Brandon Muir had more than 40 injuries when he died last March after being brutally assaulted by Robert Cunningham.There you go! Nothing to do with the social services at all – it was
The High Court in Glasgow was told that witnesses, including neighbours, heard loud noises and shouting from the flat where he was attacked and saw him looking unwell but failed to contact the authorities.
Chief Insp Willie Semple said the boy lived in a chaotic environment but could still be alive if people, including neighbours, had spoken out.Are you sure about that, Chief Inspector?
Mr Semple said that witness statements taken by his officers revealed how much people had known.
He added: “If they had shared that with social workers, potentially we would not have had a trial. I am not saying Brandon Muir would have been alive today, but he may have been.”
Because when the ‘Times’ investigated child abuse at Muslim madrassas, there wasn’t exactly a rush to action, was there?
And when concerned neighbours rang up the SS regarding poor little Lois, it didn’t do much good did it?
Anne Houston, of Children 1st, said that in almost every case where an abused child died it emerged that friends or neighbours were concerned.Not exactly by ‘society’, Liz. Let’s take a look at some of the caring professionals who saw Brandon before he died:
She added that Brandon had been let down by those who should have had his best interests at heart. Liz Smith, the Tory shadow minister for children, said the toddler was failed by his parents and by society.
Sinead McLaughlin, a health visitor who went with a colleague to carry out a routine check-up on Brandon early last March, told the court he had a “scab-like mark” on his face and dried blood below his nose and wanted to be lifted up.Yup, that’s right. Little Sinead thought something was a bit hinky here, but dutifully went ahead and checked off her list anyway. All the ticks in the right boxes? Job done!
She thought this was unusual, as most two-year-olds would “check out” a stranger before going to them. But his height and weight were satisfactory and she had no particular concerns about his physical health.
Hey, if there’s anything really amiss, the neighbours’ll call us, right?
The court also heard that the toddler was not taken to a number of immunisation appointments, but appeared “well” when social workers spoke to his mother at a health centre two days before he died.Oh, workers at a health centre? Again, not neighbours, or other members of ‘society’, but professional public sector employees tasked with child welfare issues and failing to do their jobs. Again.
So, Chief Inspector Semple, and Liz ‘Ooh, I’m on Dave’s Team, how thrilling!’ Smith, care to tell me again how it’s really ‘society’s fault’....?
8 comments:
At what point will social workers EVER accept that they got it wrong and failed to protect a child? Their abdication of responsibility is unbelievable.
I can't imagine why, but the words that come into my mind are
"They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours."
All of our Public Services are staffed by "If you want to keep your job, Labour first, the work a distant second" or else.
The Americam system of clearing out the Administration at each change of Party works for me. A better way to document who does best.
Young Mister Brown:the words that come into my mind are "They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society."
Ah, happy days: we'll not see her kind again anytime soon.
fwiw, here's my take on those immortal words of hers:
http://theyrejokingarentthey.blogspot.com/2009/03/new-blog-on-grid-and-ksifing.html
Old Rightie:
"The Americam system of clearing out the Administration at each change of Party works for me. A better way to document who does best."
I have a problem with that, in that who gets cleared out is the large number of political appointees who've been placed over the pernmanent bueacuracy.
In Britain the - formerly - highly professional Civil Servants would stay put and only the elected leaders went.
And it worked. For a century and a half we had politically neutral, professional adiminsitrators who followed the democratically-elected politicians' orders [within the rule of law.] It was largely honest and was part of our cosntitution.
New Labour drove a coach and horses (sorry; drove a hire purchase Range Rover paid for by expenses from our taxes) through this traditional constitutional separation of powers and corrupted the system into the politicised Civil Service /police 'services'/ quangos and fake charities morrass of dishonesty and patronage that we see today.
Sack the politicos in a general election, leave a smaller and purged Civil Service to do its Sir Humphrey Aplleby thing, and cut out all government expenditure aimed at quality of life.
Add that to educational vouchers for parents paid for out of the abolition of Local Education Authorities and a Welfare State bereft of child-related payments after any woman's second child and we might have a decent and honest country again.
...and bullets that work reliably in our poor bloody infantry's weapons.
..'course, we need to make our own laws here in Blighty so we will have to recall all those Euro MPs and 'national' EU Commissioners
"At what point will social workers EVER accept that they got it wrong and failed to protect a child?"
When we start recruiting people who take responsibility for their own lives and their own jobs, instead of wailing about 'cutback' and 'red tape'...?
"...the words that come into my mind..."
The only bit that usually ever gets quoted is the 'no such thing as society' bit. Nice to see the whole passage.. ;)
"The Americam system of clearing out the Administration at each change of Party works for me."
They merely change the men/women at the top. With the social services, it's the middle management that needs to be targetted.
"For a century and a half we had politically neutral, professional adiminsitrators.."
And the way things are going, we'll see Margaret Thatcher back before we'll see THAT system back.
It never suited either Labour, or some in the Tory party, to have politically neutral advisers.
"For a century and a half we had politically neutral, professional administrators.."
'And the way things are going, we'll see Margaret Thatcher back before we'll see THAT system back.
It never suited either Labour, or some in the Tory party, to have politically neutral advisers.'
Alas, Julia; you're right.
It's one of those deep-down conservative things: having been impatient with the Sir Humphrey Applebys, Mrs T (praise her, praise her, praise her blessed name!) did tend to try to get round their ageing Keynesian consensus to some extent, I'm afraid.
And Phony Tony completed the corruption.
It's the Big Yellow Taxi Syndrome that should act as a warning to conservatives and all other multi-cellular life-forms...
There is another aspect to this, which is illustrated by this post on the Area Trace No Search police blog. Concerned neighbours (in this case) or passers-by (in situations which arise in public places) are reluctant to get involved with the authorities.
If you report your suspicions of child abuse in a neighbour's home, not only is the neighbour likely to come round and beat the living shit out of you for interfering, but there is the nagging feeling that you will be drawn into a web of bureaucracy in which you find yourself treated as a suspect by association.
To exaggerate only slightly, if I think my neighbours are knocking their toddler about and I report them to the police or the social services, I fear I will end up (a) hospitalized for my trouble and (b) on the sex offenders' register for good measure.
"There is another aspect to this, which is illustrated by this post on the Area Trace No Search police blog. "
Interesting post (and comments).
It used to be the case that - if you wnt to court as a witness - your address was protected (not that that helps if you're a neighbour!). Isn't it disclosable to the defence now?
I wonder if that has made a difference?
Post a Comment