I have a controversial suggestion for parents convicted of abuse and murder such as this .Compulsory sterilization ?I know it would never happen because of human rights issues but that`s how I feel at the moment having read about the case .I know it wont bring the little lad back but they would never be able to abuse their own kids again would they?
Just put them down.
+1 as above
I've still not been able to read any of the articles in full or listen to any coverage - too tragic and sick.
+1 sterilisation
+2 putting them down
+3 knowing they're both going to get severely 'turned over' by their respective inmates before either of the above
had to turn the radio over when they started going through the details yesterday, just an awful business 🙁
Just awful. I know that the school were being told he was being treated for some mysterious eating problem (and told a load of other fabrications about his other injuries), but I [i]still[/i] can't get my head around it going on for as long as it did and nobody there intervening. So sad, poor little boy.
There are just some sick, sick bastards in this world, it beggars belief that so-called human beings can behave in this way.
Especially to their own child.
@Andy R - mother and stepfather.
EDIT: MrsCat has told me it could be associated with something called the Cinderella Effect - Wikipedia link for starters: [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinderella_effect ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinderella_effect[/url]
really shocked by this one. sparea thought also for children in syria, iraq, afghanistan etc etc.
I have a [s]controversial[/s] [b]perfectly acceptable and sensible[/b] suggestion for parents convicted of abuse and murder such as this
FTFY
The thought that these "people" could have another child doesn't sit well with me at all.
sparea thought also for children in syria, iraq, afghanistan etc etc
Do all parents in those countries abuse, starve and murder their own kids?
While what is happening there is grim, it's not relevant in this thread.
The thought that these "people" could have another child doesn't sit well with me at all.
Wouldn't any potential future offspring just be taken immediatley into care? Surely?
tom the point is that we get outraged I.e baby p, move on till the next outrage , while all the time kids are dying on a daily basis. sorry if you feel there is no connection.
The only connection is that children are dying (i really dont mean to sound insensitive here, but its difficult not to). IMO what has happened to Daniel and baby P is some how much worse. These were kids living in peacetime, and those whose job/natural instinct it was to protect them have turned on them, quite horrifically, for no good reason.
Im not saying war is justification for kids dying, but is a horrible fact of life. Parents killing their own kids is a different level of evil.
Parents killing their own kids is a different level of evil.
Agreed, but he was not killed by his own parents, just one, the other was his step-father. It is a significant factor.
Sterilisation doesn't go far enough, I'd use them instead of the robots for IED clearance in Afghanistan
I just think it's all desperately sad.
One thing that annoyed me, though, was Nick Clegg saying it should be on our consciences. **** off, Nick - I strongly dislike being told what to feel guilty about, especially by politicians.
it was harrowing reading about it, but i just don't understand why - why did they do it?
Every time I see that little boy on television, all I keep thinking is we would have looked after you and wanted you even if your parents didn't...
feel sorry for the coppers and people involved the the investigation?
read that the police had pictures Daniel on their walls, during the investigation, and they fell in love of the boy, and did their best to bring the accused to justice
ied clearing would be good
one of the guests on newsnight made an interesting point about why wasn't this noticed at his school. His point was malnourished children are more numerous than we would like to admit and to the teachers and staff at some schools it's "run of the mill". Whether this is true or not I don't know but if it is it's a chilling indictment of our society.
Appaling case for sure but as for the suggested responses.....-1 from me, I'm afraid.
Nick Clegg saying it should be on our consciences.
malnourished children are more numerous than we would like to admit and to the teachers and staff at some schools it's "run of the mill"
And whose conscience should that be on Nick?
Appaling case for sure but as for the suggested responses.....-1 from me, I'm afraid.
What would you like to see happen to the perpetrators of such a crime ?Do you think that rehabilitation into society is possible or even probable and maybe someone who does this needs to go to a secure mental unit for treatment ?
I've not been able to have live radio or news for a couple of days because of this, can't deal with such stories since I've become a Dad, it genuinely keeps me up all night.
All of these type of people, the April Jones killer in Wales, any child killers or abusers, the lot of em just take them straight from the trial and drop them in the North Sea. I'd adopt them all if I could. 😥
A million children in the UK are living with "food insecurity" according to research. This country, now, in the 21st century.
But according to the Tories, the big increase in people turning to food banks is only because there are more food banks.
It makes you think doesnt it ? There are loads of couples who cant conceive who would love to adopt a child and give it a loving home .I dont suppose a shrink would ever find out what makes a person abuse their own child in this way
I dont get the malnourished child bit .I brought my son up for 7 years on income support between the ages of 2 and 9 .I didnt have a car or a phone for a few of those years but I managed ok.I think some of it is down to educating people to actually cook food from scratch and not open a packet
A blog from someone who lives with the reality of food poverty:
We're not rich. By the standards of people on here, we're very poor. But I can't imagine how hard it is when you can't provide enough food for your child.
What was the proper dad doing in all of this? Was he around?
What was the proper dad doing in all of this? Was he around?
He lives in Poland
one of the guests on newsnight made an interesting point about why wasn't this noticed at his school. His point was malnourished children are more numerous than we would like to admit and to the teachers and staff at some schools it's "run of the mill". Whether this is true or not I don't know but if it is it's a chilling indictment of our society.
Mrs B teaches in a nice market town, and usually has a few each year that they are giving breakfast and lunch, often out of their own pockets. It's more common than most would think.
But she thought that some of the behaviour exhibited would have had the police in school.. but who knows how good the parent was at covering it up? Difficult to say 🙁
why wasn't this (malnutrition) noticed at his school
It was, but the [s]evil witch[/s] mother told them he had a rare eating disorder, and as such told them not to feed him.
This is what really troubles me. If they saw the lad as an inconvenience, (his awful living conditions suggest they did) then I guess that's why they weren't feeding him at home, but to go that extra mile and lie to others to make sure they didnt feed him either?? Utter evil, barely comprehensible, madness.
A million children in the UK are living with "food insecurity" according to research. This country, now, in the 21st century.
I can't get how that can be. Basic food over here is very, very cheap compared to other countries. I think the parents must be blowing their cash on Sky TV and fags before thinking about food for their kids.
As I said above I managed on income support and actually lived very healthily because I couldnt afford to buy ready made crap .I was my lightest and fittest in 96 in my income support years,and I had time to train loads as well!!
I can't get how that can be
I suspect because they have taken a fairly small sample, from a particularly poor part of the country, then scaled up. Makes for more sensational report headlines, see.
As I said above I managed on income support and actually lived very healthily because I couldnt afford to buy ready made crap
Which is great, but if your 4 years old you don't get income support directly to your piggy bank and if mum and step-dad are spending it all on the lash every night, or have a drug habit/ desperately need that 650b bike then you see sad cases like this.
Following on from other comments about kids going to School hungry - Mrs Freeagent is a secondary school science teacher in posh Bromley borough, she often has kids in class who've not eaten breakfast, have no money/food for lunch and tell her that they have to fend for themselves in the evenings.
Others live on a diet of chocolate, crisps and energy drinks (quite often they'll do a can of 'Monster' for breakfast, and another for lunch)
So although it sounds like the School did f*ck up in this case - hungry, mal-nourished kids are more common than you'd think, even in 'nice' places.
My in-laws are Foster carers and have had several kids (all fairly young) over the years who have arrived looking like they've been living wild in the woods - mal-nourished, thinning hair, sunken eyes, filthy dirty, rotten teeth..
so sad to think there are kids living local to all of us being treated like this...
Out of interest, those of you that disagree with the sterilising/culling/disposing of such people: do you have children?
Totally agree with you about kids and being fed properly and them not getting he money directly.I think the schools have a big part to play in helping social services .Thats assuming that school staff are allowed to say things without knee jerk suspension /sacking for doing so if they are wrong.
I disagree with the death penalty, because I feel it is little more than medieval retribution, and not something a civilized society should be doing, however I do feel people like this should be going away with no chance of ever seeing the light of day, and doing 10 hours a day hard graft in jail, not sitting about playing on the X-box.
My in-laws are Foster carers and have had several kids (all fairly young) over the years who have arrived looking like they've been living wild in the woods - mal-nourished, thinning hair, sunken eyes, filthy dirty, rotten teeth..
You quite often see people like this who have existed on a very poor diet .You often see adults on certain estates or in certain towns with a reputation shall we say who look way older than their years because of the way they have lived
Read that blog I linked to. Seriously. It's not just people blowing their benefits of Sky and fags.
Yes I have children but that does not alter my view that forced sterilisation is not the solution or indeed IMO morally supportable. Again IMO, I believe that the mark of a civilised society is how we treat others including those we disagree with and those who do evil things, I do not support the death penalty, I find the idea of chopping off the hand of a thief abhorrent and I think that we should be above ideas of forced medical procedure (lobotomies, sterilisation etc) as well.
Those people should be punished for sure but no one benefits from reverting to things that we outgrew many years ago (thankfully) and again IMO!!
But on a less forgiving note, I was shocked to hear the extent of excuse making on the radio this morning from people who should have known better. Shocking if not surprising.
The children they cant have after sterilization would be thankful.
So if the mother became pregnant again (heaven forbid) would you support a forced abortion?
Is there anyone on here who works in the social services who could give us an idea of what its like to be a case worker? As a country we see these cases of failure highlighted time an again but is it a very small percentage that go wrong and we just remember them because they are in the media? 0r does the whole system need overhauling or an injection of capital ?
No, but I would advocate that the child be taken away. ref: Banned from keeping animals for life for someone who demonstrates that they are morally and mentally incapable of caring for an animal. You don't shoot the dog but you do remove it from the source of harm.
So if the mother became pregnant again (heaven forbid) would you support a forced abortion?
.Surely if that occurred compulsory fostering or adoption would be the way to go ?
So if the mother became pregnant again (heaven forbid) would you support a forced [s]abortion[/s] [b]adoption[/b]?
Yes.
Whilst I'm not a fan of the death sentence or forced "treatments", eg sterilisation, I do believe the latter should be utilised until we develop a proven model of re-education. That's going to take at least a generation IMO, even if we get the model working now. It may not serve as a deterrent, but it will certainly stop certain crimes from being committed again.
However ... the problem needs to be addressed at source, not x months/years down the line when its too late. This is the part I don't believe will get any better for at least another generation.
They're evil and they do evil things. I'm not, so I don't.
Re education can only work if you know there is a problem in the first place.You may not know there is a problem until you find a dead toddler on a piss soaked mattress.Then the re education is to late
MrsCat has just trained as a Health Visitor after 16 years as a midwife, when she let's off steam re the state of monitoring/intervention etc it is sometimes hard to believe, it may sound a bit Daily Mail but animals seem to get better protection than children.
If they didn't want the kid, why not let him go and live with his father?
Re education can only work if you know there is a problem in the first place.You may not know there is a problem until you find a dead toddler on a piss soaked mattress.Then the re education is to late
Which is why I said both re-education and "... the problem needs to be addressed at source, not x months/years down the line where its too late ..."
The latter involves everything from parenting to schooling to peer awareness to employment to the social system etc.
Who are your target audience for education though ? Playing devils advocate its not always the skint on benefits in a council flat .You can only offer help once you see warning signs .Hungry kid with no lunch ? How many times before you see it as a problem .My son wouldnt eat his free school lunch as he didnt like the sarnies (fussy sod)I had to send his lunch in and it had to be right or he wouldnt eat it.You could get the kid who binned his lunch and scabbed chips off his mates .How do you decide between early stages of neglect and fussy kid?
The whole thing makes me feel truly sick to the bottom of my stomach, in the same way the Fretzel thing, baby P & other atrocities have done in the past.
I would prefer the thread closed I can see no good in the discussion as it is.
Who are your target audience for education though ?
From a big picture perspective, I'd say everyone has a responsibility to look out for "problem people" in whatever their role or walk of life. In terms of formal "education" maybe teachers need more training, as do social workers etc.
I dont think you need more formal education of teachers etc .I think its having the balls to step in if you think there is a problem knowing you may be castigated if you are wrong
Dreadful case, which I find upsetting and disturbing, and which is why I'd much prefer this thread wasn't in the bike forum, because I go there to read about bikes.
Mods?
I think its having the balls to step in if you think there is a problem knowing you may be castigated if you are wrong
Yup. Plenty of politics and bits of red tape to cut through there though. Recognising the signs of "trouble" is 100% key as well though.
+1 agree with this
I think its having the balls to step in if you think there is a problem knowing you may be castigated if you are wrong
It's not really about the teachers or the social workers. I am married to a teacher and have a couple of social workers in my circle of friends. "Castigated" is a very light word for the process etc if they get it wrong. It is the system that needs attention. It's easier to take an animal away from an abusive situation than a child. Add to that the abusers are usually very manipulative and evasive and there is always a lawyer prepared to go full on offensive if the abuser feels their human rights are being transgressed.
Having said all that, the only time you hear about this is when a tragedy strikes. We never hear of the children who are saved by social services etc, of which there are many.
Oh and whilst I don't agree with the death penalty under any circumstances, I would have absolutely no problem with forced sterilisation for parents who abuse children.
Children are a gift to be cherished.
i have nothing to add other than just donated to this guy raising cash for the nspcc ( ive no ide who he is )
do those opposed to the death penalty because it is "barbaric" and something we have "outgrown" really think life in prison with no possibility of freedom would be more humane and "civilised"?
of course if we had the means and knowledge to effectively rehabilitate all offenders that would be preferable....but we don't for now.
and how is it more "civilised" to inflict these people's influence (even existence...) on others; either those they encounter in prison or when they get out.
I'm not suggesting death penalty to all criminals any more than amputating a foot because it has a verucca, but if you get gangrene in a leg, you cut it off and move on (albeit with a limp). it might not be pleasant but a mature person realises that some harsh realities must be accepted and in fact are for the best.
Of course life in prison is more humane than execution. A society which allows the killing of its own citizens cannot argue that killing people is wrong.
that's a circular argument. and a simplification. killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong.
in rebuttal I say 'the death penalty should be reintroduced because killing people is right sometimes'. it sums up what I believe without actually saying anything useful. so there.
I feel we should revert back to the dark ages and for the people who commit the most horrible and dispicable crimes to be put down for good.
I can say this in all honesty
If I was the father of that child, I would wait the thirty or so years that it takes and inflict as much pain upon the mother and boyfriend as I could before I got caught or killed them.
I would do it without remorse or hesitation. I'll be ready for the knackers yard by that time anyway
Coyote, that's a common defence of those in responsible positions when cases like this come around, but it begs the question of whether the teachers et al in this case did make any effort to report or notify any concerns. You can't use a difficult process as a defence for inaction.
The disgusted parent in me would like to see them given the death penalty.
The Prime Minister in me would like to see these people sterilised [b]before[/b] they reproduce so they can't inflict their misery on their desperate offspring (Recognise screening would be controversial/prone to dispute).
The citizen in me knows (hopes?) that once they've realised they're in jail for a very long time without their booze/drug binges, the reality of what they did will make the rest of their pointless lives hell to live.
The death penalty isn't about deterrence*, it's about revenge. As a society, we shouldn't do revenge. And this is in addition to the whole problem of accidentally executing an innocent person.
*Do you seriously think that these people would think "I won't kill my child if I get the death penalty, but I will if I only get the rest of my life in prison"?
The death penalty isn't just about revenge. It's part revenge (and why shouldn't victims get that anyway - it's a long established part of the human psyche and to deny it could be considered unhealthy), part deterrence (maybe not so much in this case, but what about a gang-related murder?), but mostly it's about removing these people humanely from society for the protection of those who do not indulge in the sickest, cruellest acts and do not want to become future victims.
If 'life' meant LIFE, then that would mean an existence without hope of sex, relationships, reproduction, parenting those offspring one may already have produced, boozy nights out/drugs binges, mtbing or most of the other things that give a point to the human experience.
In my honest opinion, that is tantamount to the cruellest torture and obviates any argument anyone could make about the death penalty being 'barbaric' or 'uncivilised' or 'inhumane'.
How far does it differ from the actions of Josef Fritzl? Acts which are quite rightly condemned as all those things.
mickolas - Memberthat's a circular argument. and a simplification. killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong.
Nope, that itself is a simplification. Try "A legal system that kills people has less credibility when it tells others not to kill people"
Oh, also try "The thing about life imprisonment is you can release the person when you screwed up"
and why shouldn't victims get that anyway - it's a long established part of the human psyche and to deny it could be considered unhealthy)
Well so is murder and rape and theft - you know the bad things we try to discourage and we term crimes so denying this could be considered unhealthy
lex talionis [ eye for an eye tooth for a tooth means the revenge would never stop
FWIW brady committed his crimes when the death penalty was in place but was charged once it was repealed. He has been trying to have the right to end his life fro well over a decade
Life in prison may not be the lesser punishment and the death penalty appears to be of limited use as a deterrent
I have a four year old and I just cant get my head round how peaple could do these things? they should be tortured end of
so torturing a child is bad
What exactly is torturing an adult then?
I dont get why folk go that behaviour you did is so bad. terrible and appalling my only response is to do it to you
Its still wrong whoever does it
A depressingly familiar story!
Fear not however, there will be a serious case review, with the inevitable 'revelation' that there turns out to have been a long history of multi agency child protection reports
I'm sure 'no stone will go unturned to make sure this cannot happen again' will be heard a lot, as will "lack of communication" "opportunities were missed" and "systemic failure"
The reality will be extra reams of paperwork for social workers. It will of course happen again and further stones will be moved about, nothing will change.
I am sure I read somewhere that there was another child in the family, who was well treated. So they knew what to do and had the means, they just chose to maltreat that child.
There was a family in the town I grew up in like that, my sister was in the same class as the older girl who was the child from her mothers former relationship, I was in the class of the younger child. One was abused horribly, scapegoated for everything and the younger was spoiled rotten.
The dad went to prison in this case, the abused girl ended up on the streets sniffing glue and the younger one swanned about like nothing has happened.
It is not uncommon, apparentely.
Hey guys, thud story really has badly affected me. I have a son if four and everytone I see him smile I think of that poor child and the many more like him that don't smile very often. I genuinely don't know what punusishment would suit the monsters that can do that. But what we can all do is help by supporting charities such as nspcc. Do what ice done, nip on the site and make a donation.
Northwind - Membermickolas - Member
that's a circular argument. and a simplification. killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong.
Nope, that itself is a simplification. Try "A legal system that kills people has less credibility when it tells others not to kill people"
Oh, also try "The thing about life imprisonment is you can release the person when you screwed up"
Yes.....my point *was* that it is a simplification 😕
How about "A legal system that imprisons people has less credibility when it tells others not to imprison people" - that line of argument doesn't hold in one case or the other; it is irrelevant. Death to an individual by consent of law (ie a judge and jury) is a far cry from acknowledgement of one individual's right to take the life of another.
Okay - the redaction argument is a valid one - and so far the only valid argument I have ever seen against the death penalty. Perhaps a post-judgement review with a panel of judges reviewing any proposed capital punishment cases with a 100% concensus required? No doubt there would never be a 100% certain system, but keeping murderers alive and allowing them the opportunity to murder again should surely be a larger hazard and a bigger burden of guilt on the collective conscience.
edited to change 'killers' to 'murderers'