Mother loses all rights to "sickly" children

[taniaaust1]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...yndrome-by-proxy/story-e6freuy9-1226409611274

There's something about that case which isnt sitting quite right with me... some things are not really making sense in the medias version of it.. Should this mother have really been blocked from courts from loosing all contact with children (she's not even allowed to contact by mail) till they are 18 just due to taking a child to hospital a lot?

What I find really weird about this case, is that there is nothing at all in the news story about her actually harming the kids or details of that, only that she kept taking one esp to hospital for asthma!!. Other then being maybe really obsessive about childrens health.. did she really do anything to them?

she has been banned from contacting her nine-year-old child -- and his three siblings -- before they turn 18 amid grave fears that her behaviour could lead to one of them being harmed or even killed.

I note the word "could" in that sentence.. so in other words it sounds as if she hasnt actually done anything to purposely harm the kids at all... it says "could" lead to. So the court made its decision due to things not even done?

"Unfortunately, the child picks up on the mother's behaviour and he sees himself as a sick child, that he has no life expectancy and that he will not live long.

(other then thinking one was going to die and saying that in front of him and discussing funeral arrangements.. yeah that is a bad choice of thing to do, but it does sound like she believes he will.. who knows ..maybe she was discussing in a next room and he heard her.. we dont really know what happened. Ive heard of 13 year old cancer patients and parents having discussions in their deaths.. yeah this child is a bit younger... maybe the mother is habitual open with the child?). Would it have been more sensible for the court to just put a bar onto the mother that this was inappropiate for a child of 9 to be hearing such discussion even if she believed what she was saying?

Is this a system gone crazy, when it wont allow this mother even to have written contact (surely chids father or family could monitor letters to make sure mother who may have a death phobia, dont impose her own views that he's sick and will die onto the child).

The Department of Family and Community Services received 26 "risk of harm reports" relating to the boy, the most serious of which was in February last year when he attempted to commit suicide at the hospital, saying that he had "had enough".

She also encouraged staff to perform an invasive bronchoscopy on her son when it was likely unnecessary. In another incident at Wollongong Hospital after the boy began hitting his head due to distress over her behaviour, the mother allegedly encouraged him to hit himself harder.
Two years later at Westmead Children's Hospital the boy suffered a life-threatening asthma attack.

umm "likely unneccessarily"... and the child 2 years later does actually have a life threatening asthma attack. Maybe the mum with mothers intuition, did know something wasnt quite right with her child? The sons suicide attempt.. and saying "he had had enough".. could of been said due to being ignored by a hospital rather then anything the mother did.

She took the eldest son to hospital 115 times in the three years to 2010, mostly for asthma attacks.

So again it appears nothing was done physically to harm her child at all (Im sure the media would made a big thing if there was physical stuff going on and would of reported something with that), which seems weird.

the woman showed signs of Munchausen syndrome by proxy -- a form of child abuse where parents repeatedly invent illnesses for their children because they crave attention and sympathy.

ummm Isnt to get that diagnose, a parent has to actually be doing things to give the child illness symptoms?

Now suddenly they are giving that diagnoses to someone who just belives her child is sick for mostly asthma when he already has had a life threatening asthma attack and its standing up in court.
This is ridiculous and puts other parents who have sick kids at risk of this diagnoses just for "thinking" their kids are sick.

She insists her son has severe asthma but the court found the fact that he'd had no hospitalisations for the condition since he began living with his father in May last year is proof that she was the cause of his illness.
Her condition is considered so severe that treatment could take a decade or longer, and likely not be finished before the children are 18, however, she has refused treatment.

Their removal resulted in immediate improvements to the health of the eldest child.

That dont necessarily mean much.. maybe she had pets in the house which the boy was allergic too... different diet, mold in house or wattle trees outback, could mean the issue mother and he believed he had, improved. Obviously they didnt pick up he had issues till his life threatening asthma attack.. Instead they are using that he improving on living somewhere else is the evidence his mother caused his asthma. That's a very stupid view when asthma can be environmentally triggered.

My own daughter has what doctors called "silent asthma". She used to cough every night when cold air hit her for years but doctors I kept on taking her too couldnt find anything wrong. Then one day she suddenly had a serious asthma attack and wasnt able to breath at all and turned blue on me (couldnt speak at all) and had to be rushed immediately to hospital not breathing, she could of easily died . It was only then did her asthma get diagnosed, "silent asthma".. as she hardly gets any wheeze.. no warning of it except the nightly coughs when cold.

Anyway.. this media case is concerning.. screams some of poor asthma diagnoses till almost too late (so obviously mother did have some valid concerns). I wouldnt be surprised if lies have been told about this woman by some doctors... obviously she bugged them by taking the boy to the hospitial so much.

It was agreed by all sides that the children want to see their mother and the eldest son is affectionate towards her.

Maybe mother does need treatment for her illness anxiety, but should that lead to a permanet separation from the children.. children who it is said love her. isnt it damaging too to suddenly cut off all contact these children have with their mother?
....................

My theory of something which could of played into this case..this case placed the children into the hands of their father for rest of their childhood

It makes me wonder if a father wanted custody and may of seen his exes fear of the kids health, as a way to help his case... lies are then sometimes told in as far as what has been said in front of a child.

The father of my eldest, tried this kind of shit in court on me many years ago.. tried to say i was a narcissistic personality disorder.. actually made up stuff I hadnt done. The court was told by him that I was responsible for my daughters bursted ear drum which happened due to an ear infection.. all his lies did is turned his child againt him, who knew what he was saying wasnt true but courts usually wont allow children to speak out in court).

The Australian Institute of Family Studies says that one Australian study estimated between 15 and 25 cases of Munchausen syndrome by proxy were diagnosed nationwide each year.
The Sydney Children's Hospital said that most GPs have at least one paediatric patient who is repeatedly taken to the doctor by a parent -- usually the mother -- for trivial problems.

However, only a small number may be Munchausen syndrome by proxy.
The mother denies she has Munchausen syndrome by proxy and claims doctors dislike her because she is assertive and questions their authority and medical skills.

The father's lawyer told the court that the children know their mother, they love her and she is very important in their lives and that they will not forget her. The court banned any physical contact or written communication.

Yeah.. blame the females.. blame the mother. The incident of Munchausen by proxy will surely go up if they are going to start diagnosing mothers who really only have health concerns with their children with this.

The above Australian case is scary as anyone who has an extremely sick ME child even if ME/CFS has been diagnosed, could find themselves in the same boat with courts thinking the child is being influenced just by the parents thoughts.. and hence say you are harming the child via just what you believe to be true.

 

[caledonia]

That was the case with Ryan Baldwin here in the US :http://www.prohealth.com/me-cfs/blog/boardDetail.cfm?id=1384763

 

[Enid]

Munchausen - Freud in his dreams - even idiots like me (BA Fine Arts very capable of basic plumbing) know this is mumbo jumbo.

 

[Esther12]

There are parts of that which sound a bit odd.

She also encouraged staff to perform an invasive bronchoscopy on her son when it was likely unnecessary.

So the medical staff agreed to her encouragement? It may have been necessary? And this seemed like the best example of her doing something which actively harmed her child?

Banning all contact seems difficult to justify based upon what was mentioned in that report, even if there does seem to be reason for having them live primarily with their father.

Was this kind of implied to be the mother's fault... or reason for her anxiety?

Two years later at Westmead Children's Hospital the boy suffered a life-threatening asthma attack.

 

[Enid]

The whole is odd Esther - not a clue any of his Docs.

 

[user9876]

Its common in the UK for parents with cronically ill children to be accused of child abuse through Munchausen syndrome by proxy which since being discredited the psychs have renamed FII (Fabricated Illness). Its a particular problem for children with ME where schools and doctors accuse parents of harming children.

I think the tymes trust were reporting they had dealt with 80 cases of child protection procedings where children have ME and they are just a small charity.

I thought this was quite a good paper talking about how it happens
http://journals.hil.unb.ca/index.php/NW/article/view/18793/20612