Community Tard Baby General (includes brain dead kids) - Fundies and their genetic Fuckups; Parents of corpses in denial

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

I made this post with screenshots of her FB before she made the whole thing private. (And I've seen lots of comments about us on other discussion forums in the last few days so I think we have a lot of new readers - hi!). I went through her entire public FB history before she locked it down and this is a decent summary of it. It was basically:

• Photos of Archie she's posted again since doing gym/MMA
• Lots of photos of her and Jeanette (from the This Morning interview) going out on the town with their arses barely covered
• Lots of those posts advertising the local 'Gentleman's Clubs'
• A couple of posts like that one with men calling her that suggests she also did dirty phone calls on the side

I have been wondering for a while with her discussing the phone calls in the bedroom in all the interviews if she was actually on a dirty phone call, Archie heard, it was the final straw and he thought "fuck this" and hung himself.

I also think Archie was absolutely right to be concerned about his mum and it also shows how discussing her sex work/ lap dancing absolutely is relevant, not to be moralising but its yet another indicator of what life was like for Archie. Doing that kind of work would have put Hollie at greater risk of physical and sexual assault from 'customers'. Who knows what Archie has experienced over the years related to her work - it could be overhearing her talking dodgy customers, knowing that she's getting random men phoning her, comments when they were out in public together.

With it being a night time industry it makes you wonder who was looking after Archie overnight. I suspect there was a lot of leaving him home with his teenage siblings. In the interview where she talked about him messing about with the dressing gown cord the night before, she says it was his sister Lauren who witnessed that, told him to stop and they ended up spending the evening together in her room watching films. I got the impression Hollie wasn't there that evening and she only found out about it later when Lauren told her.

I have had some similar thoughts. Also makes me wonder if he was trying for a scare/attention from her - whether after a conflict, or if she wasn't home bc she was...out, for business or pleasure. or just in general.

I'm just thinking of an enmeshed relationship, parentification, a sense by a child that he should protect his mother

+ schoolboy gossip/teasing about his mom doing some kind of sex work (true or not), at an age when 11

+ maybe a dicey boyfriend that was dealing or otherwise unpleasant OR felt to a child like he was getting kicked aside/replaced (the NEW "man of the house")

I could see a child in A's position and level of emotional development (12, with possible regulation issues besides) deciding to reassert and reattain his relationship with his mother by diverting her attention back to him by a huge scare.

 

[stingray]

Thank you to the two Kiwis who mentioned and explained covert / emotional incest, because that's exactly the term I didn't know I was looking for to describe this situation. I know it's a pretty heinous accusation to make of someone, to accuse them of having a sexual incestual relationship with their child. Especially of Hollie, because there's no solid evidence; if nothing else, there's just a handful of odd things that raise a few red flags. But I definitely think covert incest was a thing there. It really seems like Hollie tried to seek some kind of safety or stability in Archie that she shouldn't be getting from her child, that it was something she can and should only seek in other adults. For her to lean on or emotionally depend on Archie in such a significant way probably made the relationship between mother and child very unbalanced, and as others have pointed out, that's a huge burden on a child, even if it doesn't seem like it could be.

With that being said, is it inherently unhealthy for a mother to seek some kind of emotional support or care from her children occasionally? Of course not. But when that becomes the dynamic 24/7, Archie's just been conditioned to constantly think about his mother's problems and stresses. It's possible he started to feel responsible for some of Hollie's problems, too, which is a really sad thing to think about. I really do think it's just a breeding ground for a personality disorder later in life. It's a bittersweet thought, to know Archie won't ever actually have to go through these things. It makes me sad when people downplay this type of thing just because it's not the worst case scenario. A child doesn't need to be in extremely dire life-or-death straits for them to still need and deserve help in these situations.

 

[not very concrete]

if she wasn't home bc she was...out, for business or pleasure

Leaving a 12 year old alone for a few hours isn't that bad, and I somewhat doubt she left him frequently if his training needed a lot of time. Someone before mentioned how the specific gymnastics club he attended would have parents watching the practice, partly because of the chance for their kids to be shown off to the 'top dog' coaches so it became a bit Dance Moms-y between the parents. Hollie strikes me like the type who would attend everything to gloat how perfect her child is or to find reasons to be disappointed in him - her love for him would essentially be 'conditional' on him achieving something

The road this discussion is taking regarding their relationship strikes me as that of a narcissistic parent, and realistically she doesn't have to be diagnosed with NPD to be one

 

[Thomas Eugene Paris]

1. It is not necessary for me to consider, in this short extempore judgment, the circumstances which led to A's collapse, other than to say that between 12th and 13th June, skeletal survey X-rays were undertaken which showed multiple fractures throughout his skeleton and significant fractures to his ribs bilaterally. Most of the rib fractures appear to have callus formation which indicate that they preceded A's collapse. In addition to these fractures, retinal haemorrhages have been identified which are both bilateral and multifocal. I understand there are now proceedings in the family court in East London. The Local Authority, who has made the application in the family court, sought and was granted leave to intervene in this application.

Ouch. Later on there’s a point made about how loving and attentive the parents are.

Sounds like with being such a young child somehow his brain has adapted to recover some of his breathing drive. Still no chance of recovery though, although the judge has said no to the DNAR.

If the parents are cooperative with the medical team why has this gone to court? Is it because the child is under LA care with the ongoing investigation?

For those who aren't familiar with this subject, the specific physical findings, and more importantly, the wording chosen to describe them, indicate a level of suspicion regarding "pediatric non-accidental trauma (NAT)", the current medicolegal terminology for child abuse. While Mr Justice Hayden cannot outright accuse the baby's parents of beating the shit out of their kid in this context, he has used certain language to describe the findings of the physical examination which make clear what happened without explicitly saying it.

Specifically, multiple fractures at different points in the healing process and bilateral multifocal retinal hemorrhage in an infant are giant, flashing neon signs screaming "I SHOOK MY BABY TO DEATH". I can get into the specifics if anyone is interested, but these particular injuries are pathognomonic for non-accidental traumatic injury. The sum of the physical findings is highly indicative.

Hoping @cuddle striker or others in the field will correct me if I am wrong. I'm about as certain as I can be that this baby was shaken by an adult caregiver after ongoing physical abuse, and the legal fight over turning off life support isn't the righteous struggle of a bewildered and traumatized family who refuse to give up hope that their darling baby will recover - it's an attempt to avoid homicide charges.

Gross.

 

[GenociderSyo]

For those who aren't familiar with this subject, the specific physical findings, and more importantly, the wording chosen to describe them, indicate a level of suspicion regarding "pediatric non-accidental trauma (NAT)", the current medicolegal terminology for child abuse. While Mr Justice Hayden cannot outright accuse the baby's parents of beating the shit out of their kid in this context, he has used certain language to describe the findings of the physical examination which make clear what happened without explicitly saying it.

Specifically, multiple fractures at different points in the healing process and bilateral multifocal retinal hemorrhage in an infant are giant, flashing neon signs screaming "I SHOOK MY BABY TO DEATH". I can get into the specifics if anyone is interested, but these particular injuries are pathognomonic for non-accidental traumatic injury. The sum of the physical findings is highly indicative.

Hoping @cuddle striker or others in the field will correct me if I am wrong. I'm about as certain as I can be that this baby was shaken by an adult caregiver after ongoing physical abuse, and the legal fight over turning off life support isn't the righteous struggle of a bewildered and traumatized family who refuse to give up hope that their darling baby will recover - it's an attempt to avoid homicide charges.

Gross.

Yea I found it quite odd that they specifically talk of traumatic injuries seen in shaking then go loving parents. Rib fractures are ususally a dead give away that SOMETHING happened to a child that age.

 

[Carpe Jugulum]

Yea I found it quite odd that they specifically talk of traumatic injuries seen in shaking then go loving parents. Rib fractures are ususally a dead give away that SOMETHING happened to a child that age.

I know there’s been cases where it turned out the child had some super rare disorder (not a medifag just remember reading about it). Chances are though something awful happened to that poor boy, what a hornets nest I stumbled into when browsing for news about the fires yesterday.

 

[Niuhp]

For those who aren't familiar with this subject, the specific physical findings, and more importantly, the wording chosen to describe them, indicate a level of suspicion regarding "pediatric non-accidental trauma (NAT)", the current medicolegal terminology for child abuse. While Mr Justice Hayden cannot outright accuse the baby's parents of beating the shit out of their kid in this context, he has used certain language to describe the findings of the physical examination which make clear what happened without explicitly saying it.

Specifically, multiple fractures at different points in the healing process and bilateral multifocal retinal hemorrhage in an infant are giant, flashing neon signs screaming "I SHOOK MY BABY TO DEATH". I can get into the specifics if anyone is interested, but these particular injuries are pathognomonic for non-accidental traumatic injury. The sum of the physical findings is highly specific.

Hoping @cuddle striker or others in the field will correct me if I am wrong. I'm about as certain as I can be that this baby was shaken by an adult caregiver after ongoing physical abuse, and the legal fight over turning off life support isn't the righteous struggle of a bewildered and traumatized family who refuse to give up hope that their darling baby will recover - it's an attempt to avoid homicide charges.

Gross.

Not a medfag, but the line "Most of the rib fractures appear to have callus formation which indicate that they preceded A's collapse." is pretty suspect. I'm happy to be mistaken, but does the presence of callus formation on most but not all fractures suggest more than one traumatic incident? Like different stages of healing?

 

[GenociderSyo]

I know there’s been cases where it turned out the child had some super rare disorder (not a medifag just remember reading about it). Chances are though something awful happened to that poor boy, what a hornets nest I stumbled into when browsing for news about the fires yesterday.

Yep I have read of one case where a child with Brittle Bone Disease's parents got accused of child abuse, but it was quite quickly overturned because the child was injured not long after and given tests to diagnose. In a way it helped the parents to get their child services quicker then ususal.

 

[Fred the bald Eagle 1]

and the legal fight over turning off life support isn't the righteous struggle of a bewildered and traumatized family who refuse to give up hope that their darling baby will recover - it's an attempt to avoid homicide charges.

Hopefully a legalfag will pitch in but I think it’s gone to court because the child has been removed from the parents care and is now the responsibility of the LA, due to the ongoing investigation. Police and medics do have a degree of empathy and they will be allowed to be with the child, but never unsupervised.

The judge does make it sound like it’s the LA that has brought this to the court, presumably because they need an extensive paper trail to show they’ve acted in the childs best interest, and social workers aren’t medically qualified to make the decision.

As for the possible brittle bones thing- that usually is a slight knock, and doesn’t come with retinal haemorrhage and brain injury…

 

[Thomas Eugene Paris]

Yep I have read of one case where a child with Brittle Bone Disease's parents got accused of child abuse, but it was quite quickly overturned because the child was injured not long after and given tests to diagnose. In a way it helped the parents to get their child services quicker then ususal.

Brittle bone disease (osteogenesis imperfecta) wouldn't account for the bilateral multifocal retinal hemorrhage.

Maybe a rare, undiagnosed disorder would explain one or maybe even two of the physical findings, but when you consider all of them together, there's really only one possibility. I think that is the subtext of what Mr Justice Hayden is saying.

Not a medfag, but the line "Most of the rib fractures appear to have callus formation which indicate that they preceded A's collapse." is pretty suspect. I'm happy to be mistaken, but does the presence of callus formation on most but not all fractures suggest more than one traumatic incident? Like different stages of healing?

Correct, and the line about the callus formation is an attempt to preempt any claims by the parents that the fractures are a consequence of resuscitation efforts or other therapeutic measures. A callus forms when bones heal; the body responds to bone trauma by sending lots of various bone precursor cells to the area. These cells first make a soft tissue "bridge" between the two ends of the fracture, which eventually hardens into bone. The body then organizes specialized "pruning" of the excess bone around the fracture site. The appearance of the x-ray changes as all of these steps occur, which is how a physician can tell if a fracture is recent or old.

A bunch of fractures that are all at different stages of healing, without a convincing explanation for each, indicates that multiple injuries happened at separate times.

Edited because I forgot to share this link, which describes the physiologic process of bone healing.

 

[Totallyunknown]

I've been saying there's something sus about Hollie and this situation for weeks now. Very interesting that the judge is bringing up potential past abuse. Hollie may try to cover for this by saying he was in MMA and gymnastics so the injuries were natural to the hobby. But they can't really do anything else to him to find out if there's any other evidence.

Cops should be outside the hospital room when they pull the plug and as soon as he has no vitals, move in and arrest her.

Kudos to the Farmer moving her to her own thread - this doesn't end when Archie dies.

 

[Carpe Jugulum]

Cops should be outside the hospital room when they pull the plug and as soon as he has no vitals, move in and arrest her.

This is a different little boy. Whether there will be reporting if there are prosecutions after he dies, we will have to see. He currently can’t be named.

 

[Thomas Eugene Paris]

@Totallyunknown, the other case involves a 3 month old boy. His parents might try to spin it as an accidental injury, but it would be shocking if such a story were believed.

Also, in case it hasn't been clear, bilateral multifocal retinal hemorrhage isn't something that occurs spontaneously or as a result of a little bump. It's a pattern of injury that occurs with massive force, like falling from a great height, being in a high speed car accident...or being shaken to death by some asshole who was supposed to care about you.

 

[Treasure Champs]

Easy mistake to make, the judge is the same in both cases. For some reason Britbong land apparently has one designated Tard Baby Judge.

 

[Flourishing Pinecone ❧]

From the Baby A case being discussed, Justice Hayden specifically notes:

"For the avoidance of doubt, this is an entirely different situation from that advanced to Arbuthnot J in Barts Health NHS Trust v Dance & Ors [2022] EWHC 1435 (Fam); Barts Health NHS Trust v Dance & Ors (Re Archie Battersbee) [2022] EWCA Civ 935."

This case is quite unusual, and in normal circumstances the baby would have "died" formally (and been taken off the ventilator) back in June, but it appears things were held off because of legal/guardianship issues because of the obvious non-accidental injury discussed here.
But it's important to note that even after Baby A started taking spontaneous breaths:
"[A] remained flaccid, unresponsive to pain, with no spontaneous or provoked movement. All brain stem reflexes were absent, apart from breathing.

Based on this change in clinical status, paediatric neurology recommended a repeat EEG and MRI brain scan. These were undertaken on Monday 4 and Tuesday 5 July 2022. The results remain extremely abnormal with an unresponsive (isoelectric) electroencephalogram and evidence of maturation of devastating whole brain injury on MRI"

I do get why Justice Hayden doesn't want to sign off on the DNAR (kid isn't likely to suddenly die at the moment, resuscitation likely to work if needed, it's an evolving picture, and the kid could potentially go home even if it is to die), but this should be a clinical decision imo. He's does acknowledge that this could well change, and I bet he's being a little cautious given his recent involvement with Hollie.

 

[Any Fucker]

Yep I have read of one case where a child with Brittle Bone Disease's parents got accused of child abuse, but it was quite quickly overturned because the child was injured not long after and given tests to diagnose. In a way it helped the parents to get their child services quicker then ususal.

There was one case where the criminal court process took so long that the child had already been placed for adoption. They were told it was too late to overturn despite being innocent

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/09/parents-cleared-of-abuse-launch-legal-battle-to-win-custody-of-adopted-baby

 

[Barbarella]

Perhaps, for clarity, we should refer to the unnamed baby as Baby A, so as not to confuse with Archie. Assuming he lives long enough to be a discussion topic

Judge likes the word parlous, doesn’t he?

 

[everybody in Portugal]

it's an evolving picture, and the kid could potentially go home even if it is to die

I'm sure I read upthread that he's under the care of the Local Authority... If other relatives aren't considered suitable he'd likely go to a foster home to die or else to a hospice or something, I guess I've got family that worked in child protection in the UK, next time we speak I'll ask for some clarification on where a kid in this situation would go.

 

[Flourishing Pinecone ❧]

I'm sure I read upthread that he's under the care of the Local Authority... If other relatives aren't considered suitable he'd likely go to a foster home to die or else to a hospice or something, I guess I've got family that worked in child protection in the UK, next time we speak I'll ask for some clarification on where a kid in this situation would go.

Yeah that did sound odd to me but it's what was in the judgement. Maybe he was being

 

[Thomas Eugene Paris]

Easy mistake to make, the judge is the same in both cases. For some reason Britbong land apparently has one designated Tard Baby Judge.

Poor guy. I hope he has good antidepressants, a therapist, and an engaging hobby. Semper fi, Mr Justice Hayden.

All of the pediatricians I've ever encountered who specialize in child abuse have been...burdened, to say the least. I'm remembering one guy specifically whose directory photo on the hospital website resembles an Al Qaeda proof-of-life photograph of Eeyore. I can't imagine that judges who deal with the same are any more chipper, but god only knows they are doing incredibly important work. Hopefully Mr Justice Hayden gets some holiday time soon.