A BABY was taken away from his parents for six months because of a bruise that was later shown to be not their fault.
The child, who is not named for legal reasons, was taken from his parent’s care after they were wrongly suspected of hurting him.
1
The baby was later returned to his parents after it emerged they weren’t to blame for the mark.
Instead, medical tests used to justify the abuse hadn’t been properly conducted, a judge ruled.
The Cardiff family court case stopped after it was discovered that the 2.5cm bruise was a symptom of mild von Willebrand disease.
The condition, which affects around one in every 100 people in the UK, can make bruising or bleeding occur more easily than injury.
The parents said the court case had been “traumatic” and blamed a “one size fits all” approach for the ordeal.
Shortly after the baby was born there had been a routine appointment with a student health visitor, who raised concern over a 2.5cm bruise to the baby’s lower rib area, WalesOnline reported from the hearing.
At the time, the parents could not give a definitive explanation for the bruise.
They said it could have been from their baby rolling on a plastic toy giraffe or accidentally being held too firmly.
Two days after the bruise was found, a GP from Cardiff and Vale health board, specialising in child protection, conducted a medical exam.
The “significant bruise to the chest wall” was found to be “unusual” for rolling over a toy.
A 1.5cm darker green/blue area within the 2.5cm bruise was found to be “highly concerning for non-accidental injury”.
Within days, the Vale of Glamorgan council had taken the baby from his parents and placed him in the care of other family members.
The parents were only allowed to visit the baby under supervision.
The council then applied for a care order to give parental responsibility for the child, using the bruise as the sole basis for the application.
District Judge Julian Hussell approved an interim care order and delayed the case so a consultant paediatrician could assess the baby, raising doubts about Cardiff and Vale Health Board’s initial child protection exam.
The paediatrician wrote in his report that the baby’s initial blood tests and examination were “not carried out as recommended by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health to exclude a bleeding or clotting disorder”.
What are the symptoms of von Willebrand disease?
People with VWD have a low level of a substance called von Willebrand factor in their blood, or it does not work very well, the NHS says.
Von Willebrand factor helps blood cells stick together (clot) when you bleed. If there’s not enough of it or it does not work properly, it takes longer for bleeding to stop.
The symptoms of VWD may start at any age. They can range from very mild and barely noticeable to frequent and severe.
The main symptoms are:
- large bruises or bruising easily
- frequent or long-lasting nosebleeds
- bleeding gums
- heavy or long-lasting bleeding from cuts
- in women, heavy periods and bleeding during or after labour
- heavy or long-lasting bleeding after a tooth removal or surgery
He concluded that the torso bruise was likely to have been accidental and that it could have been caused by the bar of a pram catching the baby as he was being placed in it.
‘Warm and loving bond’
Following this report, and around five months without their child, the parents applied for the case to be dismissed.
However, Judge Hussell did not dismiss the case after claiming it was not “obvious” that the council would fail to meet the criteria for a care order.
Instead, he adjourned for blood tests which he noted “should have been undertaken” earlier.
The tests were indicative of mild von Willebrand disease, and he concluded the baby was likely to have a borderline bleeding tendency.
In the final hearing, six months after the baby was removed from the parents’ care, Judge Hussell said there were no concerns of the couple having substance abuse, domestic violence or anger management issues.
He said they had been “totally cooperative throughout” and had been observed to give “excellent care” to their son with whom they had a “warm and loving bond”.
The judge also took into account evidence from one of the family members the baby had been staying with.
The family member had kept a log of any bruises or marks on the baby, and this suggested that he bruised more easily than the average child.
The council accepted it was unable to prove the bruise was caused by inadequate care.
They asked the judge for permission to withdraw its application for a care order.
James Lewis, the council’s barrister, conceded that from the outset of the case “the medical evidence was not very firm”.
He added: “I have to say, I cannot imagine the strain these proceedings have put on the mother and father and the family as a whole.
“It is clear they love their son dearly and want to be reunified with him.”
‘Traumatic’
Speaking after the hearing, the parents said they were overjoyed but that the court case had been a “traumatic” experience.
In light of the revelations over inadequate testing, they felt the nuances of their son’s situation were missed because of a “one size fits all” approach.
Vale of Glamorgan Council and Cardiff and Vale University Health Board were contacted for comment.
