To think carers should be jailed

[InBedBy10]

That man who threw that poor child into the alligator enclosure is said to be severely mentally disabled. He was out with 2 carers who clearly weren't watching him when this happened. Witnesses have said they were on their phones. AIBU to say they should be charged for this incident?

To be honest this is not the first time i have heard about carers being totally negligent and getting away with it. Instead the care company they worked for was sued. Which will probably happen here. But i think its totally wrong that the people directly responsible can walk off into the sunset with no repercussions. There needs to be more liability put on people in this position.

I wouldn't be a carer though - the pay is too bad and the risks are far far too high. Until this changes, then the constant turnover won't change.

Not everyone has a choice.

And this is a risk in itself - only desperate people do the job. Not people who can afford to speak up about the appalling working conditions (with some exceptions) or stand up for workers rights.

This is nonsense. There are many reasons why someone with no known risk to others might require 2:1 care. Some organisations insist that anyone who requires personal care be 2:1 for the protection of the service user, for example. People need to stop making assumptions.

Not just life admin.

When I was working out in the community, I had to log on to an automated safeguarding system via my phone, and update any changes eg, extend the length of the appt or or the location. I know some home care companies use similar systems, so they could even have been doing that.

It's crazy the number of people on this thread who seem to think Risk Assessments are somehow magic and can predict and prevent every possible eventuality, including situations so shocking that they inspire this level of media frenzy and speculation.

I’ve worked as a career in between jobs as it was very easy to get a job and I woudl always rather work than do nothing and sign on. Pay was poor and so were the conditions. As with most areas of work you had those that worked hard and those that did the absolute minimum

for me I knew it was temporary but I can imagine I would become less enthusiastic over a long period of time as you are so often treated poorly by medical professionals and family too

I agree the whole system and how it’s financed needs to be changed (along with mh community support) the money that many companies and so called charities are making from local authorities is shocking

These threads today about this incident are ridiculous. People need to grow the fuck up. They weren't even there.

@FayeMumsnet

Why are you letting all these threads run? Loads of people calling for LD people to be locked up in institutions. If this was your child or family member would you accept this?

Just zap the thread then since the entire basis of the OP is pure speculation and encouraging others to speculate.

Not to mention several people falsely claiming that anyone who has 2:1 care is a risk to others. Not only inaccurate but hugely stigmatising and could have real-world consequences for the significant number of people with LD requiring this level of care for reasons completely unrelated.

Who said anything about a job ?

How about parent(s) taking their child out (with one of them being paid 40p and hour) and being criminally liable for their child ?

Obviously the solution for some people here is simply "Well don't go out then", after all it's what we did in the 1970s. And they were brilliant they were.

@Urgentbiscuitrequired - it’s a very upsetting case and sends shivers down one’s spine imagining if it had been one’s own child.

Questions do need to be asked. The man/his carers/managers do not get a free pass because the man was learning disabled. Public outrage serves to ensure that the issue does not get a “nothing to see here” stamp - which obviously some posters are keen to apply.

Yes, that was my thoughts - were they actually working on their phone at the time. Almost all care providers use apps to keep in touch with their carers, provide rota changes, get them to write notes and things. Entirely possible they were working. And people can say they should do paperwork once the person being cared for is in a more secure area or at the end of shift, but a) they are expected to update at specific points in the day and b) they are provided with time to complete paperwork.

@FayeMumsnet

And please can you answer why if I would post something blatantly homophonic or racist it gets automatically removed, but if someone posts something saying 'we need to go back to institutions for LD people' it gets left up for the purpose of 'debate'???? Is there something about that protected characteristic that means that it needs different treatment on here? I mean this is an isolated incident, but apparently that means all LD people should be locked up now.

You gave a specific example of two to one for someone falling and I specifically said I don’t think that could have been the reason and said why.

To be able to continue disagreeing with me you are having to expand the reasons for two to ones beyond the ones you gave in your example ( and to which I was specifically responding).

Questions need to be asked, yes. But the basis of this thread is that two people are guilty of criminal negligence and should be thrown in jail, without questions being asked or answered, simply because the performatively outraged are out for revenge and therefore writing their own story without any facts or evidence. I don't think I've seen anyone, either on this thread or elsewhere, seriously suggesting that this incident shouldn't be investigated.

You also have risk assessments that are written by people who are in no way qualified to do so who often struggle with written English it’s shocking this is allowed

they copy and paste from previous risk assessments and add a few changes job done this is down to poor and lazy management and cutting costs

Public outrage serves to ensure that the issue does not get a “nothing to see here” stamp - which obviously some posters are keen to apply.

The problem with "public outrage" is that it will stop short of actually improving anything for carers, or the people they care for. As this thread shows.

I'm not the poster you're responding to but, if it helps, through my work over the years who have had 2:1 care on trips out for the following reasons

History of making allegations against carers, or their family members making allegations against carers

Risk of absconding

History of seizures or other serious medical episodes where carers may be required to administer emergency medicine, perform CPR or other interventions where two people would be advisable (one rings an ambulance while the other starts CPR or administers medication for example)

Risk of harm to themselves, and due to their size and weight 2 people may be required to intervene physically to prevent them harming themselves

Some organisations insist on 2:1 where any intimate personal care is required for the protection of the service user and staff

Some organisations insist that if a service user is going to be transported by a carer in their vehicle another member of staff must be present in case the service user becomes distressed, or needs assistance

For all we know one of them could be a new member of staff who is 'shadowing' another member of staff as part of their induction as this is also something I've known happen

In my strong opinion there need to be more male carers (and social workers). I see out and about big men accompanying patients from a nearby secure home. These are sub-Saharan men - why are there not more British men employed in this field? There are enough NEETS!!

It clearly is not safe for slight women to be managing large men. I have personally experienced situations with overwhelmed carers - a punch in the street, a man trying to hug me in the supermarket and at a concert a man climbing on stage and hitting people trying to persuade him to return to his seat. Each time the female carers were impotent.

That’s not profiting!!! That’s a council under severe financial pressure needing to provide services as low cost as possible. The more they pay, the fewer people they can provide a service to. That’s the choice they face. Except of course, there are also legislative requirements they have to meet, so it’s not really much of a choice at all.

You genuinely don’t seem to understand what the word profit means.

Or do you honestly think the council is nefariously saving money from the disabled to spend on jollies??!!!!

Let me disabuse you of that idea. We recently held a meeting for various partner agencies. I had to buy paper cups, tea and milk from my own money as we had no budget for it. And I don’t earn much ( very slightly over UK average salary).

Yes services are ground down, but that’s a National issue of what we value as a society are prepared to pay for and what tax levels citizens are willing to tolerate, especially given the high cost of living.

But If you think LAs are ‘profiting’ you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

How do you know those NEETs have the right skillset to care for vulnerable people?

My brother, and nephew, were out of work for a period. I wouldn’t trust either of them to independently manage my disabled son, and they’re my own family.

We can’t just throw available people at complex children and adults, with absolutely no certainty they’re capable of doing the job.

Which part of:

“In point of fact if he was a resident of a care home then two carers will normally be mandatory for any outside visit. Simply because carers are human beings who sometimes need to eat and use the loo. It tells you precisely nothing about the person in care with respect to safety. Carers are not security guards.”

was incomprehensible to you?

Do you really not comprehend the difference between a competent adult who needs some care and assistance in their own home and someone who is in a full time care facility due to not having adult competence or the ability to look after themselves?

Your friend/relative who goes to the shops with one carer is competent to make a choice and presumably not likely to wander off and get lost. If they did wander off its a choice they made as a competent adult. The carer is also not their responsible adult for decision making, simply the professional assisting them physically. In both cases the carer is not a security guard.

We don’t even know what happened - its notable that all the reputable news outlets are talking about alleged offences and not using words like “thrown” or “grabbed” to describe what happened.

Its loons online who are claiming the man as black, Muslim (Police stated white British) and throwing the child (reputable press are not making this claim). The loons claiming the non verbal man should have been interviewed because a FOAF claimed he could say “yes” to a simple question (as can most toddlers).

Its loons online insisting that its suspicious that the press are disabling comments - well duh, they don’t to be committing contempt. I’ve even seen loons claiming that they named the crocodiles so its suspicious not to name the man or the carers - apparently not grasping that the crocodile won’t be l in court

You are assuming intent on the part of someone not competent rather than accident. I’ve seen plenty of parents stand toddlers on barriers at zoos to see the animals - its stupid but presumably competent parents do it.

So how about waiting for the investigation into the facts rather than rushing to appoint blame, to assume malice and locking up all legally incompetent adults into 24*7 jail for life.

Obviously many people are unsuitable - but my point is that is care work marketed at men - young or otherwise? Because they could be ideal.

And talking of unsuitable - what more unsuitable carer is there than a woman who cannot restrain or control her male charge when out in public?