I’m quite accustomed by now to being governed by a legislature that doesn’t draught and scrutinise most of the laws it passes, and which refuses to enforce most of the few good ones evenly and consistently, and which breaks the inconvenient ones at will.
I’m aware that my life and the lives of those whom I love are being defended by brave people who have not been equipped with enough of what they need to do that very simple job. I’m angry about it and I won’t stop criticizing the paymasters, but I can eat a meal while blogging about that anger.
I don’t expect that the children of most of my friends will receive an education anywhere near as deep and as long lasting as I was privileged to receive from the State and I’ll go on bewailing the fact, and get to sleep easily enough afterwards.
Not everything is political.
Some bad things just happen, and it’s difficult to imagine how anything like a free society could prevent a few deranged individuals from committing certain terrible crimes. Some things are simply sad, and there’s nothing to be done to prevent them.
A minority of mothers have killed their children throughout history.
Madness; either permanent or made by the extra demands of parenthood during times immeasurably harder than our own, have led wretched women to batter, smother, strangle, drown, expose or stab their offspring as long, almost, as records exist - and even before.
In some cases it seems that dire necessity and collective security might have inspired (or rather tempted) some women to kill their children. Sometimes even, it was a sacrifice: a bribe to the cruel heavens to buy some value higher than the value of a child’s life.
Each death is a tragedy: a tiny person gone and a whole wide world and a potentially long life of experience lost forever.
Wirral mum admits killing her four-year-old daughter
A MERSEYSIDE mum today admitted killing her four-year-old daughter.
Little Chloe Fletcher was found dead in her Wallasey home after a phone call to police in the early hours of Wednesday, April 29.
Today at Liverpool Crown Court dark-haired Laura Fletcher, 22, pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility after months of rigorous psychiatric tests.
Andrew Menary, prosecuting, said at the time she was “suffering from serious mental illness”.
Fletcher’s “not guilty” plea to murder was accepted by the prosecution.
Neil Flewitt, defending Fletcher, said his client was aware she could face a term of imprisonment.
Fletcher called police on the night of the killing from a phone box close to her Oakdale Avenue home.
When officers arrived they spoke to the defendant before she directed them upstairs.
In a bedroom they found Chloe on a bed with a soft toy by her side.
She was pale and cold to the touch and had three bruises on her forehead
She was fully dressed but was also wearing a dressing gown.
The bathroom door was open, the light on and the bath full of water.
A post-mortem confirmed the cause of death as drowning.
Judge Henry Globe QC, Recorder of Liverpool, adjourned sentencing until October 9 so psychiatric reports can be prepared.
Neighbours described Chloe as a “cute girl, with beautiful blonde curls.”
Floral tributes and cuddly toys were left outside the red semi-detached home where she lived with her mother after news of her death began to spread.
Chloe had recently started at nearby Oakdale nursery where owner Karen Lane paid tribute to a “happy, bright and cheerful” little girl.
In the aftermath of Chloe’s death Wirral council confirmed the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board (LSCB) had commissioned a “Serious Case Review”, to investigate the agencies involved.
The council admitted Chloe was “known to a number of agencies”.
There’s just one thing that this recently rebuked self-proclaimed social commentator might add to this awful story.
“…The council admitted Chloe was “known to a number of agencies”.
Often, madness and depression do not appear overnight and they are rarely invisible to trained professionals. It is probable that health visitors and others from “a number of agencies” had at least seen the pitiful and pitiless Laura Fletcher before Chloe’s death. To what extent might her malign state of mind have been visible?
On the one hand, our taxes and our patience and forbearance are called upon to finance and tolerate a huge and sometimes intrusive bureaucracy of ‘child protection,’ and we’re told it needs massive funding to work properly.
On the other hand, it appears you can intercept and deal with potential child abusers for the simplesumof £30.
And yet again, on the quiet, “Chloe was “known to a number of agencies”.
Lessons, no doubt will be learned, and maybe they’ll discover that Laura Fletcher ‘just snapped.’ Is it likely that they’ll find just who it was decided not to learn the lessons of Victoria Climbié, Baby P, and all? They’ll likely as not blame the ‘systems’ and put some new ones ‘in place’.
I’ll bet it’s not an individual.
Individuals are silly.
Individuals pay taxes.
Individuals fill in forms for the system.
Individuals do what they’re told.
Individuals don’t burn down public buildings full of people who didn’t do their jobs.
For anyone whose life, or whose nearest and dearest’s lives have been harmed or ended by the diamond-hard accretion of everything moral relativist, culturally Marxist, multicultural and inbred-secretive-bureaucratic that is contemporary social work and ancillary trades, or whose children’s’ educations have been disrupted or ruined, or who have been personally mugged or robbed or who have lost friends and relations to the depredations of social work’s end-product, we present:
Social Schadenfreude Three: The Revenge.
Community Care's campaign to protect the social work profession from media distortion
We at The Social Workers’ Anti-Defamation League do not believe that this article goes far enough, and so we have suggested some improvements and intensifications.
The great work…
.
Wasn’t that what they used to call alchemy? And how true a metaphor for our beloved profession – nay; our destiny – to turn the base metal of a randomly evolved humanity long imprisoned by oppressive and illogical laws into the gold of rational (Wo)Man
...of most social workers goes unrecognised while the profession gets pilloried
‘Pilloried’ actually refers to the Mediaeval process whereby individuals who have been tried and convicted of harming their fellow humans or their property were exposed to brief periods of public humiliation, insult, and sometimes having of rotten thrown fruit at them.
This was a procedure based upon the utterly false superstition (now entirely discredited by the pioneers of modern social work theory) that human beings possess sense organs with which they can perceive pain, loud noises, and discomfort. The folly was further compounded by the insane notion that Homo Sapiens Sapiens is equipped with a faculty called ‘memory’, whereby previous experiences can be recalled to mind at ‘will.’ (As if ‘will’ was anything other than a social construct that disguises the complete subjection of human consciousness and behaviour to environmental stimuli such as economic relations and power structures, theoppressiveness of family or other tribal structures such as nationality, and to xenophobic, sexist, imperialist and violent belief systems, except for Islam.) The madness continued in that it was felt - for centuries without number - that once pain, discomfort, or humiliation had been inflicted on some so-called malefactor, then whilst contemplating an act of challenge against outdated cultural norms such as ‘respect’ for the lives, health and property of others,they might recall the stimuli and somehow ‘reason’ that further testing of said norms might be followed by additional ‘punishment’, and therefore desist from acting freely as their natural feelings prompted.
It is impossible to exaggerate the harm that such primitive theories of ‘personal responsibility’ and ‘crime’ and ‘punishment’ have inflicted upon an innocent and blameless humanity and its individual members’ natural and healthy attempts to enjoy all of the activities and experiences that their instincts and emotions prompt them to pursue.
If social work’s mission is anything - and it is everything; everything! - it is to consign forever all of these Stone Age fetishes of ‘morality,’ ‘property,’ and ‘free will’ into the recycling box of Social Studies.
…in the media for its mistakes. The campaign to reverse this starts here
For too long, media coverage of social work has been hostile, inaccurate, misleading - or completely absent. Social work is often treated as a second class profession in news reports and much of the press focuses disproportionately on child protection,
‘Child protection.’ How redolent that is of the Victorian morality and hypocrisy that we social workers are dedicated to eradicating.
In their ignorance and phallocentric paternalism, the bourgeois Victorians imposed an ‘age of consent’ law which was aimed especially at girls – in typical sexist fashion. This atrocity asserted that young people were somehow unfit to judge for themselves when they might start to experiment with sexual activity or to decide when they were ready to become sex workers.
Imagine the guilt that adults who were accustomed to co-operating with youngsters’ natural urge to discover what their bodies could do now felt! For a century and more, caring and responsible adults and teenagers have been persecuted by an oppressive and ignorant state for their relationships with children, and it is only in recent years that social workers and like-minded professionals have been able to influence the courts and lawmakers to ease restrictions and to lighten or avoid sanctions based upon the false distinctions around adolescent and pre-adolescent sexuality.
leaving other aspects of children's and adults' services invisible.
Such as protecting children from oppressive social structures and inappropriate environments such as Christian families or the nuclear-marital home. Our profession has made great progress in influencing family law to prefer enlightened and progressive child-rearing away from these perilous backgrounds.
Portrayals of social workers in the wider media, such as TV shows, also often pander to an inaccurate stereotype - storylines perpetuate myths about social workers and fail to reflect the fact that many clients say they have a positive experience of social workers.
Here are some particularly insulting and misleading examples of how extreme examples of our work is vilified by self-appointed and unqualified investigations in the capitalist media.
This type of coverage, together with generally low levels of awareness about what social workers do, leads to a low public opinion of them. Such attitudes damage the profession's credibility in the eyes of service users and other professions, make it difficult to keep hold of experienced staff and find new recruits, and ultimately put vulnerable children and adults at risk.
You have told Community Care that enough is enough – and we agree. For the past two months we have been calling on The Sun to improve its coverage of social work issues and now we are launching our Stand Up Now for Social Work campaign.
Furthermore, we at SWADL insist on the banning of provocative and misleading ‘journalism’ such as the following;
…the social services sent out a social worker from her own community. He chose not to believe Hannah and, in effect, shopped her to her father, who gave her the most brutal beating of her life.
And…..But the problem is bigger than one paper and so is our campaign. We are reaching out to the media as a whole - and to government and social work leaders - in a bid to curb inaccurate and misleading reporting and promote social work's success stories.Community Care spoke out in 2006 in its Stand Up for Social Care campaign, when social work was under threat as traditional social work departments were disbanded and social care was increasingly becoming an after-thought rather than an integral part of public policy. Today that threat to the profession continues - in the form of unfair portrayals in the media and subsequent low public opinion. Once again we are taking a stand. Join us and Stand up Now for Social Work.To achieve our demands (above) we are calling on:● The media to portray social work in an accurate and balanced way, be accountable for the information they provide, and agree and adhere to guidelines for reporting on social work● The government to do more to support and promote respect and positive images to enhance the professional standing of social work, as it has done for teachers.● Social services departments and councils to improve their media skills to help improve their responses to the press in times of crisis and increase opportunities for positive coverage.What Community Care will do In the next few weeks we will publish articles in the magazine and online, run special podcasts and videos on our website, and lobby the media and politicians. Our plans include:● Protesting against the Press Gazette's decision to shortlist The Sun's Baby P campaign for the best editorial campaign of the year accolade in the newspaper's British Press Awards.● Holding the media to account by highlighting good and bad coverage of social work.● Drawing up guidelines to advise journalists and the wider media about what social workers do and how to accurately portray the profession.● Promoting positive stories about social workers and the difference they make to people's lives, and highlighting positive social work role models.● Demanding that government offers more support to the profession. ● Continuing to collect more signatures to our petition and parliamentary motion calling for better media coverage of social work blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Oh sod it. It’s not funny.
North Northwester here.
You know what? I reckon that social work is indeed hard, demanding and exhausting work – way and above more harrowing than my own experiences in the education system and the welfare benefits world where the everyday stories you hear are heartbreaking enough. I know that people in those trades lose sleep and obsess and worry at home and go to work and serve way beyond their job descriptions to help their fellow human beings.
Social work can be and should be and sometimes is painstakingly undertaken by thoroughgoing professionals… I guess.
Not that I’ve seen it - you understand – ever. But as I know that there are great teachers out there and benefits bods who aren’t insane tax-fountains raring to let illegal immigrants impregnate teenagers in exchange for six bed roomed mansions…I’ll assume that some, and maybe many, social workers have a grip on reality and are making furious efforts not to allow the repetition of the mistakes and hideous negligence above.
But.
Just point me to the root-and-branch humility and top-down professional self-criticism in social work about this lot. You get it from police after they’ve gone over the top or just failed – and they got lumbered with the McPherson Report. Where’s the verdict of ‘institutional doziness?’ Where the hell is it?
THE hospital consultant at the centre of the Baby P scandal has been banned from practising, the General Medical Council announced today.
In this upside-down Nu Labour Britain someone in authority at last has had enough gumption to at least consider the possibility of maybe checking sometime soon that one of the links in the chain that led to the death of Baby P might be worth looking at.
What if the rabid right-wing press had not generated such a fuss, with all its curtain-twitching Daily Mail reading vigilante censoriousness and cheered on by vindictive Tory bloggers? What if instead we had stayed silent and let these moderate-minded childcare professionals and theoreticians (with one noble exception, and a politician to boot!) sort it out? Then would Dr Sabah Al-Zayat still be in a position to ignore bruises on another child's 'body?
I'm not saying that other experts won't 'fully exonerate' her in the fullness of time, and that the official stocks of whitewash aren't being brought out as we wait, but who knows? Perhaps Doctor Sabah Al-Zayat's replacement might look under the chocolate on another child and find something interesting.
Maybe that child will live.
Perhaps we in the dextrosphere aren't all mere windbags grouching from home and never achieving anything. So let's keep blogging, as if lives depended on it. Home.
I can recommend it for anyone who thinks perhaps that we enraged Daily Mail-reader types are:
A) too harsh on all concerned, and B) members of a tiny minority of professional right-wing whingers.
On it is a link to another Guardian page discussing how its readers failed to notice an insignificant number of tiny and easy-to-misinterpret clues which might, in a parallel universe, have led to a different outcome for Baby P.
The Guardian Key Questions are a priceless treasure trove of the bleeding obvious, and here they are.
Key questions
• Why did all the children's services in Haringey fail to stick to approved procedures for managing child protection cases?
• Why did Shoesmith chair the serious case review into the handling of Baby P, rather than an independent expert?
• Is it a coincidence that a death happened in Haringey again, eight years after the death of Victoria Climbié, or is there a specific problem in the north London borough?
• Did police urge social workers not to return Baby P to the family home? If so, why was this ignored?
• Why did Haringey fail to pass on all relevant documents to police and prosecutors until the case reached trial?
• Why did NHS staff fail to follow the correct procedures when there was evidence that Baby P suffered non-accidental injuries?
• Was the management and supervision of staff involved in the case up to scratch?
• Why did the local authority not abide by the fostering regulations when it used family friends as temporary carers for Baby P?
The bodily hygiene behaviour of family Ursidae in sylvan environments springs to mind, and also speculation about how well the Reformation has been received lately in the topmost stratum of the Vatican.
I’ve decided not to swear much online, but a chap has to do something or else the anger just builds up and builds up and fills his world until he finds himself on top of a church steeple or some other tall building; stark naked and with nothing for company but a high-powered sniper’s rifle, some fondue forks, a deep-fat fryer and a cage full of hamsters.
I have a dream that one day it will be better.
One day; just for one day, I’d like to live through that day and not go to bed thinking that - spiritually at least – I can feel the cooling trickle of Gordon Brown’s genetic code darkening the seat of my pyjama pants.
One day; just for one day I’d like to think that the Conservatives, the heirs of Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher might have a clue; perhaps clue enough to oppose the man and the party that have bankrupted Britain and who mean to do so much more to harm the car boot sale of its surviving economy, and that their top leaders would show enough gumption, enough nous (and this is the leaders of a party whose basic, fundamental, simple-to-understand philosophy means ‘step away from the really, really stupid stuff that always hurts and use the things that you can see actually working) to pin some kind of blame on him and to promise without apologizing to do something different and stick to it, rather than giving the impression that they’d be more gainfully employed fellating farmyard animals on late night reality TV.
One day; just for one day in what’s left of 2008 or even in all of 2009 (I’m a patient person), I’d like to see someone very senior and who owns part of the government’s responsibility to protect us from violent mass murder and who controls one department or another whose budget runs into the billions recognise that an ideology exists whose thirteen-hundred year mission from God is to subjugate all of mankind into complete and unbroken obedience, and I'd like to see him acknowledge the idea that during those thirteen centuries of war and oppression, no powerful group or sect within Islam has sustained anything but minor modifications on the universal suppression thing, and that petro-dollar-rich death-cult fantasists are not exactly the same as falafel-eating ecumenical Anglicans would be, and that such a minister or official might adjust defence or security policy to acknowledge that situation in some kind of co-ordinated and, yes, sustainable way that is not girded around with apologies for the cultural insensitivities that might taint or characterize any government action intended to avoid getting some of the rest of us killed.
One day; just for one day I’d like to see one influential part of the multi-billion pound Welfare State actually perform one simple task with consistency and without making things worse, such as protecting a child who for whatever reasons (and let’s not be ungentlemanly here and blame, oh, to pick a scapegoat totally at random say "the Left") appears to have briefly lived in a man-made hell on earth.
I’m not saying that I expect such an organisation to have anything useful to say about how such a hell was created in the first place despite the oceans of money that have been spent over past decades to improve the lot of the poor, or how or even whether such a hell might be modified let alone abolished (one must be realistic, after all; wide-screen TVs with a hundred satellite channels in every hovel in the land is a sustainable and desirable ecological goal, but wiping chocolate off a sick child to check for injuries is just a science fiction pipe-dream). I'd just like to see that someone not yet sacked from such an organisation who might commit to and actually bring about some kind of change from previous cluster-related official behaviour that allows such satanic evil to perpetuate itself, decade after decade unchecked and unchallenged. Just for one day I’d like the senior officials of the welfare state behave as if they were the ultimate, court-of-last-resort protectors of childhood rather than acting as if they're merely the proximate sources of childbirth.
This is where you can find the Haringey Council Social services budget. There's a PDF file which you can download.
Look amongst the pages for 'children and young peoples' services' p 25, or 'social services' p5 under cost of services, and 'children and young people' p 103.
May be some repetition there, but still, I can't quite see where it says 'check under the chocolate, there's a dear.'
Devil's Kitchen has a second post about this case. He takes time to offer a different and contrasting view from his own. He doesn't swear once in the new post. He is very calm.
