to think the BBC still doesn't have a fucking clue when it comes to protecting children?

[hedgehogsdontbite]

I've just watched the Panorama episode which included footage of 5 year old Azam Aldaham. I'm horrified that they stood back while this poor little boy was taken by his 'uncle' knowing full well that something wasn't right and the little boy wasn't being cared for.

Harrowing Panorama episode

Too little too later twiiter appeal by Panorama to find him

For those who didn't see it, the episode was following the refugee route through Europe. On the way they came across Azam travelling with a group of men, one of who claimed to be his father, his mother was apparently still in Turkey. The little boy was injured with what looked like a broken jaw, but the men he was with dismissed it.

The next day further up the route the BBC crew came across him on his own being treated in the street by a dr who said his jaw was broken, the wound was infected and he needed to be in hospital. He was clearly in extreme pain and was crying for his mummy. He told the BBC interpreter that the man wasn't his father. They clearly knew something wasn't right. But the man turned up, got into the ambulance with the boy and then took him from the hospital and disappeared before he could be treated. This injured, frightened, little boy hasn't been seen since.

AIBU for being really angry that they, yet again, stood back and turned a blind eye to a child being hurt.

that's awful. Isn't there some sort of journalist code or something to intervene?

I saw the same thing as you. The little I saw said that he had received treatment at the hospital and had been expected to stay in a few days but had since disappeared.

I'm not sure the bbc could do anything really, under what power could they remove a child from someone. The only thing thing they could have done was call the police. The hospital are the ones who become responsible for him and must have some procedures in place to deal with this type of event.

Good god. how could they do nothing. poor poor boy

if the wound is infected he doesn't have much time how could they just film and do nothing

It definitely says he was taken from the hospital before receiving any treatment. You can see that bit of the documentary here:

twitter.com/BBCtrending/status/649617500636758016

What is also worrying is that the programme makers seemed to be well aware of and were making the point that men travelling alone were exploiting more vulnerable people and pretending they were together so they'd get fast-tracked through the checks.

They are journalists, not social workers.

I'm not sure how people expect them them to intervene.

And how do you know they did nothing?

I'm afraid YABU.

Practically speaking, what could they have done? They saw the boy went to hospital, enquired after his wellbeing to be told he had disappeared after initial treatment? Were they supposed to start a manhunt?

Besides, it is a common moral position amongst journalists that their role is to observe and record, not to intervene. This is a position which is often debated (and these journalists weren't following it anyway, we saw them provide shelter to one family for instance). But there are a range of different agencies on the ground it that situation, so it is not unreasonable of a journalist to take the position that their role is to inform the world of the harrowing situations they observe and bring about change that way, which will achieve more than helping a few people.

An extreme example of that ethical stance is discussed here (warning, contains some truly distressing descriptions of child neglect and abuse):

ajrarchive.org/article.asp?id=662

Weeping with laughter at the thought of journalists having a code of professional ethics. As you were

Sorry but journalist code? really?!

I see your point and it was awful to watch but what could they really do? They'd be kidnapping him themselves

Xposted with hermione

I thought the journalist seemed very naive in his comments all the way through that report. It seemed he had a story to tell of plucky migrants and didn't know what to do when sometimes the reality deviated.

It may well be that they alerted such authorities as there are as soon as they came across the little boy. They could not conceivably have forcibly removed him.

Journalists die all the time while trying to report the truth. Others are imprisoned.

Op - I think it must be such a difficult situation. On what authority would be a BBC journalist seize a child in Turkey? Turkey isn't known for its tolerance of journalists.
If you were there what would you do?
I'm sure the journalists see many, many heartbreaking situations.

I'm sure they are truly heartsick as there is nothing they can do except tell the story.

If they'd wanted to tell the story of 'plucky migrants' BetLynch it would have been incredibly easy for the journalists to have focused on the stories that supported that position, but instead they chose to show a range, both the heart rending and those who were less sympathetic. I thought it did a reasonable job at showing some of the complexity of the situation.

Worldwide 61 journalists were killed in 2014, 44 so far in 2015.

I guess so , he did a good job of showing himself being a bit bewildered which is understandable given the circumstances. To me though he was so flipping wet.

This one is old but stays with me. In over ten years it's a pity nothing has changed. There appears to be more than one set of consequences though.

www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5241442

Well said ubik - not all journalists see their job as creating 'sidebar of shame' fodder.

I can't stop thinking about that little boy tonight. Where is he, what happened to him?

My son is the same age.

The BBC have reported that Azam has now been found.

twitter.com/hashtag/FindAzam?src=hash