1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Currently being held prisoner in hospital...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by scratch, Jan 11, 2019.

  1. Rainmaker


    Joined: Aug 18, 2007

    Posts: 8,045

    Location: Liverpool

    I'm not saying it's the case here but my wife says from her unfortunate experience more likely someone senior at the nursery had an 'Oh ****' moment, and 'beat' the OP to reporting it. Kind of 'We have a child in our care who comes to nursery with bruises', before the OP could ring and say 'My child went to a nursery and came home with some unexplained bruises'. If you know what I mean. You know how they say HR is there to protect the company, not the employee, and they're not your friend? A bit like that. As I said that doesn't mean it's the case here but my wife is highly experienced (and highly qualified) and saw this type of behaviour much more than anyone would like to admit.
  2. Slam62


    Joined: Jan 3, 2006

    Posts: 7,192

    Location: Monaco

    tend to agree with this,
  3. crinkleshoes


    Joined: Jun 9, 2009

    Posts: 11,607

    Location: London, McLaren or Radical

    Can't tell the OP what to do, but if I was in his shoes, I would be fighting against the 25 X-Rays thing... most people don't even have that many in their lives, let alone in a day & so the sample size for reliable data on what effect that will have, especially on such a young child will be very very low, so no reliable recommendation can be made on the true risks involved.

    If you go through the official patient dose figures and add up the different x-rays... it's quite a sizeable dose...


    My avenue would be to negotiate down to relevant X-Rays... focusing on the regions showing bruising. Then you come across as both reasonable to comply with their demands & concerned for the safety of the little one.
  4. SexyGreyFox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Mar 29, 2003

    Posts: 48,572

  5. Minstadave


    Joined: Jan 8, 2004

    Posts: 24,073

    Location: Rutland

    There's a few really uninformed opinions in here.

    The CT scan is far more radiation than the skeletal survey, as the above post shows. There will be a tiny but real increase in lifetime cancer risk, particularly from the CT head. This isn't my opinion this is well documented.

    There will also be a second skeletal survey 2 weeks later aswell if national guidelines are followed, as acute fractures are not always immediately visible.

    As a parent you don't have to have either, this will have been discussed and consent given. If parents don't give consent then Social Care can seek permission from the court, normally as part of the Section 47 child abuse investigation. They don't always get it.
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  6. Dr House


    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 12,988

    Location: London / Prague

    good luck, get some legal advice. Check your home insurance
  7. Minstadave


    Joined: Jan 8, 2004

    Posts: 24,073

    Location: Rutland

    Nothing to do with money. If there is a risk that a child has been abused the NHS/Police and social care are obliged to investigate as part of each agencies duty of care.

    You'd be amazed at what gets picked up as part of these investigations for unexplained injuries.
  8. Housey

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Feb 21, 2006

    Posts: 26,555

    As said, I would suggest some legal advice is appropriate here. Be clear on each discussion, what is said and to whom and don't get angry if you can help it. There is a process, you just need to ensure it gets to the root cause of any problems, correctly.
  9. Minstadave


    Joined: Jan 8, 2004

    Posts: 24,073

    Location: Rutland

    Your paediatric consultant and social worker will be able to give you all the information needed. The whole process should have been explained in detail.

    Lawyering up would be of limited benefit at this stage, but if you do you would need a lawyer with experience in these cases if you choose to go that way.

    There's a very detailed guide here:


    You might need a subscription though. I've got a copy somewhere.
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  10. Caracus2k


    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,239

    Imobile child with unexplained injuries and parents removing the child from a medical setting when the doctors have explained they need to do tests to look for /rule out any other, older, similar injuries....

    = Social services call the police and there's a fair chance they will consider using their emergency powers to take the child into police protection .....

    If you think a few questions and a stay at hospital is inconvenient you definetly won't like be being the subject of a 'section 47' (children's act 1989) investigation with the possibility of child protection proceedings to follow.

    Injured young children are a difficult case if there isn't a clear explanation for any injury(ies)

    They can't speak for themselves and social services and the police can't rely on what the parents tell them as some parents can be quite convincing at lieing through their teeth to cover up child abuse.
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  11. wedrum


    Joined: Aug 11, 2016

    Posts: 4,168

    Location: Cheshire

    Exactly see post 52
  12. Minstadave


    Joined: Jan 8, 2004

    Posts: 24,073

    Location: Rutland

    Inappropriate user name for a child protection thread :eek:
  13. DampCat


    Joined: Feb 26, 2007

    Posts: 13,402

    Location: Manchestah

    Man. I just spent 7 hours in A+E with my 11 month old and thought the world had ended. Sucks OP. Sorry man

    Document everything.
  14. ivrytwr3


    Joined: Aug 25, 2006

    Posts: 3,371

    So SS and the hospital are treating the daughter - 1st priority. Any direction on what action will be taken wrt the nursery?
  15. Django x2


    Joined: Sep 28, 2008

    Posts: 12,218

    Location: Britain

    You say you're not accusing anyone, but immediately raise a fairly harsh accusation.

    There are perfectly reasonable explanations for bruises on young children, from play, to a knock on furniture, to even medical conditions, which is the one I was about to share.

    There was a case a few years back where a girl was removed from parents and placed into care because of unexplained bruising. It was medically discovered that she had a condition (Von Willebrands II) but that discovery came too late as the child had been adopted, which meant, even though innocent, the parents couldn't have her back. It's still in court of appeal afaik.
  16. edscdk


    Joined: Jul 17, 2008

    Posts: 6,546

    I would suspect parents that have done nothing do as they are told, worry a lot, allow ss to gather evidence (that's wrong) and get their kids taken away... Parents that abuse their kids don't worry don't care don't cooperate ss cannot get any real evidence and it goes on for years
  17. Minstadave


    Joined: Jan 8, 2004

    Posts: 24,073

    Location: Rutland

    At the end of the hospital stay the Doctor provides a report of the examination and investigation findings. Then you have a multi agency strategy meeting to decide what action is taken. Usually involves health/police/social care and sometimes health visitor/nursery.
  18. mattyg


    Joined: Jun 17, 2007

    Posts: 7,309

    I have first hand experience of this

    We had a phone call from SS asking if we could come and collect our niece from nursery as there had been an issue. When my OH got there she was met by her sister and SS. We were told there was some unexplained bruising on the child and could we have our niece overnight.

    Over night turned into 9 months. That was SS plan all along. They drip fed us then put us under pressure to become emergency foster parents to our niece. They sent us on courses to become foster parents for other children too.

    So the good news for the OP is if he has close family who haven't been in unsupervised contact with the child around the time of the injuries then SS will try to place the child with them. (I say good news. What I mean is in a bad case scenario then they will try to place the child with family which is less bad than a stranger) the issue is you may have to have supervised contact.

    The Dr's will take pictures that will show bruising that you can't see with the naked eye to try and get a timeline etc However Dr's can be wrong. Whilst we had our niece she got a scratch on her head. We took her to the GP to get it recorded and he said it was at least 2 days old. Muppet. She was examined at hospital that morning by a specialist due to the case and no head injuries where recorded.

    To cut a long story short and to highlight massive flaws in the system.

    I have to word this bit carefully

    Our niece had recieved injuries (grab brusises around her Jawline and on her arms and scratches to her face) from someone unknown. The injuries happened when she was in the care of her mother and her mothers new boyfriend
    The Boyfriend wrote a letter that was read out in court that said the Mother didn't cause the injuries as they happened at a time when the mother wasn't there. The boyfriend admitted getting frustrated with the child as the child 18 months old child had rearragned his startrek videos... He also admitted the she had fallen off the couch into a bucket of Lego.

    He wouldn't explain the thumb and 4 finger bruise on the childs jawline nor the finger bruises on her arms.

    IF SS had proven that the mother had caused those injuries then the chikd would have been perm removed and the mother would have been prosecuted.
    However the mother and boyfriend had then split up and mother was back with babys father, and because of the "admission" was in family court it was inadmissible in criminal court the boyfriend got off scott free.

    The ONLY good thing to come out of this is we have a really good close relationship with our Niece. She knows she lived with us for a while but doesn't know why

    Hopefully the OP will have a much easier ride.

    Sorry If i scare you with our story
  19. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 61,589

    If it is the case I just googled (there has been a recent judgement) it is far less black and white than that - some injuries are inconclusive as to how they happened and there is general signs of neglect - which has lead to harm or the child experiencing unnecessary suffering - even if there wasn't intentional harm caused. Does look to me like there is far too many inconclusive factors in the case, on both sides, and it should be re-examined at a higher level.
  20. cheesyboy


    Joined: Dec 7, 2012

    Posts: 11,001

    Location: Gloucestershire

    You don't remember that bloke who was on breakfast TV and in the papers begging for help because SS had taken his daughter away unjustifiably? You know, the one who murdered her after he got her back...