Girl sues council over pregnancy
Discussion
:rolleyes:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/4111160.stm
Girl sues council over pregnancy
A 14-year-old girl is suing her local council for £50,000 in damages after she fell pregnant at a special needs boarding school.
The girl says Herts County Council education authority failed to safeguard her welfare when she was at the school.
She is due to give birth to a daughter in October and is still living at the Merseyside school, in a special mother and baby unit, while attending lessons.
A claim has been issued on the girl's behalf by the Children's Legal Centre.
'Suffered injury'
It states that she was "negligently placed" at the school where she became pregnant and stayed in a room next door to a boy of 16.
The claim says the school was unable to adequately supervise the pupils' behaviour.
As a result, it says, she "suffered injury, loss and damage".
Hertfordshire County Council would only confirm on Monday that it had received the legal claim but said no court date had yet been arranged for a judge to decide.
In a statement, a spokesman said: "We are in receipt of this claim which is in the hands of our legal advisers."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/4111160.stm
Girl sues council over pregnancy
A 14-year-old girl is suing her local council for £50,000 in damages after she fell pregnant at a special needs boarding school.
The girl says Herts County Council education authority failed to safeguard her welfare when she was at the school.
She is due to give birth to a daughter in October and is still living at the Merseyside school, in a special mother and baby unit, while attending lessons.
A claim has been issued on the girl's behalf by the Children's Legal Centre.
'Suffered injury'
It states that she was "negligently placed" at the school where she became pregnant and stayed in a room next door to a boy of 16.
The claim says the school was unable to adequately supervise the pupils' behaviour.
As a result, it says, she "suffered injury, loss and damage".
Hertfordshire County Council would only confirm on Monday that it had received the legal claim but said no court date had yet been arranged for a judge to decide.
In a statement, a spokesman said: "We are in receipt of this claim which is in the hands of our legal advisers."
My firet reaction was one of utter disbelief that a mother was blaming the school for a lack of care towards her daughter!!
But on further reading she is a special needs student who boards whose room was next to a 15 year old boy's, sounds not like rape but some one took advantage!!
£50,000 is OTT though.
But on further reading she is a special needs student who boards whose room was next to a 15 year old boy's, sounds not like rape but some one took advantage!!
£50,000 is OTT though.
Pies said:
I read this earlier how come nobodies been charged with rape
Because she probably consented to sex, then decided to relieve herself of all responsibility and sue her school; no doubt we will pay for the legal bill also, not to mention 18 years of benefits, followed by probably a lifetime of again, benefits.
>> Edited by scorp on Monday 20th June 17:16
scorp said:
Pies said:
I read this earlier how come nobodies been charged with rape
Because she probably consented to sex, then decided to relieve herself of all responsibility and sue her school; no doubt we will pay for the legal bill also, not to mention 18 years of benefits, followed by probably a lifetime of again, benefits.
>> Edited by scorp on Monday 20th June 17:16
Unless im badly mistaken any girl under the age of 16 who is pregnant must have been raped, as in the eyes of the law she can not consent
Edit to say i've found this
What is 'statutory rape'?
If you are under the age of consent (16) and you choose to have sex with someone who is over the age of consent, then they can be charged with the crime of 'statutory rape'
>> Edited by Pies on Monday 20th June 17:26
Just another round of parents who don't care about their kids.
The parents of the girl in question obviously couldn't care less about her as they haven't shown any responsibility in the situation. The girl seems to see her own pregnancy as an inconvenience that she can use to her advantage in court, and whoever made her pregnant obviously has no responsibilities either.
And who do they sue? The council.
And when you sue a public service, you essentially sue the country as that's where the money comes from.
I despair when I see more and more children dragged kicking and screaming into the world by irresponsible kids, only to see their kids, even more irresponsible, having children at even younger ages. Where does it end?
The parents of the girl in question obviously couldn't care less about her as they haven't shown any responsibility in the situation. The girl seems to see her own pregnancy as an inconvenience that she can use to her advantage in court, and whoever made her pregnant obviously has no responsibilities either.
And who do they sue? The council.
And when you sue a public service, you essentially sue the country as that's where the money comes from.
I despair when I see more and more children dragged kicking and screaming into the world by irresponsible kids, only to see their kids, even more irresponsible, having children at even younger ages. Where does it end?
kerfuffle said:
Just another round of parents who don't care about their kids.
The parents of the girl in question obviously couldn't care less about her as they haven't shown any responsibility in the situation.
How do you know that?
Well, surely they'd have something to say, and would be making a lot of noise so far as this case goes. How it appears to me is that this girl has literally been offloaded to this institution, and she's decided to sue the first thing that came into her mind.
Pies said:
Pies said:
I read this earlier how come nobodies been charged with rape
Because she probably consented to sex, then decided to relieve herself of all responsibility and sue her school; no doubt we will pay for the legal bill also, not to mention 18 years of benefits, followed by probably a lifetime of again, benefits.
>> Edited by scorp on Monday 20th June 17:16
Unless im badly mistaken any girl under the age of 16 who is pregnant must have been raped, as in the eyes of the law she can not consent
Edit to say i've found this
What is 'statutory rape'?
If you are under the age of consent (16) and you choose to have sex with someone who is over the age of consent, then they can be charged with the crime of 'statutory rape'
>> Edited by Pies on Monday 20th June 17:26
Technically your right, but a legally responsible (12+) child can still consent to sex and should be held responsible for that decision (i mean, a 14 year old can be charged with murder, so why not the responsibility of agreeing to sex?)
I did not see any claim to "sexual assault", so im presuming there was a level of compliance here.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I agree, my sister is autistic and perhaps could be a target for
, either by staff or by fellow inmates. These institutions are largely unaccountable, the staff underpaid and blind eyes turned. My thoughts are that the school was probably negligent (having seen a lot of special schools in my time). The whole mental health system and behavioural support in this country is a joke. Physical disabilities are fine and get money thrown at them and the best treatment. Anything to do with mental illness is swept under the carpet still. The fact is these bloody people always have their stories straight and cover for each other and it takes a case like this to blow the doors off. It does go on something chronic. Mentally ill people/chavs/etc are not to be derided, the conditions are as valid medically as toothache, I hear this stigmatised shit from everyone and really there is one bunch of people at fault, Tony Blair and his
joke of a government.
.....and breathe 
love machine said:
I agree, my sister is autistic and perhaps could be a target for
Mentally ill people/chavs/etc are not to be derided, the conditions are as valid medically as toothache, I hear this stigmatised shit from everyone and really there is one bunch of people at fault, Tony Blair and his
Thing is, as ridiculous as this case sounds, one needs a lot more information, before pronouncing judgement over the whole case. For a start, what sort of disability does the girl have? There are some profound learning disabilities which would make the girl a target for such things. Unless we know the detail of the story, then it's too early to start pronouncing that we are being bled by such cases.
Ferg said:
......and really there is one bunch of people at fault, Tony Blair and his
Hmmm..and this sort of thing never happened before 1997.
no win no fee was brought in by New Labour. whether this case has any merit, a no win no fee lawyer has nothing to lose for writing a few letters and sending a couple of faxes.
the figure of £50k is also key. if the council go to court it will cost them much more. so, they'll probably settle for £25k out of court. Either way, the taxpayer will get rogered as per normal.
Twincam16 said:
I agree entirely. The concept of sex and even having children has become so selfish and cheap it's more of a legal token than anything that could possibly be to do with a relationship.
I hate the way moral standards are thrown away and spat on without care.
Whats the solution? You mention abstenance and the liberals do their nut.
What annoys me is that never linked increase sex education to sex. I mean - you tell young people what they can do with their genitals - are they more or less likely to try them out on each other? thats also (IMO) why young people f**k each other with less recrimination. They haven't had a chance to feel and experience love and bonding, they simply shag each other.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff