Mrs Patel is charged with murdering her three children

A mother accused of suffocating her three babies wanted more attention from the nurse helping her, a court has heard.

Trupti Patel, 35, is charged with the murder of Amar, aged three months, Jamie, aged 15 days, and Mia, aged 22 days.

She denies suffocating the babies either by squeezing their chests or blocking their noses or mouths between 1997 and 2001.

Pauline Trew, a health visitor from a medical centre near the Patels' family home in Maidenhead, Berkshire, told Reading Crown Court Mrs Patel wanted more involvement from Michelle Wolfendale, a nurse who helped parents who have previously lost children.

'Perfectly well baby'

She also told the court Mrs Patel was unhappy with the device she had been given to monitor the breathing of baby Mia.

Mrs Patel told Ms Trew she had trouble sleeping because she kept needing to check on Mia following the deaths of her two sons.

Ms Trew visited the family home twice in the weeks after Mia's birth, but said neither mother nor baby gave her cause for concern.

Despite Mia being slightly jaundiced, Ms Trew said: "I had no worries. She looked a perfectly well baby."

But she said Mrs Patel was unhappy with the breathing monitor she was assigned for Mia.

She wanted a device her baby could wear on a belt rather than one which was placed on the mattress in her cot.

'More involvement'

During the defence, Ms Trew was asked about Mrs Patel's general state during their meetings.

"Do you remember her telling you that she had not been sleeping well as she felt that she had to keep checking on Mia?" she was asked.

"Yes, I remember her saying that," Ms Trew said.

She was then asked whether Mrs Patel had been disappointed that she had not received more attention from Michelle Wolfendale, the nurse assigned to help her with Mia under the Care of Next Infant Scheme for parents who have previously lost a baby.

"Is it the position that you phoned Michelle Wolfendale and said that Trupti Patel wanted more involvement from her?" she was asked.

Ms Trew replied: "I phoned Michelle but she was not available so I left a message to that effect."

She also said that when she saw Mrs Patel with Mia there was a lot of eye contact between them.

'False reading'

The court also heard that the sensitivity of the breathing monitor given to Mrs Patel for Mia had been turned down by 20%.

Mrs Patel had returned the device claiming it was sounding an alarm even when Mia was on top of her mattress and breathing properly.

Stavros Vassos, who was responsible for testing the monitors for the manufacturers, said the device may have sounded the alarm because its reduced sensitivity was not enough to pick up the baby's movements.

Mrs Patel was given a second monitor which when tested after Mia's death was working properly.

But Mr Vassos told the defence that the device was not foolproof and that a "false positive" reading could be produced by movement from the monitor's cable.

He also said urine could "play havoc" with the device's electronics.

The trial continues.