Leigh @xx_jiggly_jugs_xx

[KKK.Hates.Dengie..]

@It’s all the drama Mick so true, I'm the perfect example of being diagnosed later in life but when I was diagnosed did I go on PIP and excuse my emotional disregulation and act out? No. All it did was lead me to understand myself more and, before and after diagnosis, my emotional disregulation has never ever made me lash out at my kids. In fact, I believe I'm a better mother because of it because I'm the first to understand being overstimulated and feeling emotions XYZ randomly. It equips me with the knowladge to take a step back when my child is "creating" and rather than give them a "bollocking" I ask what's made them feel/think/act this way and I will them correct/comfort/parent accordingly. Theres literally no mental health excuse in the world that excuses how she behaves and acts in the presence of her children and if there is a MH issue there that prevents her acting accordingly then SS are right to step in for their wellbeing.

In terms of the suicide insinuation, she's one to talk and she is the biggest troll going. Forever, it's been spoken about how she's made people feel. I mean lou is a prime example, she's clearly unstable, albeit it due to drug use, but KKK has no problem logging into her lives, does she? And ripping people to shreds online. Trying to break up families online. She is gross and this is the best karma.

“Sorry Hun this thread isnt about you, as far as I'm aware nobody asked to hear your life story”

 

[Call me Karen]

What an incredibly unlikeable person she is. She knows it and that's why she is bitter, making her even more unlikeable. She creates her own vicious circles.

 

[YourMum]

@KKK.Hates.Her.Kids im not a new member baby, ergo your group rules state i can't be KK. I've been here long time


Paul, you are a sad sad little man. You crave the attention of a bunch of housewives, most who's own houses are pig styes.

Oi you cheeky t My house is fing spotless and your fing hock fits in my kitchen. Off you do you nasty prick

 

[YourMum]

Oi you cheeky t My house is fing spotless and your fing hock fits in my kitchen. Off you do you nasty prick

*hovel…. Speed typing in anger

 

[Save KK’s abused children]

Oi you cheeky t My house is fing spotless and your fing hock fits in my kitchen. Off you do you nasty prick

The irony of kk talking about pig stys when she lives in that absolute hovel of a house seen crack dens with better furniture

 

[KKK.Hates.Her.Kids]

Her house is so jank she photoshops herself out of it

 

[YourMum]

NOT ANOTHER ONEEE?!

I read that in the accent too

 

[YourMum]

Little catch up

Overwhelming support? I have literally never seen anyone as hated as her

 

[YourMum]

Sorry hun this thread isn’t about you, as far as I’m aware nobody asked to hear your life story. And as for excusing your Child’s behaviour, do you not think that all Children struggle with not getting everything their own way, sharing etc? It’s your job as a parent to teach them these things, not simply smack a label on it.

Nobody asked to hear your life story….. again, I fing love this page

 

[Yammyssubstanceaddiction]

Think I’m the one who was supposed to be blackmailing her unless she’s moved on to it being Paul now? I’m still yet to see my ransom note or what my demands were though

‘Send me 48 meatballs or I leak the voicenotes’

 

[greentrousers]

Think I’m the one who was supposed to be blackmailing her unless she’s moved on to it being Paul now? I’m still yet to see my ransom note or what my demands were though

‘Send me 48 meatballs or I leak the voicenotes’

I heard you'd demanded a bag of weed, out of date mince meat and a live chicken off her

 

[Yammyssubstanceaddiction]

I heard you'd demanded a bag of weed, out of date mince meat and a live chicken off her

Couldn’t imagine the state of the weed she’d get if she did smoke! ‘I’m not paying that much for cali buds when I can just flash my gash to the 60 year old down the road who grows his own, it just doesn’t make sense!’

 

[Frank Farmer]

Think I’m the one who was supposed to be blackmailing her unless she’s moved on to it being Paul now? I’m still yet to see my ransom note or what my demands were though

‘Send me 48 meatballs or I leak the voicenotes’

I have no idea

 

[Maggot Robbie]

I agree that the older child should have CiN status, he is after all a child in need of care and support and that's regardless of Kayleighs lack of parenting. Any child can be CiN because of disability or care needs.

However my point was that everyone seems to think that sending the voice notes off will amount to invoking Child Protection protocols and I don't think that's the case. Is the child at risk of significant harm?

Harm yes, significant harm no. We might not like it but that's the way it is.

I'm assuming there are guidelines on what constitutes 'significant harm'? Is it ultimately down to an individual to assess the 'evidence' and make their own decision?

 

[MyName’sLaura]

Yeah I find it odd that Paul is getting the blame, you ever heard of the saying ‘don’t shoot the messenger’?? All the disgusting words came out your own big fat gob, you’re just upset it’s come to bite you on that spotty orange arse.

As for the jawline? You troll yourself you funny t

 

[KKK.Hates.Her.Kids]

Physical abuse is literally seen as significant harm on the 4.3 recognition of significant harm chapter of the safeguarding children partnership so I'd say they qualify.

 

[Ruby Onslow]

I'm assuming there are guidelines on what constitutes 'significant harm'? Is it ultimately down to an individual to assess the 'evidence' and make their own decision?

There's no absolute criteria, all forms of abuse could result in a section 47 investigation, physical, emotional, sexual, neglect etc. However it's a judgement call, for eg is there cumulative longstanding abuse, was it premeditated, What's the likely psychological effects on the child if they've witnessed the abuse of others (a child witnessing DV could be at risk of significant harm for eg even if not being hurt physically themselves)

Obviously if there is evidence of sexual abuse or a child has unexplained broken bones or cigarette burns etc no judgement to be made straight referral to MASH for section 47/ emergency protection order and removal pending investigation

But evidence of one incident that could be explained as accidental? it's not going to meet the threshold. unless of course there is lots of other evidence which forms a clear picture of significant harm or risk of significant harm.

 

[MyNamesLaura]

Physical abuse is literally seen as significant harm on the 4.3 recognition of significant harm chapter of the safeguarding children partnership so I'd say they qualify.

Please stop getting your information off Google.
You're actually being informed by someone who is well educated on the ins and outs.

 

[Call me Karen]

Ultimately its for children's social care to look at the referral and consider next steps. Anyone and everyone is entitled to make a referral and SHOULD make a referral if they suspect (proof or no proof) that a child may be at risk. So no point going back and fourth on here about what they will and won't investigate. Our responsibility as individuals is only to refer.

 

[DoIKnowYouHun]

There's no absolute criteria, all forms of abuse could result in a section 47 investigation, physical, emotional, sexual, neglect etc. However it's a judgement call, for eg is there cumulative longstanding abuse, was it premeditated, What's the likely psychological effects on the child if they've witnessed the abuse of others (a child witnessing DV could be at risk of significant harm for eg even if not being hurt physically themselves)

Obviously if there is evidence of sexual abuse or a child has unexplained broken bones or cigarette burns etc no judgement to be made straight referral to MASH for section 47/ emergency protection order and removal pending investigation

But evidence of one incident that could be explained as accidental? it's not going to meet the threshold. unless of course there is lots of other evidence which forms a clear picture of significant harm or risk of significant harm.

I’m struggling to understand (realistically) how it can be passed as ‘accidentally’ when in the same sentence she admitted to giving the child a ‘bollocking’ that to me seems like total lack of self control, not to mention the force of a typically soft toy, used to black a child’s eye.