Saffia should not be a housemate because...
 

There are two children missing their mother

Well I know the immediate response, a number of fathers went in from at least BB2 onwards.

However, one of Saffia's children is only seven months and if as she admits she has broken up with the father, then in theory he could use this as an excuse to win custody.

I am an administrator on the Facebook group, Don't Take her Baby where we have had stories where social services instead of preventing the next Baby P, go after mothers or both parents on the flimsiest of excuses to legally baby snatch so they can meet adoption targets.

I see these horror stories, where woman who are totally innocent are even arrested or threatened with arrest and children removed

Then I see a mother of a young child, going into the house.

This may seem sexist, but with the way the SS behave, doing what Jennifer did last year and what Saffia is doing seems very reckless.

:mad:

I am not goint to judge. She could have a close relative or friend outside the house looking after the child. The money she earns from Big Brother could enable her to help the child more.

Too early in the game for this sort of thing.

So is my campaigning on the abuse by the SS clouding things?

I like Saffia she seems the normal one young babies soon adapt i'm sure she'll be fine with her grandparents.

Lol, do you seriously think going onto BB is gonna have her kids taken away from her??

Bascially, the dads can look after them, and secondly she will have friends and family to look after the kids aswell.

DONE.

I think she is doing it for all the single mums out there,well thats what impression i got anyway.

I don't mind parents going in but what really bugs me is when they play the sympathy card and say "ooooo I miss my kids sooooo much". Surely they know they'll miss them if they're signing up for a 14 week show.

I don't think it's your place to judge Sticks. I also think your story about Social services reeks of conspiracy theorizing. If this practice were real don't you think the newspapers would have sussed it out given how much scrutiny the government's under at the moment?

She should be removed immediately, put in the stocks and be pelted with dirty nappies.

shes obviously in it for the money! rather than the experience! but yeah mums or dads go on bb to try and get money! so that they have money to raise their children! im sure the children are being looked after by their grandparents/dad/friends/or other relatives!

Actually a number of these cases have been covered in the press. That was how I got involved due to press reports of how a baby was removed unlawfully by social services and the court ordered the SS to return him. (A few days later he was removed by a district court that was nothing more than a rubber stamp)

The main problem was that central government was trying to address a real problem of older children trapped in the carer system, so came up with a system where financial inducements were given for each child adopted out.

A very laudable and noble idea

The trouble was that the idea was perverted by local government and social workers used every minor excuse to start removing babies from mothers. The most common one, was that if they had ever had an eating disorder well in the past or had once been treated for depression then they were fair game.

Social Services were removing babies at birth, so they could adopt them out, achieve targets and get government cash.

Press coverage in the Telegraph

Coverage by the BBC

There was a thread in Serious Debates, Are Social services out of control

Your an administor on Facebook?

Did you know that Saffia announced last night that she was going into the house, like minutes before entering!

She should be ejected

They can still cry out for their kids. It is a natural reaction. Dont mean she is playing the sympathy card or being a hypocrite.

If she said nothing at all about her kids in their, she would be slated too.

A handful of cases get into the press...there is absolutely no basis for your argument whatsover...Im sure Baby P's mother would have been saying she was a good mother and what a miscarraige it was if they had taken her baby!

I doubt her kids'll get taken from her.

I dont think you should judge her because loads of other single mothers go on BB and get their own mothers to look after them !!!!!

I still think she shouldn't be there to be honest but if she needs money then maybe

I think she's doing it for herself. Did hear her telling someone on LF (can't remember who) that her mother has moved in with her children while she's in the house and the childrens' fathers are having them at weekends

good... then it's a win win for me because I can stand her :P .. kidding

but if a dad went in it would be ok but oh no not a mum i am sorry but we want a life aswell she is doing this for her kids was in my local paper today about her, everyone has said she is a great mum there with there gran and dads having them at weekend why should ss go in and take her kids what is so wrong with it nobody said anything about jen last year sorry not being rude but like i said its ok for dads to go

These cases are quite different from Baby P

I a lot of these cases the child was put on the at risk register before they were born, just because the mother in the past had depression, anorexia or even self harmed in the dim and distant past.

One mother, Fran Lyon, if you want to Google that infamous case, was given a birth plan where her child would be permanently removed from her after 10 or twenty minutes, and she would not be allowed to breastfeed, incase, while in the hospital she drank a poison to harm the baby. This was because a doctor who never ever met her said she would have Münchhausen Syndrome by Proxy, a conditions whose very existence is disputed. Other medical professionals who know her contested this, but Northumberland SS were adamant.

Fran had to run away to Sweden, where Social Services there said there was no cause for concern. Even so, it was rumoured in the press that Northumberland SS would apply to make her then unborn child a ward of court to bring it back by force. (Fran says that bit was a media invention)

A number of these cases, never got the chance to prove they were a good mother, the SS just saw a way to meet quotas from the evidence we have.

Also a number of the cases, the SS got called in, because some so-called doctor misdiagnosed something minor when the mother brought the child in to A&E because they were worried about their child.

Abusing parents / Carers steer clear of hospitals for obvious reasons.

I have been in personal contact with one case, and they are looking to take legal action.

John Hammond MP has dossier files on the abuses by Social Services, so it is more than the handful of cases that reach the newspapers. I have corresponded with one woman who was in court yesterday fighting to keep her child and that has not made the news.

All of these cases are not the same as the Baby P case. Those cases are hard to deal with, so the inference is that the SS go after softer targets, those who are no threat to their child.

OK so in the Saffia case this may not be an issue, but after dealing with and trying to assist people I would hope you would see I got annoyed with both Jennifer last year and Saffia this year.

If you check back, you will find I was critical of Jen back then

I could be over sensitive here as previously explained because of my work on the Don't Take her Baby facebook page which is dealing with abuse of power by social services departments, who persecute the innocent and yet allow Baby P to happen.

How would you know that??

I agree with Sticks. People dont realise both her kids are very young. I think it's very irresponsible for a parent to leave their kids for potentially up to 3 month.

I don't think its a problem, she isn't the first to go in with a young child and certainly won't be the last. Dads with young kids go in, should they be stopped too? Plus the children are probably in good care. Thats such a 1950's view