TO THINK THAT THOSE WITH "NO INTEREST" IN BABY P CASE ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM?

[pofaced]

I don't read the Sun/ Dail Mail. I don't vote Conservative. I don't get off on gruesome details BUT

A child died after grotesque abuse despite the authorities being aware of his "distress"

It is proper for people to want to know how the hell this happened (and so how it can be prevented from happening again) without being accused of being voyeuristic/ sensationalist etc....

If we all close our ears/ eyes to all the horrid things that go on/ believe there'll always be "a few" parents who can't quite take care of their children. are we not somehow accepting that there'll always be a few Victoria Climbies/ baby P etc...

FFS there is such a thing as society! Don't turn a blind eye or get caught up in blame and recriminations... actively participate in your children's school/ playgroup/ ehgage with other parents/ children/ report suspicions etc etc and PERSIST!

Oh FGS

fucking hell, can people not read the titles of threads in active convos

If you are referring to the SGB thread,I do not actually feel that the poster is unfeeling about the case.I am sur e she is fully aware of allt the horrific details and is repulsed as would any sane individual be.I think the thrust of her arguement is not about the horrific details of case,more about the multitudinous threads regardingit and regurgitation of facts ad infinitum.

But what's with the FGS? FGS ignore the horribleness that has happened: FGS "that's just the way things are"?

and presses hide again....................

It is proper for people to demand that this be properly investigated and lessons learned. Properly investigated. No knee-jerk responses.

I cannot for a moment think that anyone doesn't think that. The investigation bit. I think a lot of people are wielding pitchforks ATM.

I also cannot for a moment think that telling MN how sad you are about it contributes to this.

But I don't get my knickers in a twist about the multiple threads really. I just ignore most of them.

But not this one

This is the first time I have wanted to hide a thread. Or bump it out of use...?

Erm... I have neither given (nor read) nasty detaails in above case but I hav been struck by how MNers seems to be divided into Sun/ mail types and those who don't want to know about it at all.

My point is simply that Britain is increasingly divided between those who " are fully involved in their children's lives" and those who are incapable of being so involved and that it seems from reading threads here about everything from MILs to school playground politics that very few people are prepared to even bridge that middle ground

Did anyone see Rich Kid, Poor Kid on C4 last night?

I second StarlightMcKenzie.

I am too sensitive to such matters, that is my problem. I mostly mumsnet in the evenings. I am often alone as my dh travels.
I have two small boys, one of whom I have very nearly lost, twice.

The mere thought that somebody can do something like that to a small child does not bear thinking about.

I know it happens. I am not just putting the fingers in my ears going "la la la la".

I just dont want to suffer a full blown anxiety attack before bedtime, and have to dig out the diazepam, just because of insensitive thread titles in what I regard my life line on lonely evenings.

??? Do you really need to know more than "the child was horribly abused?" to be concerned?????

I worked on criminal cases for a number of years, and a lot of them were sexual abuse cases - i don't think everyone needs to know the details of them to be horrified by the concept. Trust me, too much immersion in this world can twist the way you view the world. It's hard to face this day in and day out and be left with some trust in the people around you.

Some people do need to know all the details of the case, but not everyone does. Does YOUR knowing the details assist in stopping it happening again?

I've actually no idea what that last post was about pofaced.

Err the thread title mentioned "no interest" in baby p case... I have no desire to read/ repeat seriously unpleasant things that will upset anyone. However, I did think that perhaps someone might be interested in discussing the meaning of baby p above and beyond the fact that some seriously nasty/ dysfunctional people had caused his death.

In particular, I thought it would be interesting to explore why so many mothers would choose to ignore the facts of the child's life and death as a self-preservation tactic rather than engage with the issues it throws up and the society in which they'll raise their children

Whoops... thought there might be someone interested in a conversation rather than a rant...

night night...

Erm, are you drunk? I ask because I have posted in my cups before now. It's not a good idea.

Good point MadMarge.

I have a family member who was sexually abused when she was three.
It was a horrible case. It tore the family to pieces. Looking at the little girls behaviour at the time, when she was acting out things. And in her way trying to communicate.

It was a member of staff at her nursery.

I dont want to talk about such things.

I dont want to read gory details on mumsnet. And I do think that when people repeatedly bring such matters up, gory details and sad and angry emoticons, it bloody PROVES that they cannot for one moment begin to understand the emotional trauma and upset to those who has been through this kind of thing.

It is appaling.

Knowing the horrific details (timescales, injuries, no. of visits these were missed) may prompt questions about social services in Haringey and lead to action in the form of petitions, writing, petitions to MPs, Ministers for an independent review of not just this case but child protection procedures and management as a whole to ensure that this does not happen again. But for David Cameron's pointed questions in Parliament, this issue was in danger of being swept under the carpet whereas now it is at the top of the political agenda. We can do a lot to keep up the momentum.

If you dig a little deeper, if you keep hammering down a point, you might find there is a REASON why people really, and I mean REALLY object to such insensitive headings.

People must discuss as much as they want, but can they not please try and be a little sensitive and to the point about their headings? And must it be in AIBU or CHAT?
It is a news case, cant it go in news?

Thing is, you don't know whether they are actually not interested at all, or whether they just see little point in what solidgoldbrass refers to with her customary tact as "competitive sadding".

I don't tell people how sad I am about it. Doesn't mean I'm putting my fingers in my ears and singing "la la la I'm not listening".

I don't get why trying to preserve your own sanity by avoiding the gruesome details means that you're not paying attention to the wider issue. There is no connection between the two. Also, the comparison with full involvement or not in your child's life is fatuous and irrelevant.

I am incredibly upset about this case (and no I'm not adding a there), but I think if I read the details I would probably go into emotional meltdown. It's not just this case. I can't bear suffering in any form - human or animal. Knowing it happens is as far as I need to go - knowing the precise details would not make me care any more - it would not be possible for me to care any more. I just wish I didn't feel so bloody helpless.