Mother sentenced for twins’ deaths

I don't like the recent tendency to always look for blame rather than explain I don't think it's helpful in trying to prevent incidents in the future.

I cant find any record of what was wrong with her eyes just it was alluded to.

I'm not blaming the grandparents, or the father (although there are questions to be asked about his involvement). We don't know the full story. People do have a right to refuse entry to their homes - we hear on here about people who don't get invited into friends' houses - and I would be most annoyed of anyone demanded entry to my house, although I often have people round by invitation. If she found her house too difficult to look after (whether because of having four babies, because of failing eyesight or her learning difficulties) she may have become defensive and not wanted people to see the mess.

What did the authorities know about the situation? I am the first to agree that if there is evidence of harm being done to children there should be intervention, but if there was none how would they know? A suspicion can be followed up, but if there is nothing to go on when they get there, persistently targeting the family would become harassment. It's easy to say after the event that children should come first (of course they should) but do we want to live in a world where people can burst into our homes uninvited? Also, how many social workers would we need to make that a possibility, and how would we pay for them? Arguably that sort of behaviour would deter social workers from entering the profession, as they would become more like the police.

The question of 'essential' shopping came up in lockdown, with people very keen to judge others for the contents of their baskets. What is essential to one person may not be to another. I would never see sprouts as essential, but there is an argument for all vegetables being necessary. Even things like wine might be essential to an alcoholic, but a luxury to others. None of us can judge that sort of thing. How different was it from the (non essential) night out the McCanns had? I know I'm banging on about that, but apart from the state of the house, the situation seems very similar to me. Something terrible happens to children who seem otherwise loved and cared for when the parent(s) were avoidably away from the scene. One family gets support, enormous levels of funding across Europe and sympathy, and the other is jailed for ten years.

Good post Doodledog.

Barleyfields

Good post Doodledog.

I completely agree Doodledog and I also thought of the Mcanns

Good post.

Yes indeed Doodle.

If she found her house too difficult to look after (whether because of having four babies, because of failing eyesight or her learning difficulties) she may have become defensive and not wanted people to see the mess.

Yes, that is understandable.

If Social Workers are concerned about safety can they not request that a police officer attend with them?

In this case, there would appear to be no reason to think this woman was a threat. As I said previously, despite the living conditions, the children looked happy and seemed well cared for. The grandparents might have had worries but if the children seemed fine when they were out and about then why would they want to ho bursting into the house as someone suggested they should have done?
The older two at least were at school so presumably no concerns were raised there either.

People who live in such conditions can become secretive and defensive about the state of their homes; it's overwhelming them and they cannot start sorting it out.

Where was the village we all need to raise our children? I agree it was wrong to lock her up.

None of us can judge that sort of thing

It was not me who judged that the items were non-essential, Doodledog. I have no idea what Rose bought. That was in the judge's summing up.

Allira

^None of us can judge that sort of thing^

It was not me who judged that the items were non-essential, Doodledog. I have no idea what Rose bought. That was in the judge's summing up.

I wasn't getting at you (or anyone). Just pointing out that the phrase is meaningless, whoever said it, and should have no bearing on the outcome of the case.

watermeadow. I feel exactly the same as you. When this tragedy was first reported, the children's mother was said to have been "out shopping". However, it later transpired that she was at Sainsbury's - which isn't like flitting round the shops trying clothes on.

Of course it was totally stupid to have left the little boys in a locked flat on their own. However, given that she had mental health problems and, from what was reported, was unable to cope with caring for 4 very young children, that should be taken into account when sentencing.

Where was the help for this woman? The father said how devastated he was, but was he not aware of how totally out of control the situation was at home? Surely somebody must have known and could have sought advice and assistance?

SusieB50

Exactly this , where was the help and support? I would have struggled to cope singly with these four little children and I have no mental health issues . What is the point of putting this poor poor woman into prison hasn’t she suffered enough?

She killed her innocent children.

Social services used to (when I worked there, which was a long time ago) provide support workers for mum and children at home. It's very time intensive and I doubt whether it still exists very much. I think its possible she realised things were deteriorating but was afraid "they" would just take her children away.

Wyllow3

I don't like the recent tendency to always look for blame rather than explain I don't think it's helpful in trying to prevent incidents in the future.

I cant find any record of what was wrong with her eyes just it was alluded to.

I think it was something to do with pressure on the nerves. It was after the children died from the timeline I saw. She discharged herself and I think her sight is very limited now.

Eloethan

*watermeadow*. I feel exactly the same as you. When this tragedy was first reported, the children's mother was said to have been "out shopping". However, it later transpired that she was at Sainsbury's - which isn't like flitting round the shops trying clothes on.

Of course it was totally stupid to have left the little boys in a locked flat on their own. However, given that she had mental health problems and, from what was reported, was unable to cope with caring for 4 very young children, that should be taken into account when sentencing.

Where was the help for this woman? The father said how devastated he was, but was he not aware of how totally out of control the situation was at home? Surely somebody must have known and could have sought advice and assistance?

No it wasn't stupid it was criminal.

Freya5

SusieB50

Exactly this , where was the help and support? I would have struggled to cope singly with these four little children and I have no mental health issues . What is the point of putting this poor poor woman into prison hasn’t she suffered enough?

She killed her innocent children.

She did not kill the children. Nobody could think she intended this to happen or did it deliberately surely. She made a stupid mistake, one that she’d done on several previous occasions apparently, and as I said previously this is a very deprived area. I know the road she lived in, it wasn’t a flat, it was a small house. The Sainsbury’s she went to was a ten minute walk away and the same back. I’ve used that shop on rare occasions, I know! That part of London Borough of Sutton is a very run down area but things like that rarely happen in Sutton. Even though it’s a London borough, it is mainly a well heeled area with pockets of deprivation.
I feel sorry for this Woman to a degree. She was out of her depth with those children, struggling, neglecting them but it’s a stretch to say she killed them. In my opinion.

Wyllow3

Social services used to (when I worked there, which was a long time ago) provide support workers for mum and children at home. It's very time intensive and I doubt whether it still exists very much. I think its possible she realised things were deteriorating but was afraid "they" would just take her children away.

If you look at the full Judges report on-line Wyllow, it gives in detail her MH issues and an account of her eye deterioration.. It is a sorry story.. key in her name and it should come up..

A local multi-agency review has already taken place (Guardian 3rd October 2024)

“After the house fire, a multi-agency review was conducted by the local safeguarding partnership in January 2022 … The review found that the children were happy, healthy, well presented, well nourished and had a positive relationship with their mother. The multi-agency review that took place did not query the professional practice and the government’s national panel agreed that a local child safeguarding practice review was not required”.

She did not kill the children

Rose was found guilty of manslaughter.
Manslaughter in the UK is the unlawful killing of a person without the intent to kill or cause serious harm.

Do you disagree with the verdict?

I can’t see how punishing this poor woman any further can do any good at all. She surely is being punished every single day of her life, never will she be able to forgive herself.

She made a terrible error of judgment, with catastrophic consequences, punishment enough I think.

Manslaughter does not carry a mandatory prison sentence. If only prison was a place where there were genuine rehabilitation there might be a point, or we had places fitting that bill for community sentencing.

Allira

^She did not kill the children^

Rose was found guilty of manslaughter.
Manslaughter in the UK is the unlawful killing of a person without the intent to kill or cause serious harm.

Do you disagree with the verdict?

No I don’t disagree with the manslaughter verdict.

I think in terms of society we do need to judge, not blame, but judge. I felt exactly the same about the McCann's. In my view what the McCanns did was negligence, and we as a society who have a responsibility to all children need to be clear about the standards we hold for the most vulnerable.
That doesn't mean this woman wasnt let down by services, or that I disagree with the verdict of manslaughter, it doesn't mean that the mccanns havent experienced the greatest punishment, but it is I think wider than that.

Wyllow3

Manslaughter does not carry a mandatory prison sentence. If only prison was a place where there were genuine rehabilitation there might be a point, or we had places fitting that bill for community sentencing.

I asked if the poster disagreed with the verdict, not with the sentencing.

Why didn't the father do anything? Beautiful boys, let down.