Do I have SIL's child? **AN UPDATE**

whitewing

You and DH should definitely have your own next child anyway.

As to your brother's baby, it could work if you moved far enough away, and there was no contact with SIL. Your child will get over moving and resettling elsewhere. You would manage 3 young children if you didn't have the stresses of everything else, although it may not be quite to the standard you'd want and it wouldn't be easy.

However, would it be possible for the baby to go into foster care and you and your DH and children to have regular contact? Again without any involvement with the baby's parents. Then maybe in the medium term could you think about adopting the baby? It is far too big a decision to make in a fortnight and to be honest everybody should be respecting that. Yes, it would be lovely to bond but as long as the baby is well cared for, I do think you can have a good relationship and that can grow deeper at a later date when you aren't so pressured.

MrsTinks

I think if you take this baby you will to a degree or other always resent not having had the ability to try (successful or not) for your "own" child with your partner.
I offered many years ago to be "tummymummy" for my cousins child should it be deemed too dangerous for her to try (she has a rare haemophilia condition that is very extreem!) and it was only because I was young, single and lived in a different country I considered it. I don't know that I could live that close to a child I had carried, mine or not, and I suspect that your SIL won't be able to stay away either unless she lives far away from the child.
The proximity, your SIL and brothers conditions and everything else just screams no at me...
If your first instinct had been "heck yes!! bring it on!" then that would be one thing... but no-one should ever have to be pursuaded to take in a child or to have one...
I too know very happy adopted people who have gone on to do wonderful things and have wonderful adoption parents... parents to them who are more special because they picked THEM Normal parents dont get a choice... adopted parents get a different bond because they made a different kind of choice - and both are in my view very special - just different

To be honest if you want to do something for your SIL and brother then suggest to them that sterilisation might be a very good idea... if they are not fit to mind their children and SIL has had that many removed from her at such an early age then I really don't think it's in ANYONES interest that she has any more Because guess who's door they will knock on again next time it happens?

gizmo111

Money_maker wrote: »

But if I'm reading this right, all credit to the 3 fathers who have taken on their children thus saving them from this sort of future.

Hope you're bearing up ok, OP

I'm not sure why these men should suddenly be seen as saviours for looking after their own children?

whitewing wrote: »

You and DH should definitely have your own next child anyway.

As to your brother's baby, it could work if you moved far enough away, and there was no contact with SIL. Your child will get over moving and resettling elsewhere. You would manage 3 young children if you didn't have the stresses of everything else, although it may not be quite to the standard you'd want and it wouldn't be easy.

However, would it be possible for the baby to go into foster care and you and your DH and children to have regular contact? Again without any involvement with the baby's parents. Then maybe in the medium term could you think about adopting the baby? It is far too big a decision to make in a fortnight and to be honest everybody should be respecting that. Yes, it would be lovely to bond but as long as the baby is well cared for, I do think you can have a good relationship and that can grow deeper at a later date when you aren't so pressured.

SS will want a permenancy plan asap to present to the court. The OP has already been assessed as being suitable to look after the older childen on a short term basis however I sincerely doubt that a further in depth assessment for Special Guardianship or Adoption will be positive given the doubts she has, this will shine through loud and clear through the assessment process.
If the OP took on the child then with SG contact would be supervised around 3 times a year for the parents - the baby has 2 not just the SIL.
Adoption would most likely be letterbox or once a year.
Contact would be agreed at court and an order made.
SS would really want the child to be with the OP as soon as possible so it can form positive attachments to who will be its primary care giver.
If the OP took on the child in either scenario she would have full PR for the child and would be well within her rights to refuse the SIL contact or entry to her home without invitation.
In my expereince most families settle down once plans are in place and respect the new carers privacy, and many just stop having contact after a while either unable to make the commitment due to their chaotic lifestyle, birth of more children or are unable to cope with the pain seeing a child they can't care for brings.
I don't think in heart of hearts the OP feels able to take on this child and that decision should be respected and commended as I know many family's who delay the childs permenancy by saying they will care for children so as not to upset the rest of the family and when it comes to crunch back off for various reasons - this is unsettling for the child especially older ones.
Good Luck OP but I think you have made you mind up.

Mimi_Arc_en_ciel

Sorry just wanted to point something out.

Someone mentioned about having the child and moving. Firstly, That would cut family links from my child - her Dad lives near (Although he doesnt see her at the moment through his choice) that may change in the future. I also have a REALLY good job that I'd lose if i moved - so wouldnt be able to support the child (and mine!) any way.

If I did take on the child, I'd be alienating myself from my family - if my nana was to die, we wouldnt be able to attend the funeral because SIL and brother would be there and I wouldnt want a scene at church - and so on.

and to the person who mentioned fathers being a saint - they havent seen kids for years - only having them now because of the care situation. not saintly to me

Money_maker

Money_maker wrote: »

But if I'm reading this right, all credit to the 3 fathers who have taken on their children thus saving them from this sort of future.

Hope you're bearing up ok, OP

No one mentioned saviour and no one mentioned saint. In view of the behaviour of some absent fathers these days, I feel that they deserved some credit for taking on their children rather than allowing them to go into the system.

I'm sure the standard response is that of course they should take over the care of their own offspring but sadly the way society is today, this is not always the case.

Mimi_Arc_en_ciel

sorry moneysaver - that wasnt meant to be aimed at you (was a PM but cant be bothered to reply to them as it wasnt a nice one!)

meritaten

Mimi - I think most of us posters just picked up on the fact your original post was a definate 'no' but you were starting to feel pressured and wondering if duty dictated that you 'should' take on this child. And most of us felt that wasnt fair to the child or to you - and the best option for this child to have a happy childhood would be with parents who wanted her/him! ie adoption or long term fostering. we too could see the problems you would have with the SIL wanting to be involved - Not On hun! you cannot parent under those conditions - not with the best will in the world it would affect the child, you, your OH and your marraige! Now you have to either stick to your guns or explain the circs to SS and ask if you could just say that ultimately you have been rejected - and tbh I am not sure why SS thought it would be a good idea to place the child with you - If I and so many others can see the pitfalls.........why dont SS?

gizmo111

have a happy childhood would be with parents who wanted her/him! ie adoption or long term fostering. we too could see the problems you would have with the SIL wanting to be involved - Not On hun! you cannot parent under those conditions - not with the best will in the world it would affect the child, you, your OH and your marraige! Now you have to either stick to your guns or explain the circs to SS and ask if you could just say that ultimately you have been rejected - and tbh I am not sure why SS thought it would be a good idea to place the child with you - If I and so many others can see the pitfalls.........why dont SS?

Long term fostering will not be an option for a child this young.
SS will not lie and say she has been rejected if she hasn't - ultimately the social worker will have to show the court and adoption panel that all options in the family have been explored.
From the OP's original post SS haven't asked her to have this child her SIL has, after being giving 14 days by the court to submit alternative carers.
What I will say is that these situations have a way of working out for the best however remote that may seem at the outset of care proceedings.

edgex

peachyprice wrote: »

And why on earth isn't somone making sure this girl is getting proper contraception?

gunsandbanjos wrote: »

I wondered that too, if she is 19 with 5 kids she has essentially had a child a year since she was 14:eek:

logically, the only thing that would work is to have her sterilised


& to those that dont like that idea, what do you suggest?

edgex

Mimi_Arc_en_ciel wrote: »

Can I point something out because I think it should be.

I'm hesitant to speak to SS because of the things I've seen. The SS worker has lied and falsified reports in court and has been penalised for this within her department by her manager and also by the court (from what I gather shes now been removed from her position) SIL is very young, naive and a bit on the slow side. Whilst they havent beaten or ill treated the children etc, SIL isnt mentally able to look after them. I'm not sure if Bro can have kids if he leaves SIL but i'm guessing he's not allowed to (I've never honestly asked) part of the decision to remove them was because the children have this genetic problem - If they went on to have any more kids and those kids didnt have the genetic problem SS said they would monitor and not remove straight away (although I dont think this would ever happen) I think it was too much to do - SIL is 19 and had 5 kids under 6 with this genetic disorder so that was heavy in this case.

I'm going to speak to OH tonight. I think my initially response to this was right but there's the family tug thats clouding my judgement.

Thanks everyone, you've helped

do you honestly think she should have any access to a child?

if social services have had to remove so many children from HER care, why would you even think of creating a situation that would give her access to one of them?

frankly, that your even considering it, to the point of asking so much about it, is plain stupid!


the childs interests must come first;
not yours, not your moms, not your SIL (who should in fact be completely ignored as she's not worth thinking about)