the problems in that case came from underfunding and lack of workers to deal with it http://dera.ioe.ac.u k/8646/1/12_03_09_ch ildren.pdf returnoftheleftie

4:59pm Thu 5 Dec 13

angryofessex says...

michelle1234 wrote:
all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money
What?
[quote][p][bold]michelle1234[/bold] wrote: all michelles reports say she is a more than good mum so whats ur point now she did every thing 2 stop them takeing the baby if she was that bad of a mum y would she flee with out the baby dad dosent that tell u she didnt want him haveing nuffing 2 do with him she tolled him he wasnt the dad 4 over a year so he stayed out of my life but no ss had 2 keep pushing him 2 **** forward 4 a dna if thay had left him alone he wouldnt of turned up on a family day out coz he would of still belived he wasnt the dad so no thay take kids who r happy helfey 2 put with ppl who r in it for the money[/p][/quote]What? angryofessex

6:11pm Thu 5 Dec 13

abd123 says...

It has been widely reported that the application for a Court order to have a caesarean was made by the health authority on medical grounds. If a Court after hearing evidence from the Doctors and representatives for the woman find an order is necessary that is an independent opnion from the court not from Social Services. If a woman with mental problems won't consent to essential treatment for her and the baby how else could it be dealt with?
It has been widely reported that the application for a Court order to have a caesarean was made by the health authority on medical grounds. If a Court after hearing evidence from the Doctors and representatives for the woman find an order is necessary that is an independent opnion from the court not from Social Services. If a woman with mental problems won't consent to essential treatment for her and the baby how else could it be dealt with? abd123

7:57pm Thu 5 Dec 13

StopForcedAdoption says...

Essex social services did exactly the same to me and my 3 children it is far more common than you think. Thanks to the 'secret family courts' gagging mothers so they can't speak out the general public don't hear about it. Take some time instead of spouting rubbish in your comments on here and google 'forced adoption' and 'essex social services corrupt'. Don't get me wrong it isn't only Essex social services it happens all over the UK. Essex are by far one of the worst though. The only cases we hear about unfortunately are sensationalized to sell newspapers it doesn't reflect what really happens because those mothers do not get the chance to speak.
You don't need to be the scum of the earth to have social services remove your children in most cases you don't even need to do anything wrong.
Essex social services working on their bonuses for children adopted, I don't know how they sleep at night.
Essex social services did exactly the same to me and my 3 children it is far more common than you think. Thanks to the 'secret family courts' gagging mothers so they can't speak out the general public don't hear about it. Take some time instead of spouting rubbish in your comments on here and google 'forced adoption' and 'essex social services corrupt'. Don't get me wrong it isn't only Essex social services it happens all over the UK. Essex are by far one of the worst though. The only cases we hear about unfortunately are sensationalized to sell newspapers it doesn't reflect what really happens because those mothers do not get the chance to speak. You don't need to be the scum of the earth to have social services remove your children in most cases you don't even need to do anything wrong. Essex social services working on their bonuses for children adopted, I don't know how they sleep at night. StopForcedAdoption

8:23pm Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

StopForcedAdoption wrote:
Essex social services did exactly the same to me and my 3 children it is far more common than you think. Thanks to the 'secret family courts' gagging mothers so they can't speak out the general public don't hear about it. Take some time instead of spouting rubbish in your comments on here and google 'forced adoption' and 'essex social services corrupt'. Don't get me wrong it isn't only Essex social services it happens all over the UK. Essex are by far one of the worst though. The only cases we hear about unfortunately are sensationalized to sell newspapers it doesn't reflect what really happens because those mothers do not get the chance to speak.
You don't need to be the scum of the earth to have social services remove your children in most cases you don't even need to do anything wrong.
Essex social services working on their bonuses for children adopted, I don't know how they sleep at night.
What, you were a heavy drug user with abusive partners who repeatedly went against the clear instructions of the court to the point of kidnapping, or were you a person suffering a mental health breakdown to the point of absolute psychosis, both of whom were assessed by multiple, independent professional bodies as incapable of due care and posed a risk to the child?

I'm guessing that's a no? Probably not wise to claim they did exactly the same to you.
[quote][p][bold]StopForcedAdoption[/bold] wrote: Essex social services did exactly the same to me and my 3 children it is far more common than you think. Thanks to the 'secret family courts' gagging mothers so they can't speak out the general public don't hear about it. Take some time instead of spouting rubbish in your comments on here and google 'forced adoption' and 'essex social services corrupt'. Don't get me wrong it isn't only Essex social services it happens all over the UK. Essex are by far one of the worst though. The only cases we hear about unfortunately are sensationalized to sell newspapers it doesn't reflect what really happens because those mothers do not get the chance to speak. You don't need to be the scum of the earth to have social services remove your children in most cases you don't even need to do anything wrong. Essex social services working on their bonuses for children adopted, I don't know how they sleep at night.[/p][/quote]What, you were a heavy drug user with abusive partners who repeatedly went against the clear instructions of the court to the point of kidnapping, or were you a person suffering a mental health breakdown to the point of absolute psychosis, both of whom were assessed by multiple, independent professional bodies as incapable of due care and posed a risk to the child? I'm guessing that's a no? Probably not wise to claim they did exactly the same to you. returnoftheleftie

8:50pm Thu 5 Dec 13

StopForcedAdoption says...

No of course not. Forced Adoption is a massive massive issue though, and it is only when crap like this is splashed across the papers that people really take notice of anything.
Social services have ruined my life, I just hope that my children;s adoptive family don't ruin their lives too.
2 years on and I put a brave face on every day and I go to work and try and act like nothing has happened, as soon as that front door shuts and I'm safe away from anyone that is going to ask me 'are you ok?' I break down, I'm an emotional mess who doesn't know how to deal with the fact that Essex social services came in to my home for no reason at all and removed my children made it IMPOSSIBLE for me to attend court so that they won by default. Dragged it on so long that they took all the fight I had left in me out.
Losing your children to forced adoption is like bereavement only at least you know when someone dies they have gone and are not coming back, this is so much worse because I know my babies are out there and I can't see them, I can't hug them, I can't kiss them goodnight but somebody else is out there doing it playing 'mummy' to my children that pain words can not describe it.
The woman in this article may have done wrong, but that is no reason to put her down, I can guarantee if she really cared for her child at all the pain it is causing her not having that child with her is going to far out weigh anything that anyone on here is going to say to her. And if she doesn't do you really think she is going to care what you say anyway?
No of course not. Forced Adoption is a massive massive issue though, and it is only when crap like this is splashed across the papers that people really take notice of anything. Social services have ruined my life, I just hope that my children;s adoptive family don't ruin their lives too. 2 years on and I put a brave face on every day and I go to work and try and act like nothing has happened, as soon as that front door shuts and I'm safe away from anyone that is going to ask me 'are you ok?' I break down, I'm an emotional mess who doesn't know how to deal with the fact that Essex social services came in to my home for no reason at all and removed my children made it IMPOSSIBLE for me to attend court so that they won by default. Dragged it on so long that they took all the fight I had left in me out. Losing your children to forced adoption is like bereavement only at least you know when someone dies they have gone and are not coming back, this is so much worse because I know my babies are out there and I can't see them, I can't hug them, I can't kiss them goodnight but somebody else is out there doing it playing 'mummy' to my children that pain words can not describe it. The woman in this article may have done wrong, but that is no reason to put her down, I can guarantee if she really cared for her child at all the pain it is causing her not having that child with her is going to far out weigh anything that anyone on here is going to say to her. And if she doesn't do you really think she is going to care what you say anyway? StopForcedAdoption

8:53pm Thu 5 Dec 13

StopForcedAdoption says...

One thing I would be intrigued to know is how this woman or the Echo have been allowed for this to be printed. In every court order there is a clause that it is not to be discussed outside of the parties in the proceedings. Breach of this is a criminal offence and can impose imprisonment.
I know personally I was too scared to tell anyone, anything as I didn't want to ruin any chance I had of getting my babies back....
One thing I would be intrigued to know is how this woman or the Echo have been allowed for this to be printed. In every court order there is a clause that it is not to be discussed outside of the parties in the proceedings. Breach of this is a criminal offence and can impose imprisonment. I know personally I was too scared to tell anyone, anything as I didn't want to ruin any chance I had of getting my babies back.... StopForcedAdoption

9:02pm Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

It's two obvious cases where, despite media attention, social services have gotten it right- I can't really comment on your case because I don't know the details, the other two are very clearcut cases, backed by evidence. I don't really care what she thinks or feels, I care about what the facts are, and how irrelevant her opinions are regarding the case due to the circumstances.
It's two obvious cases where, despite media attention, social services have gotten it right- I can't really comment on your case because I don't know the details, the other two are very clearcut cases, backed by evidence. I don't really care what she thinks or feels, I care about what the facts are, and how irrelevant her opinions are regarding the case due to the circumstances. returnoftheleftie

9:05pm Thu 5 Dec 13

returnoftheleftie says...

StopForcedAdoption wrote:
One thing I would be intrigued to know is how this woman or the Echo have been allowed for this to be printed. In every court order there is a clause that it is not to be discussed outside of the parties in the proceedings. Breach of this is a criminal offence and can impose imprisonment.
I know personally I was too scared to tell anyone, anything as I didn't want to ruin any chance I had of getting my babies back....
From a previous echo article:

" THE Echo successfully challenged a gagging order preventing the identification of Michelle Kelly and her son.

Magistrates tried to ban naming one-year-old Jaden, under Section 39 of the Children and Young Person’s Act 1933.

However, they did not have grounds to do so.

The Echo argued against the order, saying Jaden’s details and photograph were already in the public domain, Jaden was too young to be adversely affected by any publicity, and it suppressed Kelly’s right to freedom of expression.

After five minutes considering the Echo’s case, magistrates’ decided they would not enforce the order. "
[quote][p][bold]StopForcedAdoption[/bold] wrote: One thing I would be intrigued to know is how this woman or the Echo have been allowed for this to be printed. In every court order there is a clause that it is not to be discussed outside of the parties in the proceedings. Breach of this is a criminal offence and can impose imprisonment. I know personally I was too scared to tell anyone, anything as I didn't want to ruin any chance I had of getting my babies back....[/p][/quote]From a previous echo article: " THE Echo successfully challenged a gagging order preventing the identification of Michelle Kelly and her son. Magistrates tried to ban naming one-year-old Jaden, under Section 39 of the Children and Young Person’s Act 1933. However, they did not have grounds to do so. The Echo argued against the order, saying Jaden’s details and photograph were already in the public domain, Jaden was too young to be adversely affected by any publicity, and it suppressed Kelly’s right to freedom of expression. After five minutes considering the Echo’s case, magistrates’ decided they would not enforce the order. " returnoftheleftie

10:25pm Thu 5 Dec 13

Joe Burns says...

stu22222 wrote:
As an adoptive parent, I have a pretty sound understanding of the types of backgrounds that children in foster care and adoption have.
Having personally dealt with Essex Social Services Adoption and fostering team these guys have an enormously challenging job. poorly reported media coverage such as this isn’t constructive or truly represented (there is no details on why Miss Kellys child was removed and has not been reintroduced to date).
There is always a very sound reason why a child is either in foster care or awaiting a forever family (adoption). It has to be really bad to remove a child from their birth family. The support and chances birth family’s get is enormous also there is always a sound rational to removed a child (no one person is involved in the recommendation) which is agreed by a court
Her appeal to challenge the adoption is likely to lack any credibility. I really feel sorry for Miss Kelly son and I hope that he is able to be placed in a stable family as soon as possible.
Social Services aren’t in the business of removing looked after children from their parents if it is not absolutely essential .
As an adoptive parent, you listen to the lies and exaggerations of social workers to soothe you own conscience at having stolen someone else's child.

You can lie to yourself and say you chose the child, but the child had no choice in the matter, but as long as you got what you want. Many adopted children reject their "Parents" and they wont thank you for raising them, the child lost an entire family.

As someone who works with parents falsely accused of abuse or neglect, I can say that you are delusional. You think that there are "always sound reasons"? 70% of cases are based on "Risk of Future Emotional Abuse", or as John Hemming MP calls it, "The Thought Police approach to protecting children".

How about the mother whom John Hemming MP spoke about in Parliament, that she was being punished for her political beliefs. http://www.express.c
o.uk/news/uk/327086/
Why-try-to-take-baby
-from-EDL-mother-but
-not-from-terrorists Her crime? she attended an EDL rally as a teenager, yes, her baby as adopted.

Or Tim Yeo MP, I have met this family who now live in Spain with their son, safe from the clutches of child kidnappers. http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=OQxnGxbil
dM

How about Fran Lyon who received a letter from a social worker whom she never met, saying that when her baby was born would be taken for adoption? http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
511633/I-flee-Britai
n-stop-baby-snatched
-State.html

I could post thousands of these stories but I doubt you would read them. What you should read about is how many grieving mothers and fathers of stolen children have committed suicide. http://www.originsns
w.com/mentalhealth/i
d2.html

You should definitely read about the suicide rate in adopted children being very significantly higher. http://www.firstmoth
erforum.com/2013/09/
adoptees-more-likely
-to-commit-suicide.h
tml

Did your "sound understanding" stretch to the fact that councils have targets to meet in order to get funding? http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
511609/How-social-se
rvices-paid-bonuses-
snatch-babies-adopti
on.html

Did they tell you that 1 in 4 adoptions break-down and the children rejected by their "parents" end up in the "Care" system. http://www.adoptionh
ealing.com/ADOPTION%
20MYTHS%20&%20FACTS-
1.htm

I think you have been fed a lot of &%$))& and you only have yourself to blame for listening to the lies and exaggerations and not doing your on research. Try www.Forced-Adoption.
com
[quote][p][bold]stu22222[/bold] wrote: As an adoptive parent, I have a pretty sound understanding of the types of backgrounds that children in foster care and adoption have. Having personally dealt with Essex Social Services Adoption and fostering team these guys have an enormously challenging job. poorly reported media coverage such as this isn’t constructive or truly represented (there is no details on why Miss Kellys child was removed and has not been reintroduced to date). There is always a very sound reason why a child is either in foster care or awaiting a forever family (adoption). It has to be really bad to remove a child from their birth family. The support and chances birth family’s get is enormous also there is always a sound rational to removed a child (no one person is involved in the recommendation) which is agreed by a court Her appeal to challenge the adoption is likely to lack any credibility. I really feel sorry for Miss Kelly son and I hope that he is able to be placed in a stable family as soon as possible. Social Services aren’t in the business of removing looked after children from their parents if it is not absolutely essential .[/p][/quote]As an adoptive parent, you listen to the lies and exaggerations of social workers to soothe you own conscience at having stolen someone else's child. You can lie to yourself and say you chose the child, but the child had no choice in the matter, but as long as you got what you want. Many adopted children reject their "Parents" and they wont thank you for raising them, the child lost an entire family. As someone who works with parents falsely accused of abuse or neglect, I can say that you are delusional. You think that there are "always sound reasons"? 70% of cases are based on "Risk of Future Emotional Abuse", or as John Hemming MP calls it, "The Thought Police approach to protecting children". How about the mother whom John Hemming MP spoke about in Parliament, that she was being punished for her political beliefs. http://www.express.c o.uk/news/uk/327086/ Why-try-to-take-baby -from-EDL-mother-but -not-from-terrorists Her crime? she attended an EDL rally as a teenager, yes, her baby as adopted. Or Tim Yeo MP, I have met this family who now live in Spain with their son, safe from the clutches of child kidnappers. http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=OQxnGxbil dM How about Fran Lyon who received a letter from a social worker whom she never met, saying that when her baby was born would be taken for adoption? http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 511633/I-flee-Britai n-stop-baby-snatched -State.html I could post thousands of these stories but I doubt you would read them. What you should read about is how many grieving mothers and fathers of stolen children have committed suicide. http://www.originsns w.com/mentalhealth/i d2.html You should definitely read about the suicide rate in adopted children being very significantly higher. http://www.firstmoth erforum.com/2013/09/ adoptees-more-likely -to-commit-suicide.h tml Did your "sound understanding" stretch to the fact that councils have targets to meet in order to get funding? http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 511609/How-social-se rvices-paid-bonuses- snatch-babies-adopti on.html Did they tell you that 1 in 4 adoptions break-down and the children rejected by their "parents" end up in the "Care" system. http://www.adoptionh ealing.com/ADOPTION% 20MYTHS%20&%20FACTS- 1.htm I think you have been fed a lot of &%$))& and you only have yourself to blame for listening to the lies and exaggerations and not doing your on research. Try www.Forced-Adoption. com Joe Burns

3:02am Fri 6 Dec 13

Eviekat says...

StopForcedAdoption wrote:
No of course not. Forced Adoption is a massive massive issue though, and it is only when crap like this is splashed across the papers that people really take notice of anything.
Social services have ruined my life, I just hope that my children;s adoptive family don't ruin their lives too.
2 years on and I put a brave face on every day and I go to work and try and act like nothing has happened, as soon as that front door shuts and I'm safe away from anyone that is going to ask me 'are you ok?' I break down, I'm an emotional mess who doesn't know how to deal with the fact that Essex social services came in to my home for no reason at all and removed my children made it IMPOSSIBLE for me to attend court so that they won by default. Dragged it on so long that they took all the fight I had left in me out.
Losing your children to forced adoption is like bereavement only at least you know when someone dies they have gone and are not coming back, this is so much worse because I know my babies are out there and I can't see them, I can't hug them, I can't kiss them goodnight but somebody else is out there doing it playing 'mummy' to my children that pain words can not describe it.
The woman in this article may have done wrong, but that is no reason to put her down, I can guarantee if she really cared for her child at all the pain it is causing her not having that child with her is going to far out weigh anything that anyone on here is going to say to her. And if she doesn't do you really think she is going to care what you say anyway?
So your saying that "Essex social services came in to your home for no reason at all and removed your children" That just does not happen!

No one can come into your home and just removed your children for no reason!!

There is always a reason.. fact!

If it were true, well then you never put up enough fight then, because what good loving mother lets someone just take her kids without doing something about it!!
[quote][p][bold]StopForcedAdoption[/bold] wrote: No of course not. Forced Adoption is a massive massive issue though, and it is only when crap like this is splashed across the papers that people really take notice of anything. Social services have ruined my life, I just hope that my children;s adoptive family don't ruin their lives too. 2 years on and I put a brave face on every day and I go to work and try and act like nothing has happened, as soon as that front door shuts and I'm safe away from anyone that is going to ask me 'are you ok?' I break down, I'm an emotional mess who doesn't know how to deal with the fact that Essex social services came in to my home for no reason at all and removed my children made it IMPOSSIBLE for me to attend court so that they won by default. Dragged it on so long that they took all the fight I had left in me out. Losing your children to forced adoption is like bereavement only at least you know when someone dies they have gone and are not coming back, this is so much worse because I know my babies are out there and I can't see them, I can't hug them, I can't kiss them goodnight but somebody else is out there doing it playing 'mummy' to my children that pain words can not describe it. The woman in this article may have done wrong, but that is no reason to put her down, I can guarantee if she really cared for her child at all the pain it is causing her not having that child with her is going to far out weigh anything that anyone on here is going to say to her. And if she doesn't do you really think she is going to care what you say anyway?[/p][/quote]So your saying that "Essex social services came in to your home for no reason at all and removed your children" That just does not happen! No one can come into your home and just removed your children for no reason!! There is always a reason.. fact! If it were true, well then you never put up enough fight then, because what good loving mother lets someone just take her kids without doing something about it!! Eviekat

7:30am Fri 6 Dec 13

Rich;'Carol says...

the real facts about michelle kelly and her family will never be printed. this woman is the lowest form of human life and I cannot tell you how bad this person is and that goes for all of her family. her sister is just as bad with all her children in care but again I cannot tell you the real truths her mum and brother are as bad . take it from me as I know her mother julie very well . this family are a nightmare and if I was allowed to tell you then you would be shocked. Social services have a big room full of documents on this family since 1984 and its shocking reading.

The real facts about this family will never be released because the facts would make you feel sick and give you nightmares. You would never believe the truths and the police and social services must never release the facts because they are horrific.

This family are worse than the family of the film
" THE HILLS HAVE EYES"
the real facts about michelle kelly and her family will never be printed. this woman is the lowest form of human life and I cannot tell you how bad this person is and that goes for all of her family. her sister is just as bad with all her children in care but again I cannot tell you the real truths her mum and brother are as bad . take it from me as I know her mother julie very well . this family are a nightmare and if I was allowed to tell you then you would be shocked. Social services have a big room full of documents on this family since 1984 and its shocking reading. The real facts about this family will never be released because the facts would make you feel sick and give you nightmares. You would never believe the truths and the police and social services must never release the facts because they are horrific. This family are worse than the family of the film " THE HILLS HAVE EYES" Rich;'Carol

2:50am Sun 8 Dec 13

michelle kelly says...

Love I think u need 2 get ur facts right julie got sgo of her grandkids if michelle was that bad she wouldn't of had jayden for over a year with nuffing wrong with his care
Love I think u need 2 get ur facts right julie got sgo of her grandkids if michelle was that bad she wouldn't of had jayden for over a year with nuffing wrong with his care michelle kelly

2:51am Sun 8 Dec 13

michelle kelly says...

U dnt no **** love coz if that was 2 b true my mum wouldnt have sgo on 2 kids n I wouldnt of had jayden in my care for over a year with every 1 saying howa good mum I was in if thay had a file on us since 1985 that would b mad coz I wasnt even born then so get it right
U dnt no **** love coz if that was 2 b true my mum wouldnt have sgo on 2 kids n I wouldnt of had jayden in my care for over a year with every 1 saying howa good mum I was in if thay had a file on us since 1985 that would b mad coz I wasnt even born then so get it right michelle kelly

4:05pm Tue 10 Dec 13

RoysterG says...

The system is broken.
I have been involved with fighting my own court battles with the Social services as well as helping others and I know that things are not always black and white.

I do believe that most Child Social Workers start with the sole purpose to help children but too many loose faith in the system. They then have to make the choice of going against what they feel is right or to move on because at the end of the day, despite what the skeptics think, the amount of money being earned from the fostered and adopted children is to much for the corrupted bosses and hangers ons to ignore.
Last year the National Fostering Agency, which was started by 2 social workers, was sold for £130m and if you look into a lot of the private fostering and adoption agency's you'll find a lot of registered social works on the board of directors. This is legal even though it's a major conflict of interests.

I do not believe that all social workers are evil.
I do not believe that all parents are innocent.
The breakdown in the system is that there are corrupt Social Workers in some of the top jobs, who use their position to persuade or bully officials to get the results they want and there are too many innocent parents paying the price with their children.

What is needed is an Independent Body to oversee what's happening and to look into complaints made against the Social Services because for too long now they've been able to get away with too much. It's only every now and then do the papers run with a story and only then it's because of an unusual turn of advents such as what's been printed here. Many cases end with parents unable to stop the Social Services from taking their children even if they're innocent.
The system is broken. I have been involved with fighting my own court battles with the Social services as well as helping others and I know that things are not always black and white. I do believe that most Child Social Workers start with the sole purpose to help children but too many loose faith in the system. They then have to make the choice of going against what they feel is right or to move on because at the end of the day, despite what the skeptics think, the amount of money being earned from the fostered and adopted children is to much for the corrupted bosses and hangers ons to ignore. Last year the National Fostering Agency, which was started by 2 social workers, was sold for £130m and if you look into a lot of the private fostering and adoption agency's you'll find a lot of registered social works on the board of directors. This is legal even though it's a major conflict of interests. I do not believe that all social workers are evil. I do not believe that all parents are innocent. The breakdown in the system is that there are corrupt Social Workers in some of the top jobs, who use their position to persuade or bully officials to get the results they want and there are too many innocent parents paying the price with their children. What is needed is an Independent Body to oversee what's happening and to look into complaints made against the Social Services because for too long now they've been able to get away with too much. It's only every now and then do the papers run with a story and only then it's because of an unusual turn of advents such as what's been printed here. Many cases end with parents unable to stop the Social Services from taking their children even if they're innocent. RoysterG

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree