Moira Deeming defamation trial - Thread 2 from Australia

[TheSandgroper]

Thread 1 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5167282-in-australia-moira-deeming-defamation-trial-now-on?page=40&reply=138525746

Tribunal Tweets Substack https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/moira-deeming-v-john-pesutto-a-case?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share. Thanks to @BezMills

Thanks to everyone on thread 1. I am pleased it generated such interest and conversations. I have learnt a lot from many very bright women.

What continually strikes me is this constant lack of safeguarding assessment of any contributors or influencers of these educational programmes.

It should not have anything at all to do with some one being heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual. It should have everything to do with their history with dealing with children. And if someone has published works that support sexual abuse of children in any way, those people should very clearly not be involved with the programmes at all.

Due diligence is obviously not the done thing these days! 😡

Thats quite an authoritarian approach.
What happens when the civil service is "captured"?

And what is an acceptable "child safeguarder"? Do you mean teachers? Or some kind of new role?

Everyone who comes in contact with a child or is responsible for policies affecting children has a duty to be a ‘child safeguarded’. Safeguarding is for absolutely everyone.

It's evidently disappeared given the repeated paedophile /porn /abuse scandals in so many charities working with children: Mermaids, LGBTYS, Educate & Celebrate, Stonewall, Surrey Pride. Sadly there are numerous other charities that could be named.

And safeguarding should by nature an authoritative decision process to be robust and protective.

It would appear it doesn't even matter if you do it.

A child psychologist at the controversial Tavistock hospital trust remains free to practise despite being caught grooming a schoolboy for sex in a park.

He groomed a 15-year-old for sex, was sacked by the Tavistock, but remains free to practice psychology with vulnerable children.

However the Mail can reveal that despite his conviction for child sex offences, Dr Canade has not been suspended by the regulator which oversees his profession.
Anyone wishing to hire him to treat vulnerable children would find that, according to the website of the Health and Care Professions Council, he remains registered to practise, without any conditions.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13914025/Psychologist-works-Tavistock-clinic-remains-FREE-practice-despite-caught-grooming-schoolboy.html

I have no idea how this is even possible.

Dear god, I worry I’m becoming jaded because that news about the Tavistock doctor doesn’t surprise me as much as it would have a few years ago.

No. I agree. The cynicism is off the scale.

He's been convicted of grooming a minor. Wouldn't that mean he'd fail his DBS?

Or is there no such thing as a fail? Just a record of convictions so you know what you're getting into if you're going to employ him?

Ys - there is a DBS barred list as well as professional regulators also barring individuals. Hopefully he's on it.

I presume he hasn't been barred yet as nobody bothered to report him.

God, you'd think that grooming a minor for sex while you're in the position of treating minors for mental health issues would constitute a ban. Certainly hope so.

Anyone wishing to hire him to treat vulnerable children would find that, according to the website of the Health and Care Professions Council, he remains registered to practise, without any conditions. It is the council's job to keep the public safe from rogue psychologists.

The health and care professions council appear to think he can still treat minors.

I’ve been lurking and reading along with interest, some amusement, quite a lot of disgust and some incredulity (on a number of counts).

I used to think I had an unfair opinion about Australian politics and politicians as a result of reading the chapter set in Canberra in Bill Bryson’s Down Under (a very funny book, as you might expect). Now I realise they are far, far worse than anything he described or I could have imagined.

Maybe read the post I was responding to.

One programme, government approved, with input from parents and child safeguarders. One. Rolled out to every school in the country, age adjusted.

No room for anyone else to have any input.

If "everyone" is a child safeguarder, both the references to parents and the last line are redundant.

I think Datun was suggesting something different which was why I asked?

Bill Bryson’s Down Under (a very funny book, as you might expect)

I find the first half of his books are generally good. Then his seems to give up on whatever it is his set out to do and rushes through the second half.

Some of his books have made me laugh out loud. I think he went slightly off the boil as he got older

Safeguarding as a concept is something that everyone should be aware of. And not be restricted about voicing concerns, due to fears of being 'smeared'.

My issue is with out sourcing sex education. We don't outsource history lessons to holocaust deniers, or geography lessons to flat earthers.

If the entirety of sex education was included in the national curriculum, and not just some of it, there would be no need to outsource to people who turn out to be creeps and perverts.

You can't, of course, legislate against creeps and perverts infiltrating the system. But if everyone is learning the same thing, at the same time, there is far more scrutiny.

I completely agree wrt outsourcing, austerity/"big society" has a lot to answer to.

Do you think the DfE should be responsible for the training and if so what are the protections against capture? I think it should, but then again I don't think the civil service or teachers are "captured" and pushing gender ideology so I'm not concerned about central control.

I'm very concerned about parental influence as often the parents with the strongest views can be motivated by strong religious beliefs and I don't think that has any place in PHSE.

Unfortunately the sheer volume of unsuitable adults who have got involved in producing materials / training schools makes this inevitable. There was a time when we could rely on the large organisations to produce child centred, age appropriate materials guidance.
But the evidence from recent years shows that adults with an interest in porn / queer theory and gender identity have used SRE as a trojan horse to promote grim materials - just as MD has highlighted.
We had Warwickshire County Council:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3795892--All-about-me-Sex-Relationships-primary-education
The Proud Trust:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3915879-the-proud-trust
Peter Tatchell:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4930032-what-did-peter-tatchell-really-say-lily-maynard

And so many more organisations .....

Reluctantly agree that we need an agreed core curriculum

Do you think the DfE should be responsible for the training and if so what are the protections against capture?

I don't know, Cassie. But my dog could do a better job than a bloke who thinks parents get turned on when they cuddle their kids.

I'm getting "But how would you police it?" vibes.

One thing that should happen to prevent capture is all lobby groups should be banned from the public sector, including any awards, charters or equality indices. Plus banning of all political symbols like rainbow lanyards, street crossing or stairs or flags.

Not at all.
I think we should have centralised SRE. Just a bit surprised given how anti teachers/civil service some posters have been in the past. Plus concerns about capture.

Frankly I think the Conservatives were negligent to get rid of LEAs and outsource this kind of thing to charities without doing adequate due diligence.

Can't comment on the Australian situ other than the brief reading I've done today,but it seems there is an anti-LGB and religious element at play alongside the questions about that author.