Re this recent child abuse case, can we have just *ONE* thread for competitive sadding please?

[solidgoldbrass]

Yes it's awful
Etc.
But we don't need a McCann-esque thread frenzy all saying the same thing.

it's just a social work course, no biggie to get onto. you should try if you're interested. they'' need new blood as everyone's leaving cos they can't stand the stress of having to see everything and know everyhing and get it right all the time.

You know Aitch I would go for it but I look at the 4 years it would take me to get to the qualified status of SW. I then come across a case similar to this and try to tell someone further up the chain that I am concerned about this particular child and nobody will listen. What then - I become their scapegoat?

yes. and people will sign up to polls designed to sell more papers get you sacked.

Whatfreshhell (20:16 post) says sums it all up for me. Thank you.

(I think that SGB is trying to say it too somehow, but with far less diplomacy!)

are you a sw

I think the route I would take is becoming a foster carer if I can overcome my DHs opposition.

Aitch, can I ask, what did you mean by referring to what happened on here this morning? Do you mean the call for "prison justice" (which I found abhorrent in the extreme)?

yep, totally depressing, pillow.

Aitch. Normally I adore you. But I think today you are conflating vastly different things.

IMO:

Expressing grief (even if overwrought and self-indulgent) a v important social steam-letting.

People do, frequently, feel hugely over-identified with the tragedy of others. That is how art/ lit (eg Shakespeare) works.

I am one who asserts that horror is endemic in our society - that our 'nice' neighbours are just as likely to be abusing a child. I often go on about the 'tricks' which exist in our culture to distract us from that fact (eg: look! paedophile/forced marriage/stranger rape)

However, in this instance I do understand that, as a culture, we just need to talk about it. However mundane and banal that conversation is is. It has to be absorbed and contained, if we are to move forward. Eventually, I do hope, we will move forward.

Agree it can distract from demanding actual social change. But the truth is that the public-grief-expressers were never going to be the social-change-demanders.

If you are a social-change-demander, there are many things that you can do, and maybe do already.

Mabana has made many interesting points, I think.

exactly Aitch - so the answer is to overhaul the system now - make scapegoats of those who were in charge of (in this case) baby p. Put new people in charge who are not afraid of the PC brigade and remove children who are deemed to be vunerable ie: non accidental injuries that cannot be explained by 2 individual doctors over an x amount of period ie: 1 month - just for starters.

Depressing and counter to anything positive that might possibly come out of the media coverage of this story, in terms of change (such as a change to, including more funding to, the way that SS works). And also counter to any humane reaction to the very damaged people involved, who clearly needed, and need, help as well as punishment. In my opinion.

Zaharah, would that it were so simple. Don't you think you'd get miscarriages of justice the other way - children taken from innocent parents? Now, some may argue that that's a price worth paying to save a child's life - but it seems to me that walking the narrow line between trying to keep families together and supporting parents, and ensuring children stay safe is always going to be tricky, but is essential for a civilised society.

I don't think that scapegoats are useful, tbh - unless you want a veil drawn over system issues that aren't about individual human errors.

well said habbibu

they do need legally-recognisable proof, zahrah, the word of a sw isn't enough. a doctor, yes, sw no.

youdidn't say what i was conflating, onebat, and tbh i mostly agree with you but wish nevertheless that the hand-wringers would keep to one thread. all that 'look at the little poppet, with his lovely eyes etc' is stomach-churning.

and there is a good bit of grief-chiefery on mn these days, admit it. this is part of it, imo, and i don't find it respectful in this instance. people callig him by his first name loke they knew him etc.

crikey! shabster really has a stick up her arse about cod doesnt she? Particularly now she's not here to defend herself.

Aitch and sophable and whatfreshehll's posts have been eminently sensible.

OP was only asking (perhaps undiplomatically) that the outpourings of grief/shock/sadness/anger/whatever be restricted to one thread, rather than littering the board with outpourings/ghoulish details about the poor child p and upping his google rating.

What scottishmummy, dittany, shabster and georgimama and elenor said.

And why should there only be one thread? Hands up all of you who start threads that you search the archives? I for one rarely make it down to In the News in active convos. And as another poster said, there are many aspects to the same issue.

perhaps undiplomatically?

you read the threads in active onvos at least before starting a new one, surely? and what fresh angles have there been, really? apart from the one about hoping his abusers are tortured to death...

Habbibu - Of course it will be tricky but say in 'baby ps' instance - 2 doctors examinining him within an allocated time slot - surely his broken back would have showed up. Especially if we are led to believe that notes are not passed from one organisation to another - locum or otherwise.

What I mean by that is that the doctor (in this instance claimed she did not know he was a child 'at risk') is unaware and continues to be unaware - similarly the 2nd doctor will be equally unware amd they have no knowledge of the 'at risk' or indeed that another doctor has already passed judgement. And all done within a given time slot assuming the child is displaying 'non accidental injuries'

Well - you'd have to assume that 2 doctors can't both make mistakes. And in most cases it won't be something quite so drastic as a broken back - I don't know what happened there, have very limited medical knowledge and am not inclined to speculate. The difficulties will always be subtle - yes, it seems likely that new policies and processes are needed, and monitoring and evaluation of these new processes.

What I particularly disagreed with in your post was the sacking of sws as scapegoats, etc. This seems likely to me to draw a blind over system failures, rather than getting to the root of the problem.

The "PC brigade" I find an unhelpful term, tbh.

Aitch, respectfulness (first name etc) is class-dependent, I think. Working-class people find the first-name thing respectful and individuating, after generations of being known by surnames.

Aitch, nice of you to police where posters can post, what they should do before posting, the content of their post, what can or cannot go in thread title, what posters are allowed to feel and what they can or cannot say about what they are feeling.

All the remains is for you to get mn to include them in the rules of this board so everyone can be on the same page.

I think the case is desperately sad, of course. But in all honesty I can't say I have discussed it with anyone in real life apart from saying to my eldest son "terrible" when he said it made it much more sad for him because he has a young brother of a similar age. I've had lunch with friends, a family dinner, a coffee morning and not once has it come up. Do you internet grievers behave like this in real life or do you save that sort of stuff for the internet. I'm just interested really. I want the BBC to shut up now. This is no longer news.

interesting onebat.

and not interesting, blueshoes.

I think some people are missing the point. What people are feeling about this case is not grief, or "grief by proxy". You can't grieve for someone you never knew, I agree with that. What people are feeling is utter abhorrence and horror at the thought of the suffering inflicted on a poor defenceless toddler. This feeling is a perfectly natural part of being human, and everybody has the right to express it if they so wish.

Incidentally, the thread I was referring to earlier was a thread which invited you to go and view yet another tabloid news story about the affair. Threads that dwell on the gruesome details of the story are uncalled for and in that respect I do agree with the OP.