Peaches Geldof

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

Medical information is confidential. It’s completely illegal and a horrifying misuse of patient / doctor relationship to start telling family members about someone’s medical history. The doctor would be in a lot of trouble professionally.

the information could be shared with him if She consented, and shared with SS if it was they who ordered the testing. It doesn’t seem that this was the case though, I’m sure it would’ve come out in the inquest.

don’t forget “just” being an addict doesn’t warrant SS intervention. If the children were well cared for and she wasn’t putting them in dangerous neglectful situations they could’ve had very little ongoing involvement, if any.

 

[Tui]

This!! I’m pretty sure I read in one of the articles he said that they both used when the babies slept!? I’m gonna have to go back and find it now

edited to add image

He’s talking about the spare bedroom

 

[OutrageouslyScarlet]

Both children would have still been under a health visitor at that age, they’d have been meeting the milestones and been clean and well looked after.
You can’t stop a mother having her child alone. I think his only failing was not getting to the house sooner when she didn’t answer the door or phone. Thankfully the baby was fine and won’t remember a thing. He will sadly read all about it eventually.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Ideas of addiction are so skewed. As the pp said plenty of people are addicts and do normal life. People don’t like to think it but it’s so prevelent, whether it’s prescribed or not, I’d almost guarantee you know/work with an addict who is functioning.

TC was part of that scene, that’s not the crowd you hang with if you are straight laced, he also married Peaches when she was addicted to heroin and using. Is it likely he was also an addict at some point? His family social workers or not would not get care of those children over the Geldofs money if it came down to which grandparents took them in.

This! Not all addicts are dying in a corner on a ‘just say no’ advert. They are also the best liars and manipulators. Partners of addicts also always want to see the best in them and will even lie to themselves that they have got in under control or are in recovery.

 

[BigMavis]

This is interesting, like I've said I've no experience with addiction so its an eye opener. I will contradict something though, SS are able to access medical records without a patents consent if there is a child protection concern. Usually this is done by contacting the persons GP and they must only share information that is relevant or proportionate to the situation. That must not have been the case here.
I appreciate that Thomas has most likely asked himself these questions over the years, it must have been incredibly difficult for him.

 

[lpm123]

I viewed it as if she was cosleeping the baby was brought back that evening to co sleep with her. With the baby in her bed whilst she had gone to the spare room to take the drugs

 

[Raininvain]

I think the deaths of all of them, Michael H, Paula and Peaches are incredibly depressing and avoidable. I suppose the main thing to take away from it is to stay away from Heroin and other hard drugs/ etc, and get yourself some help if you are using. Also the same goes for being an alcoholic. You are a long time dead.

 

[Gflo93]

Sorry if stupid question, because I don’t have kids, she mentioned that they had a 7ft bed for co-sleeping. Doesn’t that mean that the baby was most likely left in a big bed, where he could have fallen and hurt himself. I just mean that a cot would probably offer more protection, wouldn’t it. I guess I don’t know how mobile an 11 month old could be and how likely it was he could have hurt himself. Gosh, the whole thing doesn’t bear thinking about

 

[Vanillaco]

This is interesting, like I've said I've no experience with addiction so its an eye opener. I will contradict something though, SS are able to access medical records without a patents consent if there is a child protection concern. Usually this is done by contacting the persons GP and they must only share information that is relevant or proportionate to the situation. That must not have been the case here.
I appreciate that Thomas has most likely asked himself these questions over the years, it must have been incredibly difficult for him.

Social services are different. GPs have a duty to share information with care services or police if there is a risk of harm. They have no duty to tell someones husband the medical information of another adult who is if sound mind

Sorry if stupid question, because I don’t have kids, she mentioned that they had a 7ft bed for co-sleeping. Doesn’t that mean that the baby was most likely left in a big bed, where he could have fallen and hurt himself. I just mean that a cot would probably offer more protection, wouldn’t it. I guess I don’t know how mobile an 11 month old could be and how likely it was he could have hurt himself. Gosh, the whole thing doesn’t bear thinking about

Hopefully she had read up enough about attachment parenting to know to put him in a cot if she wanted to use. I think a lot of what she said about her parenting was lies anyway. Lying to herself for the most part.

 

[Gflo93]

Got you! No that makes sense re her attachment parenting

 

[BigMavis]

Social services are different. GPs have a duty to share information with care services or police if there is a risk of harm. They have no duty to tell someones husband the medical information of another adult who is if sound mind


Hopefully she had read up enough about attachment parenting to know to put him in a cot if she wanted to use. I think a lot of what she said about her parenting was lies anyway. Lying to herself for the most part.

Very true, and she did come across articulate and seemingly together. I suppose I'm looking at the situation with hindsight and that's never helpful.
I assume anyone involved has done so too, I can't imagine how they felt after her death.

 

[Gym&Tonic]

Its actually really hard to remove a child from their parents and it’s always a last resort. SS will do everything they can to keep a family together, and will only remove them if they feel they are in serious danger. You’d be amazed how many functioning addicts there are out there who still have their children with them, I’d say most of them do actually. I‘d place a bet on most people on here knowing someone who is a functioning addict of some sort.

 

[foxy-roxy]

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-p...l?prop=36650296&sale=88039482&country=england found the house in Wrotham

 

[FrostyChops]

The more l think about this the more l wonder if their relationship was on the rocks. It's not just going to his parents house with the kids when she was into attachment parenting. Peaches also mentioned about organising a family outing for the Sunday but it getting rained off. So then only your little one came back. That whole scenario seems odd. If you plan something and the weather spoils it, wouldn't you do something inside instead? I don't know, there seems something off about that. Maybe Peaches wanted them to come back but Tom wasn't keen so as a compromise just the little one did. He may have been fretting for her as he was so little and less used to being part from her.

The fact Tom wasn't surprised at her being dead on the bed speaks volumes.

I wonder how he feels now. He married this beautiful girl with a famous family, big house, marriage, 2 kids..would he have chosen those things without Peaches? He's been left high and dry that's for sure, l had no idea she had debts when she died.

 

[Misbehaving]

Sorry if stupid question, because I don’t have kids, she mentioned that they had a 7ft bed for co-sleeping. Doesn’t that mean that the baby was most likely left in a big bed, where he could have fallen and hurt himself. I just mean that a cot would probably offer more protection, wouldn’t it. I guess I don’t know how mobile an 11 month old could be and how likely it was he could have hurt himself. Gosh, the whole thing doesn’t bear thinking about

Well this is just my take on things but i believe that probably she did follow attachment parenting in the begininng maybe the first couple of months?
Maybe when she had brief periods of being clean?
I think (or would like to) that when she started using again that as an opiate user she didn't sleep in the same bed as her son and that he was placed in a cot?
Thats just a mother's instinct for protection isn't it?
I can't imagine her not having that drug user or not?
I think she really believed in the attachment parenting theory but for practical reasons would not have been able to follow it strictly?
Lets just hope that some common sense did prevail behind the scene's what with the grandparents and tom helping out and that the baby was secure in his own little cot?
Whatever my opinion on peaches is i don't believe that she would deliberately endanger her sons life?
As another person mentioned thomas checked on peaches first so maybe he was secure in the knowledge that his son was in his cot?
At 11 months old my kids were all still shuffling or crawling none of them had learnt to walk at that age.
I know some babies are walking at that age albeit probably still a bit wobbly on their feet but i still think the probability is that he wasn't walking?
I hope for his sake that he wasn't?
That he'd been settled in his bed and fed and changed and that yes when he woke up he will have started to cry either for food or mummy or both and that getting no response he will have done what all babies do and settled himself lets hope he had a toy or mobile to look at or some tething rings or something to keep him occupied.
Also by that age he will have been weaned and hopefully the hunger pangs wouldn't have hit him as badly as if he was just getting milk?
Babies are very resilient in that sense but losing his mum thats going to be harder to recover from?
Lets hope that Thomas is giving those boys all the love and protection that he can and that the chaos and drama and pain has finally ended?

 

[Gflo93]

Yes that makes perfect sense, I definitely don’t think Peaches would have wanted to do anything to harm her baby. I don’t have children/know much about attachment parenting so I don’t really know how it works. I think you are right, I’m sure that if there was any fear about the baby they would have rushed to him first.

I’m not sure about on the rocks but there was some talk about her arguing with Tom, people overheard them arguing on the train a few days before she died. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....singer-Elliott-Smith-just-four-days-died.html

 

[Raininvain]

The more l think about this the more l wonder if their relationship was on the rocks. It's not just going to his parents house with the kids when she was into attachment parenting. Peaches also mentioned about organising a family outing for the Sunday but it getting rained off. So then only your little one came back. That whole scenario seems odd. If you plan something and the weather spoils it, wouldn't you do something inside instead? I don't know, there seems something off about that. Maybe Peaches wanted them to come back but Tom wasn't keen so as a compromise just the little one did. He may have been fretting for her as he was so little and less used to being part from her.

The fact Tom wasn't surprised at her being dead on the bed speaks volumes.

I wonder how he feels now. He married this beautiful girl with a famous family, big house, marriage, 2 kids..would he have chosen those things without Peaches? He's been left high and dry that's for sure, l had no idea she had debts when she died.

Bob Geldof will have sorted him out.
He knew what he was getting into when he married her but the lure of money and that lifestyle will have been too great to pass up.Hes never had a proper job apart bits and bobs of modelling, singing etc.
Also he wont have to pay off her debts.

 

[Gflo93]

Bob Geldof will have sorted him out.
He knew what he was getting into when he married her but the lure of money and that lifestyle will have been too great to pass up.Hes never had a proper job apart bits and bobs of modelling, singing etc.
Also he wont have to pay off her debts.

From the article on her debts it sounds like these were all settled after she died and there was about 350-400,000 left over which went to primarily Tom but also the boys.

 

[Whoops i said it]

From the article on her debts it sounds like these were all settled after she died and there was about 350-400,000 left over which went to primarily Tom but also the boys.

I would think some of that debt would be their mortgage... potentially.

 

[veryfondoftea]

Yes that makes perfect sense, I definitely don’t think Peaches would have wanted to do anything to harm her baby. I don’t have children/know much about attachment parenting so I don’t really know how it works. I think you are right, I’m sure that if there was any fear about the baby they would have rushed to him first.

I’m not sure about on the rocks but there was some talk about her arguing with Tom, people overheard them arguing on the train a few days before she died. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....singer-Elliott-Smith-just-four-days-died.html

It also says she was in and out of rehab in the months before her death. I thought rehab was a place you stayed in for a period of time, not something you can pop in and out of?