Social Services: You're too stupid to look after your child!It wouldn't be so bad if they (the courts and social services) at least meant well but some aspects of the case make that hard to believe:
Mother: No I'm not, and I'll take this up in court.
Court: You're too stupid to appoint your own lawyer.
After the psychiatrist’s assessment of Rachel, the court has now acknowledged that she does have the mental capacity to keep up with the legal aspects of her situation.
In other words they now accept that their initial assessment of her intellectual* capability was wrong, but they are still going to remove her child on the basis of that assessment.
Incidentally isn't the pretence that these stories can't be reported fully because of the interests of the child especially weak in cases like this? The child is too young to know what the news is and will be given a new identity in a matter of months if the social services get their way.
* Whilst the measured intelligence of the mother is well below average it isn't freakishly so. An IQ of 71 (equal to 71 social workers) would put her in the lowest 2% to 3% of the population. If anyone proposed that there was a case for automatically removing 2% to 3% of children from their parents then they would rightly be considered insane.