Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Community Support Workers refuse to rescue 10yr old as not properly trained......

130 replies

Wisteria · 21/09/2007 16:57

here

Hope there was more to this than apparent. Would you need proper 'training' to rescue a 10yr old?
This is procedural bollocks in my humblest of opinions - you would have thought it would be a no-brainer, see drowning child, jump in, no?

OP posts:
NAB3 · 21/09/2007 19:20

I hope the PSCO can live with themselves. There isn't many of us who could have stood by and watched a child drown. I am terrified of water but I would have jumped in.

NAB3 · 21/09/2007 19:21

I also wonder why such young children were allowed near water unsupervised.

JeremyVile · 21/09/2007 19:24

What do you mean 'live with themselves'?
They DID NOT stand by and watch him drown.

NAB3 · 21/09/2007 19:26

I am going on what I heard this morning. Has there been an update with more facts?

TellusMater · 21/09/2007 19:27

I am having a strong sense of deja vu...

NAB3 · 21/09/2007 19:28

Just tell me what I have missed then.

belgo · 21/09/2007 19:29

here

he was ten years old. Should a ten year old not be allowed near a lake NAB3?

TellusMater · 21/09/2007 19:30

I didn't mean you NAB. The thread generally.

NAB3 · 21/09/2007 19:31

Right. Why don't all the facts get checked before things are reported?

I wouldn't let my 10 year old go unsupervised near water.

NAB3 · 21/09/2007 19:31

TM. that's fine. Seems I was behind anyway.

Original poster
Wisteria · 21/09/2007 19:32

You have no idea of the capability of the child - my 11 yr old dd can swim far better than I can, yet I could easily slip into the water and drown but I don't think that could be attributed to my parents. And I know that sounds a bit silly before you flame me, but I honestly believe my dd would have a better chance of getting out of a problem in the water than I would, and for all we know the 10yr old could have been a very proficient swimmer.

Also, dcs very often go where they're not supposed to be and even though you might tell your dcs they are not allowed to go somewhere, it doesn't necessarily mean they won't.

Essentially what I am attempting to say (badly probably ) is that we know very little about the circumstances of the case as has been demonstrated today by not only my original post but also the media.

OP posts:
saggarmakersbottomknocker · 21/09/2007 20:52

Actually Wisteria I think your original post is worth discussion, around whether the PCSO's should be not 'properly' trained necessarily but better trained. Do they have forst aid training for example.

As regards unsupervised children near water goes - as 10 year olds both of my dss were better swimmers than dh - and ironically he is expected to and has performed open water rescues.

saggarmakersbottomknocker · 21/09/2007 20:52

forst first

LittleBella · 21/09/2007 20:58

I think it depends if you live near water tbh
Some people think it's intolerably irresponsible to let your children near traffic.

At what age would it be considered not irresponsible to let your child near water/ traffic unsupervised?

Original poster
Wisteria · 21/09/2007 22:05

It depends on the child and your confidence in their capability, and theirs in their own I think.

OP posts:
Pan · 21/09/2007 22:48

When I heard this I feared such a thread. Pitchforkers etc.

There IS no 'training' to go into a lake the size of a football pitch to find one missing boy who had dissappeared a long time before the PCSOs arrived.

Waters are dangerous for lots of reasons....no-one knows what's under there to be snagged on..in the darkness you can't see.

Police were never trained in underwater rescue. Some brave souls risk their lives, yes, but that is nooo reason to expect others in this inst. to do the same on what would have been seen as a hopeless cause.

Pan · 21/09/2007 22:50

The BBC are nastily culpable here. IMHO.

ledodgy · 21/09/2007 22:52

It said ont he news before that the stepdad jumped in to try and save him.

NadineBaggott · 21/09/2007 22:54

do you remember many years ago how about 6 people one after the other jumped into rough seas at Blackpool to rescue a DOG?

I think they ALL died - except the dog.

JeremyVile · 21/09/2007 22:55

The step dad jumped in to try and find him I believe.

Yes Pan - this is a low, so exploitative of the parents grief and (misplaced) anger.

harpsichordcarrier · 21/09/2007 22:55

I agree with Pan, the people reporting this should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

ledodgy · 21/09/2007 22:57

Ahh so did the stepdad get there after he'd dissappeared too then? I agree with others in that the bbc have alot to answer for here. They are jumping on the anti community police feeling that is rife atm.

kimi · 21/09/2007 23:04

This is why we need proper police on the streets and not bloody hobby bobby's.

How anyone could stand by and watch a child die because they were not trained to wade in to the bloody water is beyond me.
Did the anglers have the proper training to drag a child out of the water?? Or did they just have common sense?

I dragged a child out of a swimming pool a few years ago, lad of about 3 who could not swim took off his arm bands and jumped in to the deep end, parents sat poolside reading the sodding papers and not watching, I am not trained!!!!

Its not rocket science, I am not the worlds best swimmer but I was not going to watch the child drown or wait till someone trained popped up.

One last thought though, why were the parents not watching their children???

Pan · 21/09/2007 23:04

FWIW..good on the police to support them so publicly.

Many years ago I was a a police officer - did a few things that civilians wouldn't accept the risk of doing. But anyone who has done them wouldn't judge anyone else for not doing them.

harpsichordcarrier · 21/09/2007 23:09

a swimming pool is not the same as a body of open water.