Kate Moss

[Ding-Dong]

Should social services step in? I couldn't give a tinker's cuss that she's worth millions and has an army of nannies/helpers, she is abusing a class A drug, and in the interests of equality should be investigated by social services, in much the same way as any 'normal' person would.

Better still, the father contest and win custody on the grounds she is an unfit mother.

In my (possibly rather simplistic) mind, if you are taking class A drugs, you are automatically an unfit mother.

[VINNY100_2]

Yes in the interests of her child.Lets just hope doherty isnt the father!!

[lilyfrog]

then where do you draw the line?? what if she took class B or C drugs, or prescription drugs, alcohol or tobacco?? Do all women who use ANY of the above drugs automatically become bad mothers?? All of the above are capeable of rendering the taker not fully in control.

Dont get me wrong, I do not cpondone what she did,but you cant kjust team in their and take her baby away.

[Ding-Dong]

I think drawing the line at Class A drugs is a pretty good place to start.

[louadams6]

It could be that the child is in the care of someone else while she divulges in which case things may not be as bad as we think, but if shes doing this around her child when shes solely responsible then she cant be allowed to get away with it and the child MUST be removed from that situation. Either way i think social services should step in, if only to monitor the situation closely for a while

[undercovers]

"in the interests of equality" - if we were equal in this case e.g. Kate moss worked was not in the public eye, nobody would even know about this issue.

"if you are taking class A drugs you are automatically an unfit mother" - is a man automatically an unfit father if he takes them, how long does this run apply for?

also there is a difference between "use and "abuse" - please mind your language choices

I think you are indeed being very "simple" - i would hope that social services would look at the care and treatment of a child before determining whether or not to seperate it from its mother and home, rather than on a knee jerk "bad mother" reaction to a popularist newpaper report.

very sad business when you would happily punish a mother and child in the most painful of ways simply because you do not approve of a mothers life style - which can not be proven to be having any detrimental affect on the child...

[newtron]

I don't think the line should be drawn based on the type of drug, but rather on responsible use versus abuse.  Obviously, this assessment is subjective.  I'm sure that many people believe any use of a drug is abuse.  Personally, I do think it is possible to use recreational drugs in a responsible manner.  I don't have enough information to make any type of judgement about Kate Moss, but being in the public eye, it is probably not a good idea to do any drugs because it is almost impossible to be discrete.  Celebrities are alsways being watched. 

To answer your question, an objective investgation by social services would be appropriate to determine if her social activities truly are detrimental to her child.  Unfortunately, these investigations generally are not objective.  It will probably go something like:  "Cocaine is an illegal substance.  You used cocaine.  Therefore, you are a criminal and unfit to be a mother."  To me, this way of looking at things a little too simplistic.  But that's the wat it is. 

[newtron]

undercovers, it looks like we crossed posts and share similar opinions.

[january_bug]

Since when did tobacco render the user "not fully in control"?

[Ding-Dong]

So the general consensus of opinion is that it is OK.

Fair enough, I stand corrected.

Undercovers - I didn't realise I was being sexist, but just to redress the balance for you, Kate Moss is an unfit father.

[january_bug]

I don't think it's ok, for the record.  But even as a childless 22 year old I can see that parenting is never a black and white thing.  I personally think that 'automatically' categorising parents (mothers OR fathers) is a risky thing to do.  I don't condone the use of drugs, whatever class however. 

[louadams6]

Hi Ding-dong, i dont think that people are saying it is ok, the general feeling i get is that it is a big thing to just remove the child from her mother and they need to look closely at whats occurring here and what effect removing her daughter would have on her (the child that is). If she is permanently off her face whilst looking after her daughter then yes, of course, im sure everyone would agree that her daughter should be taken from her

[netibiza]

 I think the child is with her natural father at the moment, he is Jefferson Hack. 

[january_bug]

Do you know what amazes me?  That we all (including me *blushes*) seem to care!!  Seriously, the woman has an amazing figure, and is a very successful self-promoter, but that's all really... isn't it!?! 

[bernardo]

You say that "in the interests of equality", she should be investigated.  Not so.  She should be investigated on the grounds of upholding and enforcing the law.

[Pootle]

The good old media have got you all hook, line and sinker. Come on, Kate Moss has been hovering cocaine and swilling Champagne since the age of 14. No, I don't condone the use of drugs but this is hardly breaking news. Given the wages that Kate Moss has earned, the child will probably have a more privileged upbringing that all of you and I will never dream of. Where are you going to stop with your 'social services' rampage? Lets investigate ever rock star's child, every footballer's child and every multimillionaire's child who have ever indulged in cocaine. After all, the children of Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger et all are such a mess. Those pesky drugs....grow up

[kazza12345]

plus, on what grounds has she lost her job? as far as i can see, its because someone said she took drugs ... i would hope my employer would give me the benefit of the doubt ...innocent until poven guilty?

[louadams6]

wasnt she caught in the act kazza12345????

Like i said on a thread last night poodle, fine if thats what she wants to do with her life then thats her perogative, but she is an impressionable person to a lot of youngsters and i for one think that if she is going to do something like that (or if any star is) then it should be done behind closed doors where noone can see them at it and they should make damn sure noone catches them (i.e the media) Shes lost a hell of a lot of work and her reputation through this, i think shes got her punishment (even though she doesnt need the money) As for a rampage people are just expressing their own opinion on here so i see no reason for anyone to have to "grow up"

[luckyboy]

 it always works, the gutter press works up a phoney moral hysteria and the public get sucked in, this week kate moss, last week wayne rooney, next week? you can bet someones being lined up for the traditional roasting, complete overreaction if you ask me, take her kid of her, god that would mean practically every millionaire rock star, actor, model banker and royal getting their kids taken into care...

[january_bug]

The contracts will have been written in a way that she must not engage in any conduct that would damage the image/reputation of the company she is representing.  Frankly they could propbably have found her in breach of contract for going out with Doherty.

Don't forget... she hasn't "lost her job", she's been dropped from contracts, for being in breach.  The lawyers will have been checking and rechecking this week. 

[luckyboy]

after all this usual media hysteria has died down, she will be quietly re hired and the public can get on with hating somebody else in the public eye.