Pregnant Homeless 17 year old

Oldernotwiser

Cerisa wrote: »

do. Which is so difficult, but it's what she needs.

Whoever said that social services jump through hoops to keep children with their biological families; that's because studies and research from a number of different sources state that children do best with their biological parents. It would be a lot easier just to adopt these children out. The other side to that coin of course, is that most people prefer to have IVF than adopt a child; partly because these children often have psychological problems, having been removed from their homes. Also did you know there's a grace period where the 'adoptive' couple can give the child back? I used to work for social services and I was astonished when I heard this.

1. Children with biological families do better than children who've been through the care system for years, not compared with those who have been adopted in infancy!

2. People often prefer IVF over adoption because there are very few healthy babies available for them to adopt.

3. Adopted children who have problems because they have been removed from their families will have been seriously mistreated before eventually being taken away as toddlers or older.

4. Giving the child back is only likely to occur with older children where the adoptive parents find that they can't cope with their severe behavioural problems; you make it sound as if people are given a tiny baby "on approval".

I hope you worked for Social Services as a cleaner or similar; I don't think I've read so much inaccurate twaddle for many a long year!

rosie-lee

Exactly, by the time a child enters the care system, more damage than anyone with a heart would like, has, in most cases, already been done.

The insecurity and loss a child must feel at being taken away from the parent they know (regardless of how bad they may have been) breaks my heart to think about.

We all make mistakes and those who don't must be fibbing but the difference is when do you stop and how many chances should you be given. This is where I come from in my view that despite bending over backwards to keep helping and continually supporting some parents, it simply does not make any difference to the end result in some cases. Lets be honest, you don't need to be a trained Social Worker to make an experienced guess at the likehood of some children entering the care system during their early years. Those who will benefit and flourish with support and those who will never give a damn and sort themselves out.

Of course NO-ONE should be pushed into giving up their baby but some girls would just be doing the better thing by giving their child a better chance when its born instead of struggling through before finanally admitting it some years on.

I think perhaps that a 'stigma' may be attached because of the fact that so much support, housing, benefit etc is now available. Years ago when it wasn't it was seen as doing the right and best thing for your baby, to give it a better start and opportunity to be brought up in a stable home environment and there were hundreds of success stories to prove this. Many adoptive children are grateful that there natural parent made that difficult decision for them.

The child doesn't feel the seperation (note, I realise this sounds simplistic and I am sure there are many individual cases where this is not so - another topic) and can be secure from the beginning.

As has been pointed out, there is no shortage of homes for new babies.

DCFC79

alwaysskint96 wrote: »

Provide for your kids- yes. Provide for a SO CAllled adult with a child of their own- no.

Or should I expect my parents to be paying my expenses still- despite being nearly 40?

i mean a parent to provide for the child until they are old enough to provide for themselves eg 18

Cerisa

1. Children with biological families do better than children who've been through the care system for years, not compared with those who have been adopted in infancy!

and...? what's your point? that's what the person I was responding to was talking about; children experiencing problems being kept in their homes.

2. People often prefer IVF over adoption because there are very few healthy babies available for them to adopt.

again and? Are you trying to imply that unhealthy babies or older children are less deserving of good homes? IVF is invasive, expensive and less likely to work if the parents aren't biologically perfect; i.e. if the mother is overweight or the father smokes. A child born to you can be difficult or suffer health problems; why should you get to pick and choose when you adopt?

3. Adopted children who have problems because they have been removed from their families will have been seriously mistreated before eventually being taken away as toddlers or older.

This is true. But again, you've completely missed the point; I was discussing older children, and it is still better for these children to stay with their families, and avoid having to go through that care system and adoption process, being aware that they are 'not wanted'. They don't perform as well at school and they suffer psychological problems.

4. Giving the child back is only likely to occur with older children where the adoptive parents find that they can't cope with their severe behavioural problems; you make it sound as if people are given a tiny baby "on approval".

Again, and? how is it ok to take any child 'on approval'? Telling an eight year old they have a home then taking it away is cruel. And once again the situation I was discussing was older children; it had nothing to do with babies.

I hope you worked for Social Services as a cleaner or similar; I don't think I've read so much inaccurate twaddle for many a long year!

One, this is incredibly rude; two, even as a cleaner, I would probably be more aware of the issues than you. In actual fact I was a frontline switchboard operator, dealing with real life crises.

Another point I'd like to make is that I am drawing my information from real life, and medical studies. Not coffee room gossip, or the latest issue of Chat magazine. Oldernotwiser, you seem to be taking this rather personally.


Rosie Lee, what support? It doesn't matter if the baby can be offered a new home; it might not be best for the child or mother. Don't get me wrong; it could be. I was discussing adoption for older children, and how it is generally better for the child (especially after the age of two when they are attached) to stay with his/her mother, if at all possible, which is why social services 'jump through hoops' to make that happen.

those who will never give a damn and sort themselves out.

This attitude worries me. It isn't a child's responsibility to 'sort itself out'. 9 times out of 10 it's about that child never having people give a damn about them.

rosie-lee

Cerisa wrote: »

Rosie Lee, what support? It doesn't matter if the baby can be offered a new home; it might not be best for the child or mother. Don't get me wrong; it could be. I was discussing adoption for older children, and how it is generally better for the child (especially after the age of two when they are attached) to stay with his/her mother, if at all possible, which is why social services 'jump through hoops' to make that happen.

quote rosie lee
those who will never give a damn and sort themselves out.


This attitude worries me. It isn't a child's responsibility to 'sort itself out'. 9 times out of 10 it's about that child never having people give a damn about them.

should have worded that better sorry, by 'those' I meant the mothers not the children.

Boppy_2

I haven't read all of the posts but wanted to say she sounds incredibly selfish and like a stereotypical teenage mother wanting everything for nothing, why couldn't she have gone to college and done a short course, perhaps one of childcare would be beneficial to her!

When i was 17 which wasn't that long ago i had moved 70 miles away from my family and friends and everything i knew, i worked all hours under the sun often with very few days off, i paid my rent and bills on time and looked after myself. I fell pregnant at 18 and not once did i let myself or my child down even though my childs father abandoned me.

She needs to get her head out of the sand and sort herself out before harm comes to her or the baby.

Boppy_2

jamespir wrote: »

you obviously havent dealt with social services im living with my partner both 26 and she suffers from depression and we live on a low income we have two children one of who social services placed with her interfering parents (they were the ones who grassed us to social services in the first place) the other has gone through adoption due to that fact they did tests and viewed us with the children and decicded as a couple that we couldnt give the children the best upbringing although they had said to me i could hsve the one if i lived seperate form my partner which i said no to as it wasnt fair .

I'm not been funny but there must be more to this than your telling us. I have Bipolar disorder which is manic depression, I have a son and am pregnant again and not once have social services been involved because of my illness even though i see a variety of professionals. My midwife mentioned they would inform me if they were going to call social services and that would only be if i wasn't looking after myself or my child. At times when i am bad my husband is there to look after us both which is what keeps our family unit together. If i am wrong then sorry but if i am wrong then you need to seek legal advice as what has happened isn't right and thats a fact.

Savvy_Sue

GOING OFF-TOPIC

Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: While it’s easy to wander off-topic that often prevents newbies finding the information they want quickly and easily (please see this rule). Please keep this thread on topic. If you’d like to discuss non-MoneySaving related topics please continue your discussion in The MoneySavers Arms or Discussion Time. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="%20abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

The question is, have we missed any possible source of support for this girl, her baby and the wider family?

One other suggestion from me, if she moves back from grandma's to or near mum's, then family counselling might be very helpful in helping everyone move on from the current situation, where the young girl feels unsupported, her sister is alienated, and her mum is at her wit's end.

foreign_correspondent

Re: sources of support - someone mentioned Life - they have very specific anti-abortion views and agenda and I believe can be quite pressurising. I would steer clear

If she is considering a termination) I am not sure about her dates, have skimmed the thread) then Marie Stopes are often helpful, or the local family planning clinic.

If she intends on keeping the baby, I would suggest Sure Start whose midwives are generally lovely and would be great people to advise her, and would be supportive and non-judgemental.

Re: housing, Shelter are probably the best people to contact. As a vulnerable (ie. pregnant) under 18 the council may well have a duty to help her.

I wish her all the luck in the world, she is in an unenviable situation, which is only compounded by her age and lack of life experience.

Which part of the UK is she living in (PM me if you prefer and dont mind telling me!) Just wondering as I am familiar with services in some parts of the country.

foreign_correspondent

Boppy wrote: »

I haven't read all of the posts but wanted to say she sounds incredibly selfish and like a stereotypical teenage mother wanting everything for nothing, .

why do people feel they have the right to perpetuate these unfounded stereotypes about teenagers?? Replace the word teenage mother with another group in society (eg. black, pensioner) and it suddenly sounds a little prejudiced.

Boppy - credit to you for doing so well in difficult cuircumstances but everyone is different, and maybe this girl does not have the resilance that you had. We do not know her and I feel it is a little unfair to make judgement on her, when we have not heard her side of the story.