Thank you @Lucyinthesky88 for the title
*******READ THE WIKI********
(the pink button at the top of the page)
*******READ THE WIKI********
(the pink button at the top of the page)
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Just following on from the last thread...
in response to your reply @LuckyBlueEyes yes I have seen court documents relating to the girls but they were shared by Rachel, who was one of the parents involved.
in response to your reply @LuckyBlueEyes yes I have seen court documents relating to the girls but they were shared by Rachel, who was one of the parents involved.
Well done @Lucyinthesky88 
Title is lush hun, fluffy cloud in the post 
I really hope someone has screenshots of V being in the CIC as
I got a feeling an announcement is coming, before they get the chance to out her.
Title is lush hun, fluffy cloud in the post I really hope someone has screenshots of V being in the CIC as
I got a feeling an announcement is coming, before they get the chance to out her.
Is there room to add ‘Rachael hambleton’ to the thread title?
Yes. So, is it a great leap to think things have been shared elsewhere by a parent?
I have no intention of trying to convince you. You either believe me or you don’t, it’s quite clear which it is. But I will not go into detail. The only reason I’ve said anything is because I think it’s massively disrespectful and dismissive of the wants and needs of two children to attempt to paint one of their parents as a poor victim simply as another stick with which to beat R.
She's just shared a profile of a young lad and encouraging all her huns to follow him.
She’s a freak ! I despair at her !
And there is nothing on his profile regarding causes or anything relevant to PTWM at all. Mostly just topless photos and general rubbish.
She’s so weird. I feel sorry for Charlee having someone try to poach her dad.
What is wrong with her ! Daddy issues !
Attachments
That kind of question ‘ why wasn’t I yours’ and posting it for all and sundry to see is just plain weird.
I can believe a parent might share court documents or similar with a trusted friend. I can’t understand why that individual would then save them and share them with a stranger online, but given Rachel’s low morals and those of some of the people she associates with, that’s not a huge stretch, no.
I think a lot of people here (and no, we don’t know all the facts) can well believe that the ex wife wasn’t entirely innocent but empathise as mothers and recognise that the situation she is in now is awful even if she is partly to blame.
I also think that all the while those boys are broadcast online as part of Rachel’s patchwork ideal there is going to be speculation about their mother. Rachel has even written about the situation in her book, which will never just vanish. And that is on her. Whatever we say here is nothing compared to what she is putting them through on a regular basis because she is a trusted adult in their lives and we’re just anonymous strangers.
Oh bloody hell the shares of people that have nominated her for a “Shero” award have begun. I just can’t. 
She is literally the antithesis of a hero ffsOh bloody hell the shares of people that have nominated her for a “Shero” award have begun. I just can’t.
Which ever it is Ratchets behaviour since.... name dropping, implications physical abuse, alcoholism, local authority removal, snarky mesaages all on social media also make her a complete hypocrite given her last gushing post.
S may have behaved poorly at the time and it was deemed taking boys views into consideration that it was in their best interests that direct contact was stopped. Poor kids if J was the better option but the bar is set low.
I doubt there was any local authority removal however.
That was the whole reason she did those stories. Self gratification at its finest.Oh bloody hell the shares of people that have nominated her for a “Shero” award have begun. I just can’t.
Wasn’t anyone connected to Rachael. A lot of hurt has been caused by the other person that extends beyond R and J. As I said R not the only toxic part of that triangle.
Does that mean I don’t empathise? No, I do to a degree but my main sympathies lie with the boys. Do I empathise more when the boys are being splashed all over social media? Oh absolutely, that shouldn’t happen one bit.
And just because she doesn’t respect their privacy does not mean no one else should. As adults we make a choice and are responsible for our own actions. It’s an individual decision if you (generic) feel comfortable speculating and creating your own narrative around what happened to two children. Not everything needs discussion just because R puts it out there. This isn’t me saying we’re responsible for safeguarding before that one is thrown at me.
No, not everything needs discussing but the only reason it ends up being discussed at all (and on a continual loop) is because Rachel puts their lives out there (and has done for five years so far) and people are interested. It’s quite unusual for 4/6 children in a family to have no contact with a bio parent and she’s never made that a secret so speculation is natural.
One could argue that it isn’t respectful to the boys to read confidential documents relating to them
No, not everything needs discussing but the only reason it ends up being discussed at all (and on a continual loop) is because Rachel puts their lives out there (and has done for five years so far) and people are interested. It’s quite unusual for 4/6 children in a family to have no contact with a bio parent and she’s never made that a secret so speculation is natural.
One could argue that it isn’t respectful to the boys to read confidential documents relating to them
And waxes lyrical about second chances, sympathy, empathy and trauma after dropping salacioius snippets online for the world to see....
Well, from catching up through a lot, not sure I'll watch those stories. I'll end up emailing her with a lot of anger! I'm bleeping fed up of her and I'm bleeping fed up of her getting away with everything and people thinking the sun shines out of her arse. It doesnt. She's a bleep, a lying, manipulative bleep!!
So not only has R shared court documents that have ended up in the wrong hands.
J or S have too? Clearly if they have shared them with a trusted friend or family member, that person wasn't trustworthy enough because they shared them with lucky.
Thats not OK. Neither 3 adults should be sharing anything to do with a court regarding their children.
Like Lucy said, its unusual for 4 children from the same family to not have contact with their bio parent, it also would have been 5 children if that bio parent didn't fight hard enough and win.
Now I'm not saying S is innocent (we know nothing of that side apart from Rs narrative)
But since that,Rs behaviour and josh too, is absolutely appalling. She should never have written the children's past details in her book at all. The kids should have been a no go area full stop!
J or S have too? Clearly if they have shared them with a trusted friend or family member, that person wasn't trustworthy enough because they shared them with lucky.
Thats not OK. Neither 3 adults should be sharing anything to do with a court regarding their children.
Like Lucy said, its unusual for 4 children from the same family to not have contact with their bio parent, it also would have been 5 children if that bio parent didn't fight hard enough and win.
Now I'm not saying S is innocent (we know nothing of that side apart from Rs narrative)
But since that,Rs behaviour and josh too, is absolutely appalling. She should never have written the children's past details in her book at all. The kids should have been a no go area full stop!
- Status