Baby born to cannabis smoking teenagers must be given up for adoption, court rules

[mike_field]

A baby boy, whose father was just 14 when he was born, will be placed for adoption by Stockport Council following a senior judge’s ruling.

The boy’s mother was herself only 17 when she gave birth to him and both parents were already habitual cannabis users, a family court heard.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/baby-born-teenage-cannabis-smoking-14263759

-------------

“It is profoundly worrying that they appeared to view cannabis use as the norm and did not appear to consider it had any impact upon them at all,” the judge said. The mother and her new partner, also a teenager, faced ‘entrenched difficulties’ and seemed to have given little thought as to where they might live with the boy. I come to the conclusion that the mother and her partner sadly lack the capacity to be able to care safely for him, either now or in the foreseeable future.

So who next, it's not like they were crack addicts....daily drinkers, those with mental health issues, Jeremy Corbyn supporters?

 

[Melon Donkey]

mike_field - 10/2/2018 22:44

A baby boy, whose father was just 14 when he was born, will be placed for adoption by Stockport Council following a senior judge’s ruling.

The boy’s mother was herself only 17 when she gave birth to him and both parents were already habitual cannabis users, a family court heard.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/baby-born-teenage-cannabis-smoking-14263759

-------------

“It is profoundly worrying that they appeared to view cannabis use as the norm and did not appear to consider it had any impact upon them at all,” the judge said. The mother and her new partner, also a teenager, faced ‘entrenched difficulties’ and seemed to have given little thought as to where they might live with the boy. I come to the conclusion that the mother and her partner sadly lack the capacity to be able to care safely for him, either now or in the foreseeable future.

So who next, it's not like they were crack addicts....

Well not yet they are not, if you take the view that cannabis is often is a gateway drug that can lead to harder drug use (another debate).
Of course there are other factors that the judge has taken into account such as the couple not having a plan as to where they will live let alone the underlying issues such as a 14 year old boy fathering a child with a 17 year old girl and both using cannabis since they were 12 and 14 respectively .
Can you imagine the uproar should the little one be seriously harmed due to neglect caused by the parents being off their heads . Questions would rightly be asked of the care services and courts as to why action was not taken at this point to prevent when they had the knowledge of what was going on. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Call me old fashioned, but of course there is one way that the young couple could really show their love for their child in an effort to keep him . Stop taking drugs.

 

[mike_field]

This is why I'm struggling. The mention of cannabis...there are equally bad but acceptable things in the world and far worse and kids don't get taken away.

And it's arguable dope is a gateway and as you say, different debate but I don't take that view.

Clearly other issues, but 'a plan where to live'? I'd think nobody has a plan where to live when you suddenly realise there's a bun in the oven. I didn't, so by comparison the lass was living somewhere and grandparent was mentioned, so maybe not ideal, but it's a roof and others keep their kids in less stable existences.

I can also relate more than you think and it's no great secret lol

I get the uproar if something goes wrong but how can a judge clearly acknowledge the love, which isn't neglect, and make that decision based on cannabis. Hence my alcohol comments, mental health. What about the uber working family who rely on a nanny - doesn't that in itself become harm on this basis because the assumption is the kid is neglected by its parents?

But I am fully on board with your final comment...were they given the opportunity to demonstrate that? What's the story in the meantime between birth and court case etc. Were they supported to change their ways or judged on bad days they still took a tug?

I just think it's a slippery slope based on info available.

I drank before I had kids, I drank during pregnancy(ies), I drank post birth and I'm drinking tonight whilst we're all watching Doctor Who - the counter argument is can I only be a good dad if I stop drinking?

I know I'm being argumentative but for FFS the kids are making me watch Doctor Who I need a distraction lol

 

[Pride of Lions]

Obviously more than one factor involved in the Courts decision. 14 & 17 yr olds, cannabis, unable to look after the child properly. I'd say the court was right, on the face of it.