Well lookey here!!!!!

hello Lovely!

Welcome Sommer!






As to the OP....


Bonny, I haven't read the rest as yet, so am unsure of the whole story...

however, I am curious as to why this woman has such an intense drive to reproduce...

Curiosity killed the cat.

.........satisfaction brought it back..

Curiosity killed the cat.

Well lookey here!!!!!

hello Lovely!

Welcome Sommer!






As to the OP....


Bonny, I haven't read the rest as yet, so am unsure of the whole story...

however, I am curious as to why this woman has such an intense drive to reproduce...

.........satisfaction brought it back..

And hello Lethal...

Thank you.

I would say her drive to reporduce is that she could well be mourning her loss of her babies...

I think it is outrageous that no person in the ss in the UK has not even spotted and investigated this...

Good to see you lady.

and yes I heard the same thing... there's a quiet desperation woven into this article..


I am wondering also, there is no mention of criminal convictions...if that is the case, I also wonder at the severity of neglect, or abuse...

Ahhhhh....ok.

My impressions of that article, although well reported, is certainly out to slant the reader to viewing these people in a negative light.

I would be very curious to learn why each child was taken from them...I wonder whether a precedent has been set now, and there is not much investigation done, into the care of the child in question, at the time..

The sister? Vitriolic!

I notice she didn't take responsibility for any of her nieces or nephews...that speaks volumes to me, and diminishes what the sister has to say.


I wonder, with close monitoring, if this couple could prove themselves to be fit parents...seems they dont get the opportunity to.

Perhaps it was easier and less work to label the woman after the first time it happened, and then to just take it from there?

Heya Sommer...it's 'Jess' or Lee over here...

and yes I heard the same thing... there's a quiet desperation woven into this article..


I am wondering also, there is no mention of criminal convictions...if that is the case, I also wonder at the severity of neglect, or abuse...

That's what has me very curious... and the sister, has me rather suspicious of also.

Please don't get me wrong, children are not removed from a home unless the social worker feels the child is at risk, and at the mother's own admission, she agreed the first few little ones probably were safer away from her.

To me that shows maturity, and also some insight into what is the appropriate and inappropriate way to raise, and care for a child.

In my experience, once any governmental institution, no matter which, has labeled you, the label sticks, and is neigh to irremovable.

I gotta say, social services r primarily motivated on working to keep families together here, so im guessing the neglect was pretty bad.

Also, the comments from her sister r pretty striking, especially the bit where she says she asks her sister why she keeps on having babies, and she replies that "she doesnt give a sh** and she wants the government to pay up"

Instead of trying to have more children, she should be working on getting herself to a mental level where she is fit enough to get to know the children shes already had.

Shes putting her energy into the wrong things.

And as for her "carer" bf, why is he even her carer? why does she need 1? if its cos of back problems and she cant work, how can she keep abusing her body by having children she cant keep? having children weakens the back....wat advice is her doc giving her?

I agree, all the facts arent clear, but children dont get removed from their family without VERY good reasons.

A letter sent to him by the council said Theresa and Toney cannot keep their children due to "concerns about severe neglect, lack of parenting ability and the consequent risk to any child in their care".



It added assessments carried out over the years "had not revealed any significant change in lifestyle or reduction in risk".

Last night ex-Shadow Home Secretary Ann Widdecombe said: "It's scandalous this woman has had so many children. But what can you do? There is nothing the State can do to stop her."

Fellow Tory MP Philip Davies said: "This is a totally outrageous case and clearly highlights the dependency culture that exists in this country."

Mark Wallace, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "It's unfair for this mum to simply keep having children in the full knowledge they will be taken into care."

And pressure group the Taxpayers' Alliance called Theresa "extremely irresponsible" as it emerged the cost of the care has run into MILLIONS of pounds - paid from the public purse.

Theresa and Toney, 36, live in a one-bedroom council flat outside Luton, Beds, on benefits totalling £1,100 a month.

Both smoked throughout their interview with The Sun despite Theresa's pregnancy.

The serial mum has been expecting every year of her adult life except 2004.


Several of her children were born with disabilities.

But all have been legally adopted except a boy now aged 14 who has cerebral palsy. He remains in foster care which has cost an estimated £2.3million over the past ten years.