We adore our son and we've never smoked in front of him... now we just want him back: Parents speak out after judge rules boy, 2, should be placed for adoption because of their habit

Social Services

We adore our son and we've never smoked in front of him... now we just want him back: Parents speak out after judge rules boy, 2, should be placed for adoption because of their habit

Health visitor told family court there was a 'cloud of smoke' over the child
Judge ruled boy should be put up for adoption because his parents smoke
Parents accused social workers of stealing son because he's 'so adoptable'
They are now due to have a 'goodbye' meeting with their two-year-old boy

By SUE REID FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:15, 5 June 2015 | UPDATED: 01:57, 6 June 2015

The couple whose two-year-old son was taken from them because of their smoking have pleaded for his return

The couple whose two-year-old son was taken from them because of their smoking have pleaded for his return and claim they had switched to e-cigarettes to try to keep their child.

They also accused social workers of stealing the blond, blue-eyed toddler because he is ‘so adoptable’ and claim that a ‘pack of lies’ has been told about them by child protection authorities.

A judge ruled that the boy should be put up for adoption due to ‘excessive levels of smoke’ in their home.

A health visitor told the Family Court in Hull she had seen a ‘cloud of smoke’ over the child and that she had ‘difficulty breathing’ on her visit.

She added that the parents were oblivious to the problem, even though their child had been prescribed an inhaler to help his breathing.

They are now due to have a ‘goodbye’ meeting with their son – identified only as AB – later this month. But in their first interview, the parents, who are appealing against the adoption ruling, have denied ever smoking in front of their son.

The 22-year-old mother said the smell of smoke noticed by the health visitor ‘was not from cigarettes’ but was because ‘the pest control people were in the adjoining house smoking out pigeons from the chimney’.

She claimed they never smoked over their son, adding: ‘We were using e-cigarettes when social workers said our house was smoky and took him away.’

She went on: ‘We normally did not smoke in the house but outside. Only occasionally, if one of us was alone at home, we would smoke in the kitchen with the window wide open if our son was there.

‘We smoke 15 cigarettes a day, but when the social workers complained we went on to e-cigarettes. They did not take any notice.’

The father said they had fitted smoke detectors in their house but they never went off ‘because there was no smoke’.

The judge in the case, Louise Pemberton, was told of other factors that put the child at risk, including that the father could have a drug habit, which the couple deny. One witness, a nurse, said the couple’s house was ‘squalid’ and another nurse reported seeing used nappies on the floor.

Taken: The parents accused social workers of stealing the blond, blue-eyed toddler (pictured with his father with identities obscured) because he is ‘so adoptable’

Judge Pemberton said she found much of the mother’s evidence hard to accept, but acknowledged that AB was happy in his parents’ company and they ‘showed real delight in their son’. Photographs taken by the couple and given to the judge showed a ‘clean home and a clearly contented child’.

But issuing the adoption order, she concluded: ‘I want AB to know that in my judgment his parents loved him very much and tried very hard but were … simply not able to meet his needs.’

Speaking at the couple’s terraced house, the mother, who was in care herself from the age of 12, said: ‘Every time we are allowed to see him, he screams for his mummy and daddy when we kiss him goodbye. He knows us and it is heartbreaking.

‘The authorities appeared to set out to take our son from the minute he was born. We have done nothing to deserve this punishment.’ She added: ‘The house we live in now is really nice. At a previous house, they said the carpets were dirty. We did not have any carpets, it was a laminate floor.

‘We showed the photos of it to the judge in court. At the other places where we did have a carpet, I was paranoid about cleanliness and steam-cleaned them twice a day.

‘They never said go to smoking cessation classes or to the NHS for nicotine replacement products. Nothing was offered to help us stop what they said was the main cause of taking our son from us … We feel he has been cherry picked for adoption because he is blond, blue-eyed, young, and just what adopters want.’

Danger: A judge ruled that his parents' smoking was damaging to the little boy (picture posed by models)

Baby AB was born in 2013. The mother had two older children, who have been subject to care proceedings after social services said she could not cope because she was so young.

AB was taken away by social workers within an hour of his birth and put in foster care. He was returned to his parents in January 2014 and stayed with them until the concerns over their smoking were raised in August. Since then, the couple have only been allowed to see him for one and a half hours twice a week at a council centre.

The 36-year-old father, who runs a carpet-fitting and decorating business, said: ‘Smoking cigarettes is not a crime and should not lead to your child being taken away for ever

Former Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming, who runs campaign group Justice for Families, said: ‘The care protection system continues to take away children from families without good reason.

‘Social workers are there to support families who have problems. This couple, who clearly love their child as the judge said, have not been given a proper chance to prove themselves as good parents.’