Woman jail by council for caring too much

teajug

I was concerned when I read this, as who else is going to care for a love ones other than the family Some of us knows from experiences as well as from the media how care homes and or council's views are on people with have dementia and how some care home treats its patients.

These secret courts are scary indeed, I was not aware of them until I read this…..scandalous.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314346/Agony-woman-jailed-secret-Daughter-locked-trying-save-father-care-home-tells-terrifying-police-swoop.html

over_flo

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/COP/2012/B31.html

As usual ,the DM does not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Errata

The Council had nothing to do with it. Why does your thread title state it has?

tina_malteser

The Human Rights Act is supposed to guarantee everybody the right to a family life. It is the council and the court who have broken my father’s human rights, ...Her words

sparkycat2

Errata wrote: »

The Council had nothing to do with it. Why does your thread title state it has?

While the Judge is the one who sent her to prison. The Council are the ones who took and held her farther in their care against the family's wishes and the Council were the ones getting injunctions and restraining orders against the family.

While the family were claiming that their farther was being held against his will like a prisoner and mistreated and they feared he would die and desperately wanted him to come home and live with his family, cared for by his family.

Would John Maddocks have been better off with his family? Was the Judge right to believe the claims of the council over the claims of the family? The daughter got sent to prison for "trying to save her farther's life" and her farther remained in council care and died. So hindsight might not go in the Judges favour.

sheep-ali

Sadly, this is going on all the time. Some years ago, social work informed me that if I did not allow my mother to go into a care home " for her own good ", they would take out a court order to force the issue. This despite my mother not wanting to go.
Social work got their way & my mother spent a miserable few months in a care home before being placed on the LCP
I have not got over the despair that I felt & it has had a detrimental effect on my own health.

DiddlySquat_2

teajug wrote: »

I was concerned when I read this, as who else is going to care for a love ones other than the family Some of us knows from experiences as well as from the media how care homes and or council's views are on people with have dementia and how some care home treats its patients.

These secret courts are scary indeed, I was not aware of them until I read this…..scandalous.

It is because of OTT reactions such as that published in the Daily Mail that these issues are best done 'in secret'.

It is so damaging to society that these papers put such a spin on these stories. We end up with people, such as yourself, swallowing whole, something that is written with not one shred of evidence.

The thing to always remember is that there are always two sides to a story and to not form a judgement when only one side has been heard.
The next best thing you can do is to buy a different newspaper.

clemmatis

sheep-ali wrote: »

Sadly, this is going on all the time. Some years ago, social work informed me that if I did not allow my mother to go into a care home " for her own good ", they would take out a court order to force the issue. This despite my mother not wanting to go.
Social work got their way & my mother spent a miserable few months in a care home before being placed on the LCP
I have not got over the despair that I felt & it has had a detrimental effect on my own health.

Yes. They do that. A hospital decided it, in my mother's case, distressing her greatly and blighting the rest of her life. They decided I could not cope as sole carer given her condition -- a condition for which they were largely responsible -- but had, I found when I protested, based their decision on faulty information (about her!).

At least I was able to choose a good nursing home.

I do though sense this case may be different.

teajug

DiddlySquat wrote: »

It is because of OTT reactions such as that published in the Daily Mail that these issues are best done 'in secret'.

It is so damaging to society that these papers put such a spin on these . We end up with people, such as yourself, swallowing whole, something that is written with not one shred of evidence.

The thing to always remember is that there are always two sides to a story and to not form a judgement when only one side has been heard.
The next best thing you can do is to buy a different newspaper.

It was not just in the Daily Mail it has been in other news papers as well. Just Google and you will see...

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/Row-continues-secret-jailing-Wanda-Maddocks/story-18812294-detail/story.html#axzz2RYVZ3CDC

http://nowmynews.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/jailed-in-secret-for-trying-to-rescue.html

DiddlySquat_2

teajug wrote: »

It was not just in the Daily Mail it has been in other news papers as well. Just Google and you will see...

It really doesnt matter which newspapers it was in. The story is a spin, is totally different to the actual case and is being read by people who are swallowing it whole.
The people reading this nonsense dont realise that there are two sides to this story and if they bother to google to actual details they would see exactly why the woman was imprisoned.

It is shocking that newspapers can print stories like this and have their readers taken in.

FBaby

Something must have not been right if they submitted 4 proposals for a family led care package and all was subsequently turned down by a judge. Could it be that the family misunderstood the medical care the father required? It does sound from the article that he had complex medical needs that a non clinically trained person might not have been able to fully gasp?

If that was the case, and taking the father away from medical care that he required could caused him to deteriorate even quicker than he did, I can understand the decision to prevent her to trying to take him away. If she then broke that ruling and attempted to kidnap her father despite the injunction, then I guess jail was always going to be the next step.

But of course, I agree that we just don't know the details of the case and never will, so can only make assumptions which could be completely wrong.