Safeguard deniers - horrific details - Vincent Chan paedophile

[dick27]

It always blows my mind when people dismiss safeguarding concerns. Horrific reminder of why safeguarding is needed.

https://www.the-londoner.co.uk/abuse-at-a-north-london-nursery-the-disturbing-perplexing-case-of-vincent-chan/

Horrifically, I know the wife of one of those paedophile doctors. He was implicitly trusted by the parents and abused his patients behind a thin curtain with the parents in the room. Honestly you just can't scream SAFEGUARDING loud enough for me

If it's the same man I'm thinking of, he also targeted boys with cancer - and as you said - sometimes with their parents in the same room. Evil.

I have no idea what the solution is - as we know predators choose to seek out children / others when vulnerable.
One thing society can do is stop shaming people for wanting to safeguard the vulnerable. Stop eroding boundaries about safety, privacy and dignity. Stop creating "sacred castes" No unchallengable medics in senior positions. No exceptions for trans adults - with the DBS, safer recruitment or in the workplace. No adults pushing age inappropriate porn / sexual fetishes etc at children under the guise of queer theory / inclusion / bring your whole self to work et .

Return safeguarding children to be the top priority for everyone working with childre, No exceptions.

Attitudes need to change fast. Children’s welfare and safety should not be undermined for anyone’s rights.

I had no idea about this. Thank you for sharing.

Jesus Christ.

You see, I don’t think most women can even comprehend being sexually obsessed to this extent - that they would hurt people and risk prison just to get their rocks off, and that they would build their entire lives around pursuing their preferred sexual experiences.

I think men have a better idea of what that might be like - if not from their own lived experience of having a male sex drive, then from being privy to locker room banter and watching a lot more porn.

Which is why you don’t get quite so many men eager to #bekind and go out of their way to make sure men have equal opportunities to do low paid intimate care jobs for vulnerable people.

I think in our keenness to improve the split of domestic labour, ensure that men take on their share of parental duties, and model that childcare isn’t exclusively women’s work, we overlook why it traditionally has been. Because it’s statistically much safer for children that way.

I’m wary of prioritising men’s hurt feelings, or our own feminist fantasies about a perfect world where men and women are exactly the same and do all the same things, over the safety of children who don’t have any ideological allegiances yet.

And another doctor - https://news.sky.com/story/former-doctor-charged-over-alleged-sexual-assaults-on-38-patients-13479747

Those charges are terrifying. So many child hospital patients 😡

No less than 100% of neonatal murders this century by hospital staff are alleged to be by women, An even more damning proportion than the criminologists statistics you shared. We must therefore ban all female neonatal staff.

Or perhaps, we can be mature enough to recognise that the actions of a few criminals should not determine what happens to (either) half of the population.

So much hyperbole. I reckon we're mature enough to discuss all these worrying issues with anyone arriving trying to silence / shame women out of raising them.

You many not be interested in discussing reasons for the sexual abuse of children - but most of us are and are trying to discuss them.

Edited to be less critical of previous poster

100% may sound like a 'damning proportion' to you, but 100% of how many?
The total number of neonatal murders is very small, and the number carried out by hospital staff smaller still.

I think it's 1

You could just admit that you can’t find an equivalent list of female paediatricians who have sexually abused children, rather than going off to find an extremely rare and very specific type of crime that a woman has committed and trying to claim that demonstrates any sort of equivalence.

Then you make an appeal to ‘maturity’ in your dishonest attempt to obscure the fact that men commit 82% of all child sex abuse. Male nursery workers represent approximately 2-3% of the workforce yet there have been several recent convictions of male staff for sexually abusing children in their care. An infinitely higher proportion than female workers.

Why are you so determined that safeguarding should be undermined?

Inexplicably, the government are currently trying to encourage more men into childcare - paying them an additional £1000 to join. That’s a slap in the face for female nursery workers. How many kids will we sacrifice for this unevidenced idiocy?

I presume PP is referring to Lucy Letby who allegedly murdered 7 babies in a neo natal unit (but David Davis is involved in challenging her conviction as he thinks it is wrong)

PP managed to miss this one, although he was a father rather then staff - PP clearly needed to draw the line very tight to exclude the male neo natal murderer.

PP is making a totally dishonest comparison.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c5yv8y4yyxqt?app-referrer=deep-link

Exactly. I was shocked to read an interview in a Sunday magazine with an older male academic or doctor (or something, can’t quite remember). He said that he thinks about sex every 2-3 minutes all day, every day. He said it like it was totally normal.

Some men are obsessed with sex and that doesn’t diminish with age. some men are clearly so obsessed with sex that they will commit sexual abuse to get what they want.

The bit I find mindblowing is that there are PPs on this very thread, on a parenting forum, arguing to try and obscure the vast difference in behaviour and risk between men and women and therefore undermine safeguarding. If you can’t accurately access risk, how can you have effective safeguarding? I guess that’s the aim…

Another doctor:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-68554055.amp

This one was an anaesthetist who had a fetish for images of abuse victims drugged and unconscious. Absolutely gross.

He had previously been caught as a voyeur but was allowed back to work.:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/deviant-devon-doctor-allowed-back-9656939.amp

The information in these links are distressing.

As I said, male GPs and breast surgeons and gynaecologists and paediatricians don't examine women and children without a female chaperone or a parent present.

This is a feature of privatising forensic science servces, police don't check the devices, they go to specialist firms. Tech-savvy criminals have remote wipes set up for their devices or booby trap hard deletes when you start tinkering with their files, you need skilled people to preserve/recover data. There are huge backlogs of devices sitting with approved digital forensics providers whose need to make profit necessarily counts above the interest of the criminal justice system in expedient delivery.

Why are MPTS so bloody naive?

They aren't exclusive categories. Child abuse and rape can happen in all kinds of ways, pornography involving children is a particular way of that happening.

I used to do some in home childcare, mainly for people I knew, and belonged to some online groups related to it. There seemed to be a huge push for documentation of all kinds of things the kids did. The parents in many cases seemed to have huge expectations that the cares would follow sometimes very demanding routines around documenting every little thing kids did, or specific things they had to say or not say, odd routines for pick up time, and so on.

It always seemed to me to be quite intrusive in terms of just interacting with the children.

I don't know if you ever read the detrans forum on reddit, but there was a post there recently about a young women who had detransitions and stopped testosterone mainly because she was really frightened and traumatised by the changes in her sexuality. Not in terms of the sex of her partners, she was interested in men. But the obsessive, high risk sexual behaviour, weird fetishes, and so on. all of which stopped when she stopped the hormones. It really struck me that it was an unusual window into something like what some men seem to describe experiencing.

I don't think anyone has said there isn't a substantial differernce between men and women.

Some have pointed out that even if it is a lot more men than, it's still not anything like most men. Some that it might create societal expectations around women performing care work. Some that there could be really significant practical issues with actually separating men out of kids lives to an extent that would make a differernce, and so other safeguarding measures would be more effective.

No posts here have been saying it isn't important to protect kids.

Whilst no one said it wasn’t important to protect kids, certainly the subtext by some was that posters here are being ridiculous to agree with Julie Bindel’s argument that men should not work in nurseries.

Including making an incomprehensible and utterly insensitive comparison between men sexually assaulting infants and women working in accounting. I mean, wtaf was that? Then dialling back but still making further whataboutery arguments. Seemingly without acknowledging hard data. Leaves me puzzled about the underlying reasoning for going down this line of misplaced arguments instead of the issue at hand.

In most of the cases of serial child abuse in institutions / schools there were red flags that were ignored / explained away. Boundaries were crossed, abusers set up excessive secrecy in order to abuse and these weren't challenged. Staff felt unable to challenge those in more powerful positions - and of course children thought they'd not be believed.

If I was a parent of one of those abused or raped infants, then the bottom line for me would be, no more males in nurseries. Despite that NAMALT and despite knowing some lovely young men who work well with children.

If you read the details in the article it's apparent that not only were the hospital aware he was a sexual predator but they dismissed the risk in favour of "be kind" - so typical of the NHS.

The review exposed the fact that countless staff - mainly younger women - clearly saw the risk he posed to others. He insisted on catheterising women - presumably this should be done by a doctor, not an anaesthetist? This was described as being "on the outer limits of what was acceptable" for his role. In other words he sexually assaulted women in the operating theatre in plain sight.

But of course, nobody was to blame but the review amazingly uncovered that the hospital had an "unsafe sexual culture" and that women staff weren't listened to. 🙄

Worth reading those links as I suspect that the findings will be mirrored in most of the NHS given what we know about the lack of safeguarding and care for women's safety.

BundleBoogie

Male nursery workers represent approximately 2-3% of the workforce yet there have been several recent convictions of male staff for sexually abusing children in their care. An infinitely higher proportion than female workers.

This reminds me of the statistics for male midwives that I found in an article about widening the profession to men, written by a male midwife and a male student midwife.

In 2020, 104 (0.3%) of the 38,855 registered midwives in the UK identified as male and the number of male midwifery registrants has progressively dwindled since 2017

In 2020, one of those registered male midwives was "senior midwife" Paul Johnson, who was suspended for taking pictures of patients without their consent and sending them to colleagues, and bullying of colleagues. The NMC struck him off in early 2022.

In 2021, Jack Newey-Bradley, qualified nurse and midwife, was struck off, after being prosecuted for child sex offences in 2020.

Also in 2021, Scott Butler, qualified nurse and midwife, was convicted of child sex offences. (He was struck off in 2022.)

When you're a male midwife bemoaning how low the numbers of male midwives is, it is very unfortunate for nearly 3% of your colleagues to get suspended (and eventually struck off) so soon after publication.