Trial By Media

[murtle]

I'm not sure where to put this, so thought this the best place but it may not be controversial at all!

 

Having made the mistake over the last couple of days of catching a couple of radio programmes and lately the news I am so tired of the trial by media that appears to be happening more and more (or did I just not notice it before) when things go wrong.

 

The first was the Brand and Ross saga and lately it appears to be Sonia Shoesmith and baby P.

 

With Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross, I don't care what they do, I don't find their programme funny so I don't listen to it, OH did find it funny now can't listen to it cause some people who originally chose not to listen to it get the right to voice their complaint afterwards...when they have chosen to knowingly listen to something that offends. What gives them the right to complain afterwards?

 

With Sonia ShoesmithI don't want to hear residents say that all should their jobs, when they probably know as much about the situation as I do - which would be only what has been published in the press...I don't know if she should keep her job. Listening to one of the guys on the radio saying the difference that she has made to his school stuff then hearing the *man from The Sun* explain their campaign why they want her to loose their job had me throwing things at the radio. ...and as for hearing well someone should be held responsible for it....YES absolutely the cruel, eveil people that inflicted the injuries should be held accountable. Not people who are trying (in the most) to make the lives of many a better existence.

 

I believe the British media is all gutter press now, and should be restrained/held accountable for what they publish.

 

End of rant...for now...

[Rudi]

Re the Brand/Ross thing - only a fraction of the complaints about the programme were from people who had actually listened to the programme - the rest were from people who read or heard about what went on in the media!

 

I don't like the current trend for sacking people every time something goes wrong, sometimes it's appropriate, other times it's pointless and tends to be after the baying for blood in the media.

[K9Fran]

The media started with Diana, and possibly before then (Christine Keela (sp?) etc.) and have got waaaaaaay too big for their boots.

[Carole Stitcher]

I fear that I am possibly going to be controversial here.

 

While I am not a particular fan of the media in any of its forms and I don't feel that it is their role to publicly 'try' people, I think that the particular issues involved do need raising and I also believe that action should be taken.

 

The current financial climate has been caused by senior people on phenomenal salaries that most people could only dream of earning in a lifetime. Their errors have earned many of them a golden handshake which will be funded by the very people whose lives they have, if not ruined, certainly turned into a struggle for quite a few years to come.

 

Baby P died, probably in extreme agony, because the people who are paid very comfortable salaries from the public purse did not do the job they are paid to do, which is protect the children in their care. That child was classified as at risk, had over 80 visits in a relatively short space of time, yet no professional managed to save his life and spare him his suffering. They even hounded a caring social worker who had the bottle to blow the whistle on malpractice out of her job.

 

There are people on this board who work in this and similar sectors. While I don't always agree with their 'take' on things, the one thing that is obvious from their posts is the fact that they care deeply about what they do, and I strongly doubt that the outcome would have been the same had they been involved with Baby P.

 

How long would anyone last as a checkout operator at Tesco if they let people with baskets full of shopping walk through without paying? The principle is the same, they wouldn't be doing the job that they were paid to do, but the results of their actions would be far less devastating. They would be fired, regardless.

 

With the Ross/Brand issue, the BBC is a public corporation, funded by public money, so a certain level of good taste should be maintained. How the hell can that sort of behaviour be condoned? How would you like it if that had been your daughter/grandaughter/mother Brand had been publicly claiming to have slept with? I have no children, but if I had, I'm sure that I would want to publicly smack his bottom for behaving in such a childish and disrespectful manner. The same goes for Ross.

 

In all cases, why on earth shouldn't people be held accountable for what they have done and shouldn't have, or what they haven't done when they should.

 

To put it in doggy terms, many of us on this forum have vilified the Kennel Club for not cleaning up the world of pedigree dogs sooner, have said that they should be accountable for the poor state of many pedigree dogs. What's the difference?

[Melp]

Re Brand and Ross. Who cares? yes they upset Andrew Sachs and yes it was probably in bad taste, however Brand did sleep with his granddaughter. Maybe he shouldn't have aired this fact publically but given that Brand is a gob on a stick, maybe the granddaughter should have known better than to have sex with him in the first place.

At the end of the day, who died, who got maimed? No-one, so why all this bloody ridiculous fuss and loss of jobs?

 

Baby P. Haringay council social workers failed to do their jobs and those directly responsible for failing to take action should be made to pay for that but the ultimate responsibility lies with the parents of the poor child who lost his life. They are the ones who should spend the rest of their lives in prison for what they did.

[ClazUK]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/1...l-dacre-privacy

 

At work - will add my thoughts later, but the above makes interesting reading.

[Kats inc]

Regarding Child P from what I understand the social workers and police wanted him removed from the mother's care at various points and it was the social services legal team who said no.They are the ones who gave inappropriate advice.

 

Plus like all agencies at the moment my bet is that they are severely understaffed and under resourced.Put simply children will continue to die because the services are so poorly equipped.There aren't enough staff.There aren't enough foster carers.There isn't enough funding.There isn't enough back up.

 

A child could die from my caseload tomorrow and even though we are £20k a year down on staff and have written to our manager time and again about dangerous staffing levels you can bet your bottom dollar I would still be dropped right in the mire by said manager.I carry huge levels of risk on a daily basis and yes it worries me sick often.Only today I have been to a meeting where I truly believe the children should all be removed,as do the school staff,but even after the fiasco of Child P the social worker refuses to budge.I have to put everything in writing to cover my arse.But if any of those children got hurt tonight yes I'd be named and shamed by our lovely gutter press tomorrow.

 

Senior managers need to be held accountable for the awful state services are in.They blindly go on expecting over worked,over stressed staff to give a great service and they are blinkered to the fact that this isn't the reality.The reality is Child P and many other similar cases.I wouldn't say this woman losing her job is the answer but she does need a reality check.

 

I got the serious case review for Child P today but haven't had a chance to read it properly.I'll let you know my thoughts afterwards.

 

As for the Ross/Bland thing,blown out of proportion but a flipping stupid and idiotic thing for them to have done in the first place.

[cycas]

If this sort if thing was not covered in such detail by the press, would it not be much harder to convince people that more money is needed? If we didn't hear about this stuff, then wouldn't there be a temptation to think 'it must be OK, you never hear about X' when it comes to making decisions? Politicians tend to focus on stuff that is covered by the press because they reckon that if it's not widely known, not many people will be influenced to vote on it.

 

Re Ross and Brand: frankly I think both are big enough and rich enough to take the flak: i doubt either will be permanently damaged by the scandal. They should have had more sense: the response was a bit OTT, but none the less, making obscene phonecalls and broadcasting them to the nation is a pretty gross thing to do: I can't bring myself to get indignant either way!

[elricc]

Regarding Child P from what I understand the social workers and police wanted him removed from the mother's care at various points and it was the social services legal team who said no.They are the ones who gave inappropriate advice.

 

Plus like all agencies at the moment my bet is that they are severely understaffed and under resourced.Put simply children will continue to die because the services are so poorly equipped.There aren't enough staff.There aren't enough foster carers.There isn't enough funding.There isn't enough back up.

 

A child could die from my caseload tomorrow and even though we are £20k a year down on staff and have written to our manager time and again about dangerous staffing levels you can bet your bottom dollar I would still be dropped right in the mire by said manager.I carry huge levels of risk on a daily basis and yes it worries me sick often.Only today I have been to a meeting where I truly believe the children should all be removed,as do the school staff,but even after the fiasco of Child P the social worker refuses to budge.I have to put everything in writing to cover my arse.But if any of those children got hurt tonight yes I'd be named and shamed by our lovely gutter press tomorrow.

 

Senior managers need to be held accountable for the awful state services are in.They blindly go on expecting over worked,over stressed staff to give a great service and they are blinkered to the fact that this isn't the reality.The reality is Child P and many other similar cases.I wouldn't say this woman losing her job is the answer but she does need a reality check.

 

I got the serious case review for Child P today but haven't had a chance to read it properly.I'll let you know my thoughts afterwards.

 

As for the Ross/Bland thing,blown out of proportion but a flipping stupid and idiotic thing for them to have done in the first place.

 

I totally agree, I think the press need to highlight these things. Also have to say that I have worked with some terribly naieve social workers.

[Carole Stitcher]

given that Brand is a gob on a stick, maybe the granddaughter should have known better than to have sex with him in the first place.

 

Given that many men can be avaricious sexual predators, maybe all women should know better than to go out dressed provocatively, or drink too much, as they may end up getting raped. Same principle here, blaming the woman for the appalling behaviour of a man.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/1...l-dacre-privacy

 

At work - will add my thoughts later, but the above makes interesting reading.

 

This raises an interesting point in my eyes. Did Brand contravene her human rights by announcing so publicly that he had slept with her? Or can he claim the media defence of it being in the public interest?

 

 

Who cares?

 

With all due respect Melp, in my honest opinion those two words contribute a great deal to the state of the society we live in today.

 

Lets consider for a moment what it might be like if more people actually cared about even the small wrongs that don't actually impact on their personal lives.

 

More parents would care where their children are at all times of the day and night, so they wouldn't be hanging around the streets, getting involved with gangs, drugs, guns and whatever else. Children could then walk home from football training without tragic consequences.

 

More people might care about what's happening outside their own front door, so maybe, just maybe, something more could have been done to save Baby P from his suffering.

 

Maybe the 7 year old child and her mother that live with us (not relatives, long story) would be able to read and write. They're not stupid, in fact the 7 year old is well above average, but both have been failed by the system and by everyone they have come in contact with and that includes social services.

 

Maybe I wouldn't have felt today that I had to hide away my two beautiful natured staffy crosses from the policewoman who came to take a witness statement from my OH. If more people cared about what's right and what's wrong, the DDA in its current form would not exist and they would not be in danger of being considered 'type'.

 

Baby P. Haringay council social workers failed to do their jobs and those directly responsible for failing to take action should be made to pay for that but the ultimate responsibility lies with the parents of the poor child who lost his life. They are the ones who should spend the rest of their lives in prison for what they did.

 

Sonia Shoesmith is a senior manager. Her job is to ensure that the people who staff her department do what they are supposed to. Whether that is through discipline or support, it is her job to supply that, through the chain, to the people who were directly involved with Baby P. She obviously didn't, so she is no less responsible than anyone else.

 

And sorry to disagree with you Kats Inc., but the legislation allowed children in Cleveland and many other places to be placed in care unnecessarily, so that is no defence of the situation in my eyes.

[Kats inc]

And sorry to disagree with you Kats Inc., but the legislation allowed children in Cleveland and many other places to be placed in care unnecessarily, so that is no defence of the situation in my eyes.

 

There will always be mistakes in the system.In any amount of good practice there will always be bad.You just have to work out whether it is bad because the worker(s) is bad or because the system is bad.For Cleveland the system was bad and has hopefully been rectified.With Child P I don't think it's clear as yet which was bad.Predominantly the whole system is bad due to a lack of funding etc but within that I certainly know bad social workers who don't lose their jobs because the service is so desperate for staff.Sad when it's children's welfare and ultimately their lives at risk

[Carole Stitcher]

There will always be mistakes in the system.In any amount of good practice there will always be bad.You just have to work out whether it is bad because the worker(s) is bad or because the system is bad.For Cleveland the system was bad and has hopefully been rectified.With Child P I don't think it's clear as yet which was bad.Predominantly the whole system is bad due to a lack of funding etc but within that I certainly know bad social workers who don't lose their jobs because the service is so desperate for staff.Sad when it's children's welfare and ultimately their lives at risk

 

I totally agree and that is why I feel that people at ALL levels should be held equally accountable.

 

If you have a department that hounds out social workers who question bad working practices, it's a pretty safe bet that it is likely to be the department that is a major part of the problem. A head of a department that does nothing about it is part of the problem, so therefore should be held accountable.

 

The lady who lives next door to me is a foster carer and her last charges were subject to a care order (not voluntary) and had not been subjected to anything like the systematic abuse that Baby P had, yet our local social services department succeeded in gaining a care order, which is why I don't accept the excuse that is emerging that it is the legislation that failed Baby P.

 

I will resort to an old cliche here: A bad workman always blames his tools.

 

On the converse said, I am well aware that there are many people like yourself who work tirelessly for the children in your care and feel very deeply for their charges. It's another reason why I feel that the bad ones need rooting out at all levels. The money that they are paid is wasted, when it would be far more gainfully used to support those who care about doing their job to the best of their ability, instead of keeping them on making the situation worse, and making the job even harder for people like you.

[Kats inc]

I couldn't agree more about the managers being held responsible.They are the ones who blindfold themselves repeatedly to the ongoing problems within their departments.Examples being a black social worker who was utter shite but they couldn't fire because she used the race card and the management were scared of her,a recent meeting I was in where 9 professionals sat around a table requested a child protection conference for a family we had huge concerns about...the social worker and her manager refused...both these cases the manager should be accountable for those decisions when something goes wrong.But my bet is they won't and they will hide behind some bureaucratic excuse.I could go on and on and on and bore you with examples.I'm not saying I'm perfect by any means but I know I do have a big gob and I know my stuff and I do tend to shout loud when I see risk.

 

Higher managers that keep on pretending everything is ok when in reality it is far from ok really need a reality check.If it was my manager standing in Sharon Shoesmith's place I'd be the first to hang her out to dry for the total lack of empathy or professionalism with which she deals with her staffing issues I can imagine there are more than likely a fair few social workers in Haringey who feel exactly the same,especially judging from what I saw on the earlier evening news.

 

I await tonight's Panorama with baited breath although gawd knows why I'm watching in a way as I'll just end up ranting at the TV.

[jacqui d]

To be honest like mel, i dont care who slept with who and like mel, do care if a child is failed by its parents/social services/society, as a nation we cant change who sleeps with who, but we can unite to save children.

[buddyboy]

It seems to be just the professionals who get blasted.... I saw a piece on the news about the 2 young boys stabbed (allegedly) by their mother - several of her "friends" and "neighbours" were approached and they all said "THEY" - meaning assorted professionals - should have done something as she was clearly upset and disturbed..... well, excuse me "friends" and "neighbours" but if I saw someone as upset and disturbed as this lady apparently was I would try to help by speaking to her, offering to help her, and if I was really concerned by contacting whoever I thought would professionally be able to help.... not just sitting back waiting for "THEM" to take charge on intuition.