Death To A Little Boy Because His Parents Were Drug Addicts.

mikey4444 | 15:47 Mon 10th Jun 2013 | News

15 Answers

This has upset me today ::

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-22845568

The Policeman in this case said "Those who should have been caring him for him ultimately caused his untimely and tragic death."

This would appear to another case of a lack of action by the relevant authorities. If this little boy had been taken into care, he would still be alive today.

Terrorists Jailed

The Edl Do Not Condone Violence As A Way Of Furthering Their Cause

Answers

1 to 15 of 15

anneasquith

Best Answer

only fairly recently have I changed my view re drug addicted parents being allowed to keep children with supervision by social work...... if any adult who is responsible for a child continues to use drugs the child should be removed immediately and put into foster care,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i can only go by my experience of foster carers in my area, and there are...

20:18 Mon 10th Jun 2013

Go To Best Answer

Mamyalynne

Absolutely heartbreaking.

pusskin

OMG That is so so sad!

hc4361

Put blame where it belongs - if his parents weren't drug addicts that boy would be alive today.

Not all addicts come under the radar of social services or other authorities. It is indeed a tragedy but blame the parents.

mikey4444

Question Author

Read the article :::Wolverhampton Safeguarding Children Board, which includes the city council's children's services department, is currently holding a serious case review into the circumstances surrounding Daniel's death.

Yet another Council shutting the door after the horse has bolted, Just like the Phillpots and all those girls that were "in care" but still managed get abused time after time after time. What were the health visitors doing when they made their regular checks...he was only 23 months when he died.

daffy654

From what I have read the little boy was exposed to varying amounts of numerous illegal drugs since his birth, evidence of chronic exposure to opiates and cannabis was found by analysing his hair, there were also significant traces of amphetamine and cocaine. The child was known to social services but was allowed to live in the home of two addicts without close supervision. There are questions requiring answers in my opinion!

mikey4444

Question Author

daffy...you can sure that those questions WILL be answered, just like the other cases but only after this little lad is dead, and no official heads will roll, in any department.

hc4361

I still blame the parents - they are "those that should have been caring for him".

mikey4444

Question Author

But hc4361, these parents couldn't care for themselves, let alone a toddler.

Trouble is, blaming the parents, who, of course are guilty, won't stop the next child from being abused and possible killed under the noses of the Authorities will it ? This will be all over the papers tomorrow with cries of indignation, and next week it will all be forgotten about until the next time.

What a tragic waste of a little life. Seeing this families history, it would seem that he should have been taken into care straight from the maternity ward.

I'm sorry but these cases with children involved really upset me. I actually cried last summer when I watched the news the night that the Phillpots kids died.

rockyracoon

What really gets up my goat are the platitudes that are spouted after these cases, 'lessons will be learnt', ATF, it happens again and again. I know we only ever hear about cases when they've gone pear shaped but come on!

RIP poor little man :(

youngmafbog

Blame lies with the parents and the authorities.

I totally see your point HC and the parents should be the no1, but the authorities are supposed to be there to step in when scum are threatening children. And in this case they did not, so they must share the blame.

I dont know what the answer to it all is though.

hc4361

We don't know the facts. I have seen nothing that says the authorities were involved with this family and of course the Wolverhampton Safeguarding Children Board is now involved, if they weren't before.

Do you propose all babies and children should be removed from the parents if they have drug problems? If so, what degree of problem? Should pregnant women be screened for drugs and forced to have an abortion?
How about single mum gets involved with druggie man - when should the children be removed?

'Taken in to care' is not some magic wand that takes the children to some sort of Disney world. Forcibly removing a child is traumatic for the child; growing up in care is not ideal - look at all the sex abuse victims who were in care when they were targeted.
No matter how bad we perceive a parent to be, most children love their parents very much and there is no crystal ball for social workers. Some druggie parents do manage to raise their children, hold down a job and have the coping strategies needed. There are many thousands of children living with drug addict parents.

Tragedies happen in supposedly perfect families - the McCann family for example and this very recent tragedy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2337483/British-toddler-Isabella-May-Crump-drowned-Spanish-holiday-villa-pool-mother-lay-sun-lounger-nearby.html

pixie373

It is completely heartbreaking. But it must be so hard to decide which children get taken into care and which don't. Sometimes the authorities can't win either way.

anneasquith

dave50

Drug addicts should not be allowed to have children, nor should they receive benefits, if necessary they should be sterilized. They chose to take the drug in the first place, they should face the consequences.