Sheila's behavioural problems/mental illness : childhood - 1985

[packagebuilder]

Packagebuilder I'm assuming you're male?  As anyone in the teaching profession will tell you boys tend to behave worse and achieve less, academically, than girls pre 16 so your school reports may not be that atypical.

I don't know if you attended a state or private school but again it would be highly unusual for a girl in the 1960's/1970's to be expelled twice from a private fee paying school from a middle class/high socio-economic background.  If it happened today the school would bring in a child psychiatrist.

Yes I am male  I did get expelled three time, and have been bullied too? I said to be social immature with obsessive tendenices, learning problems ect they said I attemped suicide twice  this was in 2006/7.

But I don't what to say anymore I don't what to damage myself! 

But College reports are all good, hard work and very friendly person, has good circle of friends etc :D

I say secondry schools reports are not worth the paper its printed on & shouldn't have any standing too! 

Mind you I still get depressed over them! I still have those reports in my bedroom to this day and look at them  :'(

[Roch]

I amnot sure if this is readable

Jackie is this a section of a statement that has only recently come to light?  I found Babs Wilson's statement excerpt a bit of an eye opener .  I'm not sure what was contained the rest of the same  statement, so it's difficult to place it entirely in context.

[JackiePreece]

Rochy thats all I have got and I believe its something that was witheld.

I think both statements point to Jeremy being innocent

Who made the decision to withold them they should be sued

Someone needs to be held accountable, there must have been brown envelopes going everywhere or caravans

[mertol22]

Mike, in your opinion, what sort of info are we talking about that if disclosed would be so damaging to the public interest?  At the end of the day this is a domestic albeit a very tragic one.  We're not talking about a threat to national security or something similar.

National Security a little suprised to see this again, quite certain the core of the witheld data will be on what happened from the storming starting from when the door was forced open from there.

[packagebuilder]

I don't think its national security, more like total police fails!! 

But the quicker CCRC approves Jeremy's appeal, the less damaging it will be! yes its 25 year too late but, better then 50 years time!

I would say that Essex police has made mistakes in this case I do, having a quick look at michael stones case I believe hes innocent too! 

[ajross]

Sheila's early behavioural problems:

Bullied at school and expelled from school x 2:

http://www.emkpress.com/pdffiles/alexanderguide.pdf

Has anybody ever looked at the medication she was on and/or therapy and what the side effects could have been? The reason I ask is that I used to work with a young chap who had psychotic episodes and acted much like he was 'possessed' he would become incredibly strong and violent. He had several courses of ECT. While having this and for a period after he would become docile and engage with us but every time his behaviour would regress and each time it did he would become increasingly violent, delusional and incoherent. Could Sheila have suffered a violent episode as a result of something like this? Having read some of the statements she seems to have become more placid after treatment but then quickly reverted back to her previous behaviour (and possibly worse)?

[Jane]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but was Sheila's adoption a private negotiation? It would have been a huge coincidence if it was otherwise. My mother refused all local children fearing their close proximity to birth relatives. Is it possible that June's doctor might not have approved adoption?

[maggie]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but was Sheila's adoption a private negotiation? It would have been a huge coincidence if it was otherwise. My mother refused all local children fearing their close proximity to birth relatives. Is it possible that June's doctor might not have approved adoption?

I think Sheila was adopted through the church of england adoption society which was a recognised society at that time.  The attitude and understanding to mental illness was so different in 1950s/early 1960s, it tended to be swept under the carpet and not talked about.  Also, there was little general awareness of the effect such illness may have on an adopted, or indeed natural child.  Of course, it could be a tragedy for such children, no one would deny that.

[ajross]

egap1 - can you shed any light on my post earlier in this thread about Sheila's treatment/medication.therapy? You seem to be well versed in the psychological/mental health side of things.

[ajross]

I believe Sheila was misdiagnosed as being schizophrenic when in fact she had dissociative identity disorder:

http://www.medicinenet.com/dissociative_identity_disorder/article.htm

I have no knowledge/experience of any prescribed medication used to treat mental illness just a bit of basic knowledge on the psychological aspect.

I would also question whether June and Sheila's  psychiatrist, Dr Ferguson, was competent in terms of his qualifications and ethics:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2310.msg69862.html#msg69862

Sheila's mental state was the major line of defence at trial!?
[/quote
Thank you egap1, I was just wondering whether any treatment caused a deterioration in her behaviour over time as I have experienced this. In the experience I had a 55kilo person had to be 'restrained' by up to 12 (much larger, well trained and experienced) adults and after a lapse of time after ECT the strength just seemd to increase. I think that if Sheila was capable of similar it would answer a lot of the questions regarding how the family (in particular Ralph) were overpowered, but no doubt, in 27 years, this avenue has been well explored.

[Jane]

Given that several members of Sheila's birth family were academics it would be doing her a disservice to write her off as an airhead. We know that at a certain stage of development a child sees itself as being responsible for what is happening in its' world. It is likely that Sheila believed that it was her fault that June had been absent for a while. At 2/3 it may not have been deemed necessary to give an explanation, but if one was given, it's possible that June may have said that she was poorly because of what she went through to have Sheila. Innocent enough words, perhaps, but enough to make a once rejected child feel in danger of causing a second.  It's not beyond the realms of possibility that June told her she must be a good girl for Mummy or she would be ill again. If this was so, most of her thoughts during her school life, especially at a boarding school, would have been taken up with worrying about whether or not her mother was still there and having been disruptive enough to get herself expelled and presumably sent home to find she was, she was probably told by her mother how bad she was, how ungrateful, how she would never make anything of herself and possibly the Ultimate, "I should have left you where you were, I should never have had you"
In the end I believe she lived her life complying with how her mother told her it would be  and "She" became very lost in  the process, but had she been given positive, instead of negative affirmation, there was enough academia in her genetics for her life to have been entirely different.

[maggie]

april1 do you think she was spoken to like that all the time? That fills me with horror. I know she was  quoted as calling her 'harlot' and 'devil's child' in a way these are terms tho strange and angry could be apologised away as of the heat of the moment and do not go to the heart the way the phrases you used would, they would do great damage to a child.

[Jane]

april1 do you think she was spoken to like that all the time? That fills me with horror. I know she was  quoted as calling her 'harlot' and 'devil's child' in a way these are terms tho strange and angry could be apologised away as of the heat of the moment and do not go to the heart the way the phrases you used would, they would do great damage to a child.

Maggie, in answer to your first question. Enough times to seriously seriously devalue her sense of selfworth, but she would never have forgotton it had they been said only once. And think again about the descriptions "harlot" and "devils child" levied, I imagine with venom at a child who has no idea of its' parentage, it takes on whole new meaning and does indeed do untold damage. Thankfully, some are made of stronger stuff than Sheila and even manage to do a degree-after YEARS of therapy!!!!!

[maggie]

Maggie, in answer to your first question. Enough times to seriously seriously devalue her sense of selfworth, but she would never have forgotton it had they been said only once. And think again about the descriptions "harlot" and "devils child" levied, I imagine with venom at a child who has no idea of its' parentage, it takes on whole new meaning and does indeed do untold damage. Thankfully, some are made of stronger stuff than Sheila and even manage to do a degree-after YEARS of therapy!!!!!

No, I do realise an adopted child is an extremely vulnerable child. I was not excusing any name calling, what I meant, with strong links between child and parent things are sometimes said which aren't meant, with love and apology the odd mistake can be ovecome. Because Sheila had schizophrenia and was probably showing signs of this in early adolescence  it may have been that she dwelt heavily on random phrases.  I am not excusing any sort of abuse, as far as we know ie. according to JB, Sheila was a happy child with no apparent issues with her adoption. I try to keep an open mind that is all unless we know the facts. 

[Jane]

No, I do realise an adopted child is an extremely vulnerable child. I was not excusing any name calling, what I meant, with strong links between child and parent things are sometimes said which aren't meant, with love and apology the odd mistake can be ovecome. Because Sheila had schizophrenia and was probably showing signs of this in early adolescence  it may have been that she dwelt heavily on random phrases.  I am not excusing any sort of abuse, as far as we know ie. according to JB, Sheila was a happy child with no apparent issues with her adoption. I try to keep an open mind that is all unless we know the facts.

Children who are victims of any sort of abuse are often reluctant to "spill the beans" Sometimes it's because they love the abuser, frequently it's because they have been made to feel the fault is theirs and if they would only do as they were told, things would improve. Equally, it could be that they are threatened with dreadful consequences if they tell what is happening to them and that would include telling siblings.

I don't imagine that Sheila and Jeremy were close. If nothing else, Sheila's abuse would have created a barrier between them. It is highly likely that they experienced similar treatment, but there are secrets which can't be shared. When Jeremy said Sheila was a happy child, it's possible that it was a throwaway comment or he needed to believe it in order to keep happy his memories of his own childhood. If only they could have talked to each other. But perhaps not!!