Posted on 11/07/2009 12:02:06 PM PST by Stoat
Kerry Robertson, 17, and Mark McDougall, 25, had been told that she was not bright enough to raise their child and that they would have to give him up.
It was another blow for the couple, whose wedding this year was halted just 48 hours before the ceremony in a row over whether Miss Robertson was intelligent enough to marry.
Desperate to keep their family together, the pair fled their home yesterday for a secret safe house.
(edit)
'But by fleeing while pregnant, Miss Robertson has not broken any law, as far as I'm aware.
'If she has her baby outside the jurisdiction of Fife council, they no longer have any power to take the child into care.
'Rather, they would have to locate her and alert the relevant council who would have to apply for a removal order themselves.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
**************************************************************
Also:
Social services 'to take baby from teenager deemed too stupid to marry' - Telegraph
not-bright-enough-to-wed-girl-s-baby-to-be-snatched-from-her-Daily Mirror
Teen_Not_Bright_Enough_to_Keep_Baby_Fox News Phoenix
ping
The baby will be taken and given to a “same sex couple” since that is what is in the best interests of the child.
If being bright enough was a requirement, that would take out 90 % of parents. Maybe even me...
Half the country is insane and they pick on this poor couple
Too late for them to bar me from parenthood. Maybe they'd say I am not bright enough to have any more great grand kids.
Unless this girl is truly a moron (I.Q. of less than 90) or worse and/or there are other circumstances involved here (e.g., a history of very irresponsible / criminal behavior), it would indeed be a miscarriage of justice to deprive her of her offspring in this fashion.
Regards,
I would venture to say that if you are a social worker these days, you are not bright enough to be one.
I know some brilliant women who are terrible mothers, and some less intelligent womwn who are doing a wonderful job.
Maybe they should just sterilize the entire “dumb” female population in England. That way they could cut back on paying social worker salaries.
In the UK, you can be considered too dumb to be a mom. In the UK you can be considered a pedophile and watch your children play on a playground from behind a fence.
Sharia Law when dads want to kill thier kids for listening to rock and roll? No problem. It’s just their ‘culture’.
They should have spelled it Fief, since they’re acting like the lord and master of those who live in the district.
IQ less than 90? A big percent of people have an IQ under 90. I wonder what this girl’s IQ score is.
I guess they should gather up all of the kittens and puppies in the UK also.
I was a social worker, and hope you don't mean what you said. I do not know of any social workers who have stooped to this level. Just the opposite is true; social workers go beyond the call of duty to keep families together. They give these kinds of women nurturing classes, and so forth. They always lean towards giving the mother a chance, and most often, these mothers pull through, or are honest enough to admit they can't handle the situation. Then, there are those mothers who have an average IQ, but no common sense, or ability to bond, who are the real dangers to their children. This woman seems to have the qualifications to be a mother.
She needs to become a crack whore. The CPS usually lets them have all the kids they can. No problem.
She may be dumb, but it seems like she and her husband outsmarted the officials by fleeing before the baby was born
Hell i thougt I was old. I only am up to 6 grandkids. No Great!
Already HERE!
Tyranny is what happens in a country without a Second Amendment...ooops sorry, without a Constitution.
When my son was due we attended some birthing classes at the hospital. One of the couples in the class were clearly retarded. You had to worry about the kid’s future, and yet they actually seemed like they were going to be much better parents than a lot of other people.
you’re too conservative to have children. not enough empathy. how soon before government health care makes that proclamation?
Indeed, although it may be a short-lived victory unless they are able to settle in a place that has different laws.
One sad aspect of this matter is that the father has stated that he would take responsibility for raising the child, and a 'grandmother-to-be' has stated that she would raise the child as well. These options were rejected because of the judgment that the woman does not understand what marriage means and so they are not allowed to marry. Without their being married, the father would not be allowed to raise the child, nor would the grandmother.....the only option allowed would be of taking the baby from the family entirely and placing it into an unrelated foster home which, as Jim Wayne mentioned above, could even be a homosexual 'couple'. This is deemed by the Government as being the best route.
A heart-wrenching situation all 'round.
liberals have 50% of their babies, and the government doesn’t qualify them as being too stupid.
Of course, in Obama’s re-education camps, the scale will be much larger, and the taking of children based on religious beliefs rather than intelligence.
“Without their being married, the father would not be allowed to raise the child,...”
Why the heck not? Don’t fathers have rights in England? What if the woman died giving birth? It’s his own child, I don’t see why he wouldn’t have 100% rights to that child.
What am I missing here?
We have Washington DC full of people that aren’t intelligent enought to be there, maybe we could send them all to England and let their social service take them and find a place to warehouse them..
wow...top 1% never knew I was so intelligent...now if only I could be smarter...
Well, she obviously was able to "grasp" something! :)
Why the heck not? Don’t fathers have rights in England? What if the woman died giving birth? It’s his own child, I don’t see why he wouldn’t have 100% rights to that child.
What am I missing here?
Whatever you may be missing, it seems that I am in the same boat. I believe that in the matter of divorces, fathers are 'occasionally' given custody of a child, and sometimes a baby, when the woman is shown to be unfit, as well as in the case of the death of a mother as you have said. Since the father has apparently not been shown to be legally unfit due to any other reason than his not being married to the mother, it is all a rather baffling, convoluted matter, and it seems that the Government's greatest wish in this case is to remove the child from the family entirely.
Just astonishing.
Good comment.
Weird. Dumb people have rights too. Why do they think they can take away her child? Without any evidence of maltreatment or anything?
F-ing Communist. Dictating everything.
God has blessed me richly. 4 children, 12 grands, 3 great grands and another on the way. I’ll be 65 in June if I make it. I’ve been married since I was a baby.
From what I have read of the matter so far, it seems that the Government is acting entirely upon its judgment that the only thing that is valid is the certificate of marriage, which, being lacking in this case, renders the child a ward of the State regardless of the fact that there is an apparently legally-competent father who is willing to raise the child as well as a legally-competent grandmother. These aspects of the matter are not considered relevant because of the lack of the marriage certificate.
I had thought that a 'social services' agency is one that is tasked with helping to do what is truly best for society...finding a human solution to a matter when the law may be unclear or inappropriate for a complex circumstance. It seems that in this case, the 'social services' should be renamed as a law enforcement agency as it appears that they are only considering the strict interpretation of the law from only one viewpoint...that of the State.
I don't know how legitimate this South African blog is, but it raises interesting questions and concerns as to the motivations of an apparent incentive to social workers in increasing adoption numbers. If the assertions made in this blog are even partially true, it certainly raises troubling concerns. Perhaps our friend Manc is familiar with the notion of 'incentives' for social workers placing more and more children into the adoption / foster home system?
Britain stealing children for higher adoption numbers Fromtheold
WOW - interesting article thank you for posting.
From your linked page:
Sterilization rates under eugenic laws in the United States climbed from 1927 until Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942). While Skinner v. Oklahoma did not specifically overturn Buck v. Bell, it created enough of a legal quandary to discourage many sterilizations. By 1963, sterilization laws were almost wholly out of use, though some remained officially on the books for many years. Virginia's state sterilization law was repealed in 1974.
Fifty years ago, much because the Nazis were considered right-wing, the U.S. eugenics movement was often called a right-wing phenomenon. Today, many conservative writers are calling it a left-wing or progressive or whatever thing. I think the truth may be that too many groups had a hand in it to call it anything but government overstepping its bounds.
Despair: Kerry Robertson is 29 weeks pregnant by Mark McDougall and the couple have already named the unborn child Ben. She 'out of her mind with worry'
yet again the Govt thinks they have a right to say who is or what is good for someone’s child
No wonder I left that country and right now I am fighting tooth and nail to stop this country from turning into the old country
I grew up in a foster home and I know how social services work .
Believe me they are corrupt to the core
another thing
I went back after I left the military to see my old social workers and ask questions as to why they never sent the letters on from my real mother, why they never told me where she was or how to contact her.
I managed to get the letters at the age of 24 because by UK law they have to give me the paper work and low and behold they had letters in there addressed to me off my mother which were never sent on to me.
Still they would not give me all the info about her to my face and because of them thinking she was not a good enough mother I have now lost contact with my real mother and have no idea if she lives.
There are many other issues I have but that is just one of them to tell you all how the UK Govt decides who should be with their parents or not.
Government overstepping its bounds is always left-wing, because tyranny is left-wing.
I hope they fled the UK all together. From all of the interviews I’ve read from them they both seem plenty smart enough to raise their own child.Even if she wasn’t can’t her family and boyfriend help her?
A government big enough to give you everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have.
It can be seen that way but that view begs argument over endless irrelevancies. While those arguments ensue our freedom is frittered away by whomever.
I'm appreciating the trend to separate that which furthers freedom from that which furthers despotism, irrespective of political labels. Mark Levin, for one, has moved in that direction. His lingo has come to resemble (borrow from?) libertarian-speak from years back.
One thing to long ago attract me to libertarianism was the cutting through the crap of arbitrary labels to get to the meaningful issues of, ala Levin, liberty and tyranny.
No wonder I left that country and right now I am fighting tooth and nail to stop this country from turning into the old country
I grew up in a foster home and I know how social services work .
Believe me they are corrupt to the core
So I'm guessing you most likely feel that it's entirely likely that there's an active 'incentive' in place for the social workers to try to place as many children into the foster home / adoption system as they possibly can? This is all just sickening.
Britain stealing children for higher adoption numbers Fromtheold
A government big enough to give you everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have.
Absolutely true and an excellent reminder, thank you.
I joined the army at 16 to get out and away so that saved me.
My sister on the other hand ended up on drugs and I mean hard drugs who has lost her kids.
What they did to my sister and I was disgusting. I asked the social worker why did you leave us in a place where you knew we were being totally whacked every day with belts, straps, planks of wood etc in the last foster home and he said that they thought it might blow over.
No they just did not want to do more paper work and wanted to keep us away from our real mother.
MAYBE ONE day I will find out if she is alive but in the meantime I have 3 kids who will never go through any of that and they will not be living in a socialist country if I or the misses have anything to do with it.
This is stupid on the part of the “social worker.” Did I jump to a conclusion? Yes, I worked for 25 years as a Social Worker.
True Story: There was a woman of limited intelligence who regularly allowed men to have their way with her and got pregnant five times in the process. Every time, the Social Workers would take the baby from the hospital and she was not allowed to view the child. Finally a Supervisor with some sense was promoted to that position and decided that instead of removing the baby, our Homemakers should help the woman learn how to take care of the child and check on her daily to make sure the child was fed and properly clothed. They did that even to the point of one of the Homemakers checking in on the weekends, on her own time, and mentoring the intellectually-challenged woman.
Surprise of surprises, the new mother quit allowing men into her bed and became a very good mother and caretaker for the baby. All she wanted to do was raise a baby. And she agreed to a tubal ligation as well. She decided that one baby was all she could take care of . . . she made this decision on her own [perhaps with the gentle assistance of a Homemaker, I don’t know for sure].
This young girl may not be as “hoity toity” as the Social Worker, but I’ll wager that with guidance, she could become a very loving mother and wife.
What the Social Worker is doing is moral elitism. And she could have a family who has asked her to give them a newborn baby. Has happened MANY times in many places and still goes on today.
I’m full of Social Worker stories, most of them true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.