General Chat

You and me both, OC.

When my children were at primary school, there was a family of four children, all well-cared for, and with an ever-present mum. Mum developed epilepsy - and the children were taken into care. I don't understand what happens today. I know a couple locally, of extremely low intelligence, who have nevertheless married and had a baby. They require a 24 hour-a-day team of social workers to supervise them. I have seen them out and about with the child, now a toddler, and they are loving, careful parents, intently focussed on this child. So how did this couple slip through the net? No Health Visitor? No neighbours? No concerned teachers? I just don't understand. OC

So sad, OC. I didn't think parents were allowed to refuse help if the children were being badly neglected, as these so obviously were. Children are taken into care for far less. The focus seems to have been on the fact that the older children were looking after the little ones rather than the fact that they were all being totally neglected by their parents.

You tooxx Night Nightxx Haysxx

I just couldn't believe what i was seeing to be honest..!! Those poor kids(if you can call em that). What a selfish couple... they just swanned about smoking,,,he was having a beer... i was so upset by it..xx The look of loss and loneliness on those girls faces was horriblexx

Also..............when the youngest asked the Dad for a nappy....he went and got it no prob's....so change her!!! i don't want to sound hard.....but...i think they were just BL.... lazy!!

I know.when asked, she said becuse i cant see where the blood is....there was no love atall towards those kids....yet they want more... she said shes addicted to the first cry of a baby.......... what about the rest of there live's??xx

.....or at least stop now....she said she wanted 8!!! They seemed to think that everyting was ok....BUT the mum dodged questions......so maybe deep down she knew what people would be thinking..x

She said all her babies were big , but didn`t say anything about smoking affecting the other kiddies--wonder if they had asthma, they looked very peaky -didn`t they? Ros

There just didnt seem to be any love towards the kids... the girls looked so lonely.... Ros..i doubt there diet is very good...hence the peaky look..xxx

OC....it has been on my mind all day....really got to me.... and yes....there are so many more 'kids' out there in the same situation...;0(( Not being able to be 'kids'xxx

Mrs Presley Yes, perhaps you are right, I don't remember what they called them, Social Worker or case worker. Whatever or whoever, we did see the mother feeding the baby at the end. Hope that was prompted by the Case Worker and I hope he/she knocks some sense into the parents - and lets those two little girls go out to play like normal kids. And of course, we only saw two examples of the 150,000 child carers..... OC

OC.. i saw at the end it said they had been moved to a bigger house..did it say they had been given a social worker aswell...i thought it said case worker..or is that the same thing...? I have to say i found it very unpsetting to watch.......when that young girl was changing the baby....how many hours had that child been in a soiled nappy... Ros,also was it me or did the Mum seem to find it funny that they had been told that smoking while pregnant was bad for the baby...?

Isn't it totally wrong that it should take a tv company making a programme before the social services sit up & take notice & action? What is wrong with these 'people' in 'authority'? I often think the media have a lot to answer for in this day & age, but they do seem to have their uses. Angela

Felicity One of the things which made me really mad - the family had refused all offers of outside help, except for a cleaner who came in two days a week, and Social Services said they 'could not force them to accept help' WHY NOT! these children were being dangerously neglected - not cruelly treated, just dangerously neglected. The mother had no interaction with the children at all. and obviously, two little girls of 9 and 12 were not aware of what kind of stimulation and attention small children need. The four younger children slept where they fell and stayed in soiled nappies till the two girls came home from school. I have a feeling - maybe wrong - that Channel 4 made this programme in the hope that the Authorities would have to take notice and do something. Since the programme was made, the family have moved to a bigger house and have been assigned a Child Social Worker. OC

I think it said at the end that they now had a Case Worker, were in a bigger house and were told to smoke outside. They were a bit ignorant about smoking too , weren`t they? Ros

More help? No, I don't think so. My mother used to think that it was good that I could cook a complete sunday dinner at the age of 8 unassisted. That and many other things had been a case of having to, and in those days, as others have said, what went on behind closed doors was 'private' and not considered anyone else's business. When I was 13, I plucked up the courage to talk to my headmistress about the situation at home and was told 'Everyone has their cross to bear, this is yours.' I never mentioned this at home. One of my siblings looked for outside help too and got into a great deal of trouble for it.

Haven't watched it yet ,but i will do. Was wondering is a child carer only a carer because of spending cuts ? Years ago surely they would have had more / some help ? Or is this thought through rose tinted glasses ?

I really thought at the end it would say something about the Social services getting involved....but it didn't.. Mind you, don't think they would have broadcast it if that had been the case.xxx

Sounds heartbreaking, and although children were looking after thie parents and families before the word 'carer' was coined, it seems to me ludicrous that a television programme was made about a situation that would normally have Social Services through the door in an instant. Or would it?