Taking new born babies from their mothers

was once considered to be acceptable when the mother was unmarried or there was some other issue. Adoption was considered acceptable too. 

Now much more effort is made to keep mother and baby together. It sounds like a good thing doesn't it? This is probably why there is a piece in this morning's paper expressing alarm at the number of infants who are being taken from their mothers within the first month of their lives.

Last week I chatted briefly to the mother of the twin girls just down the street. The girls are still pre-school. Their mother looks exhausted. Her husband seems to work very long hours and they don't mix with the other families on the street. In fact I am not sure they mix much with anyone. The girls don't go to any sort of playgroup or other social activity. It has taken them more than twelve months to learn to even acknowledge me with a wary smile. They have never spoken to me. Their immediate neighbour says the same thing. All the other children in the street seem to be constantly full of things they must tell me. T... was positively jumping up and down with impatience yesterday as he waited to tell me something. The girls are nothing like that.

Yes I know being twins, especially identical twins, can be an issue. I thought of them when I read the article this morning. They are well cared for - but what if they were not?  Twins have even been separated in the past. What of other children?

There is an extraordinary woman in this city who has taken in many, many infants from birth. They are seriously at risk infants whose mothers might be drug addicts or alcoholics or at risk of domestic violence. Yes, the babies might have problems associated with these things too but this woman takes them in and works long, hard hours to do the best she can for them. But they leave her and go on to an uncertain future. 

Sometimes they are returned to their mothers. It is then that the cycle of "return to mother and then return into care" starts. We think about the mother but how much do we think about the child? We put it in terms of the child having the "right" to be brought up by their natural mother. Is that really the case or do they have a greater right, a right to be brought up in a stable, caring environment? Do children born with FAS (foetal alcohol syndrome) really need the added burden of being shunted in and out of state care just to satisfy society's belief it is their "right" to be parented by a mother who cared so little about them during pregnancy?   

Not for the first time I am left wondering whether what we now we say is in the best interests of the child is in nobody's interest at all - least of all the child.