The Revenge of the Social Worker?
The Crymlyn Bog is one of the less salubrious parts of Wales. The Romans avoided it, the Welsh had no wish to live in it, and until a wealthy Victorian businessman hired local labour to spend their days up to their armpits in its foul peat water and construct the Tennant canal, it was a place avoided by all sensible human beings. The Tennant canal brought coal from the Neath valley, covering the area in coal dust; eventually the railways moved in and built the Dan y Graig depot where they cleaned and repaired the steam trains; the Luftwaffe bombed it senseless, until finally it housed the first municipal cemetery – the dead had no choice in resting there. You don’t want to go there. Hah! I almost forgot to mention the riveting Tir John landfill site, where the rest of Swansea dumps its rubbish.
Some have little choice in the matter; the vulnerable, the mentally ill, the inadequate, the flotsam and jetsam of modern life, the ‘work in progress’ of the nation’s caring, sharing social workers. It is a popular place to ‘place in accommodation’ as housing someone in a damp, dingy, ex-miners cottage is euphemistically known and leaving them to figure out how to sustain body and soul with only a cemetery for company and neither sight nor sound of a shop. There is a park and ride into central Swansea, I know it well, I often used it. Dismal place, the only excitement is betting on how much of your car will still be left in its parking spot when you return.
No doubt young Kirsty used the bus from the park and ride when she went into town to meet her social worker. We don’t know a lot about Kirsty. We know she has three children. We know she is 22 now. We know she has ‘mental health issues’ as it is described these days. That state of constant anger at her lot in life. We don’t know exactly what she is angry about – do her children still live with her full time? We shall not be allowed that information. The Family courts operate in secrecy, when they remove children to a ‘place of safety’, they do so behind closed doors. Was Kirsty herself in care? We don’t know that either. All we know is that a roof over her head in the unlovely Dan y Graig road overlooking the cemetery and a Social Worker are the key points in her life. We can surmise though.
Kirsty went to see her Social Worker last year. She was angry, once again. Had her children been removed? A promise to rehouse broken? Who knows! All we do know is that the outcome of that meeting was that she tipped a jug of water over the head of the Social Worker, no explanation was given by this caring professional, the ‘adult’ in Kirsty’s life – now morphed into ”upset and shocked victim”. If the Social Worker did support Kirsty in court and explain what it was that had gone so wrong in her young life, it was not reported. The Social Worker was there purely as ‘victim’.
Kirsty was given an 18 month conditional discharge, ordered to pay £150 compensation to the ‘victim’, £85 court costs and a £15 ‘victim’ surcharge. Presumably out of her benefits, for there is no mention of a job.
I am sure that spending your working hours ‘supporting’ the Kirsty’s of this world is deeply challenging. Infuriating. Wearing. Depressing even. That is why you get paid around five times young Kirsty’s benefits, and you can afford not to live in Dan y Graig road. I know that when I emerged from similar households I would sometimes go and park in the nearest ‘safe’ car park and just hold my head in my hands. Sometimes it become unbearable. I don’t believe that I ever lost sight of the fact that the inhabitants of Dan y Graig road were the victims, not me. I got to drive home at the end of the day. There was no escape for them.
Three months later, it was time for Kirsty’s next interview with her Social Worker. Same one? Who knows, they are nameless unattributable figures these days. If it wasn’t the same one, this one had the same instincts…
Kirsty reported that she had lost the keys to her ‘home’ on Dan y Graig road. Two weeks beforehand. God knows where she had been sleeping in the meantime. Boyfriend? Shop doorway? Where were the children? With a neighbour?
What do you think the Social Worker did for her? Phoned a locksmith? Arranged for duplicate keys from the Housing Manager? Checked that the children were all right? We don’t know. If she did, it made no difference to Kirsty – once again she left the office angry and upset.
What we do know is that the Social Worker remembered that Kirsty had a Guinea Pig – so she phoned the RSPCA. They got into Kirsty’s flat for her. Got a warrant and everything to do so. Whether they thought to let Kirsty back in is not recorded, because all they were interested in was the Guinea Pig. They looked through the window and saw it – four furry feet in the air – patently a potential resident of the cemetery opposite.
They took Kirsty to court; now the Guinea Pig was a ‘victim’.
The prosecution followed a tip-off from a social worker, last October, that the 22-year-old, of Dan y Graig Road, Port Tenant, had abandoned the animal.
Prosecutor John Tarrant told the court: “A social worker learnt that she had lost the keys to her house a fortnight ago and was aware that she had a guinea pig.
“An inspector went to the address and he could see through a window and saw the body of a white and brown guinea pig.”
The inspector, Neill Manley, then took some photographs before setting about acquiring a warrant to enter the house.
Mr Tarrant told magistrates what Mr Manley discovered saying: “He recorded a strong decomposing smell and found the guinea pig laying dead with an empty water bottle, no food and a cage full of faeces.
“The type of cage was not suitable for anything other than short term. While there were some toys inside it was far too small.”
A postmortem was carried out on the animal which revealed the cause of death as being starvation.
In mitigation David James pointed to the fact that his client, a mother of three, had “mental health issues”. The prosecution did not accept the mitigation.
Kirsty will be back in court on May 28th to find out what her punishment is this time. The Social Worker does not appear to have said anything in her favour in court, yet again.
I doubt that Kirsty is a particularly loveable character. I daresay she displays what is euphemistically known as ‘challenging behaviour’. She may well be one of those characters who 50 years ago would have lived within the confines of a community hospital. Possibly carefully protected from getting pregnant in the first place. Nowadays we have ‘care in the community’ and an army of highly paid professionals to organise the life of the Kirsty’s of this world.
Works well doesn’t it?
Purely my personal opinion, but it seems to me that Kirsty might be a lot better off without a social worker…
h/t The sharp eyed Edna – yet again!
May 26, 2013 at 07:48
-
Doh, parargraph 2 should read “after” not “before”.
- May 26, 2013 at 07:41
-
Jonathan, there are thousands of kids in care, in my opinion there is no
reason to discriminate against smokers. There aren’t enough parents available,
not the other way around. Why should it make a difference? I, as a smoker, to
my knowledge can father a child naturally. Why is it any different?
Why is smoking seen as this great evil anyway? We are all going to die one
day, and fair enough, on average it shaves maybe 5-10 years off ones life, but
who gives a toss? My parents smoke, so do I. I picked it up from them, I
guess. Do I hold them responsible? No. I am glad they loved me and took care
of me, and gave me a better upbringing than 90% of the selfish career focussed
parents my friends had, who tended to get divorced frequently, have affairs
and generally put their children before their own financial and sexual
needs….and at the very worst, the child may become a smoker as an adult. Big
fucking deal.
No idea why they have statutory visits anyway. Seems like creating jobs for
the sake of creating jobs. How difficult is it to look after a baby? It’s
pretty much dialled in to us as human beings, and all she said was really
picky things she seemed to be repeating from a textbook.
I have a friend who is a state nursery nurse. She has to write 15 page
reports on “what temperature should the nursery be?”. They have created a
profession where there is none there, to extort professional wages for a job
which could be done at half the cost. Looking after kids is not a science, and
it never will be, and the sooner we realise the state has overcomplicated the
issue purely to create highly paid jobs which could be done by a nanny far
cheaper, the better.
The state nursery nurses are on about £25K + pension. Private sector is
minimum wage. Says a lot. £25K to look after kids.
- May 25, 2013 at 14:04
-
Social work is a job created by upper middle class women, for upper middle
class women and their upper middle class daughters. A fantastically well paid
profession (for what it is), where they can enjoy being all altruistic and
letting this feed their self esteem that they are “making a difference”,
whilst deluding themselves they are “professionals”, and getting great pay to
boot. Having your cake, eating it, and eating someone elses too. A total
disgrace, a completely sexist area of the jobs market and a deeply narcisistic
one at that.
I hate them, literally hate them and their self important stupid little
lives.
-
May 25, 2013 at 15:04
-
You can’t do so more than me- my tale is horrific and I will find a way
to write the tale (pointless via MSM and blogs). The worst is SS know I hate
them so I am rather likely now to be the brunt of vindictive behaviours.
They were unable to get me do what they demanded- even trying threats- what
they write about you is like reading the Jimmy Savile story- reality and
fiction are intermingled in a way to create a fabricated story.
Any political party with the higher level thinking to question and bring
these people (most are not upper middle class – they are the illiterate and
poorly educated class in large numbers nowadays- they get a state bursary
for their studies) to heel and removing their powers will get my vote.
-
May 25, 2013 at 15:15
-
Ah, Edna, all the ones I hear on the radio are extremely “frightfully,
frightfully” and have all these fancy words like “outcome based” etc to
mask the fact they are overpaid babysitters. Also, the person who came to
supervise my sister after her first birth (some sort of state sanctioned
child rearing expert – I understand that they are forced on all new
mothers these days) spoke in a highly condescending and bullying way
(while I was there) and I would have chucked her out if it was my wife and
child. They all seem to think they have such expert knowledge, and being
truthfull, they have overcomplicated a highly simple process (the raising
of children) to create an unneccesary and unwanted profession, which the
human race has handled pretty well up until now.
My parents had their worries when we were kids as apparently they got
wind of the fact my parents smoked the odd bit of dope, despite the fact
they were devoted parents. Drunk on their own power.
The adoption process these days is a waste of time, there are political
tests to make sure you aren’t in any way right wing, and lord help you if
you smoke.
- May 25, 2013 at 22:13
-
The person ‘overseeing’ your sister and baby would be a nurse- health
visitor- not a social worker. Social workers only visit if you need
council social services or request support. They also visit in twos-
they like to intimidate people and use this pairing to back each other
up when they ‘cock up’ their work.
They are a self righteous lot who have a lot to hide personally. Have
had a child protection leader in social services who took out a ‘hit’ on
her partner and kept her conviction a secret until she asked a junior
staff member to lie about a mother in a case she managed- the judge
found her out. Not sure if she was sacked though because they rarely
sack social workers and the regulatory body did not remove her from its
register as a practitioner.
- May 25, 2013 at 23:46
-
This would have been a Health Visitor, a qualified Registered Nurse.
While your sister may not have needed one, there are an awful lot of
young, inexperienced mothers who don’t have a lot of family support, who
are quite appreciative of having an older woman who is very experienced
with babies to give them reassurance about what is normal (and what is
not.)
Probably your sister would only have had the statutory minimum number
of visits, since she did not want or need them.
I agree with you that the English caste system is ridiculous, with
everyone complaining about how other people speak. That is a large part
of the reason why I left the UK altogether and now speak with more of a
US accent, though mostly I speak Spanish.
I don’t agree with the political tests, but it seems like a good idea
not to give children to parents who smoke if there are non-smoking
parents available.
-
May 22, 2013 at 21:34
-
I think it will be interesting to see whether either of these two guys
involved in the Woolwich atrocity were known to mental health services.
-
May 24, 2013 at 16:30
-
From the Daily Mail.
It is believed he first became interested in Islam at the age of 16 or
17.
In recent weeks he had been regularly seen in Woolwich preaching just
moments away from where Drummer Rigby was murdered.
Mayur Patel, 29, told The Daily Telegraph: ‘For the last three weeks he
had been walking up and down the main street shouting and preaching.
‘It was an obvious sign there was a mad man walking around.’
- May 21, 2013 at 23:18
-
’2. Most people who are mentally ill are harmless to others’…..’#2 is
probably statistically true, but is there any evidence that people who have a
mental illness are LESS likely to be a danger to others?’
Yes. You can find it in Sweden, where almost the entire population must
surely be mentally ill, mustn’t they, given some of the nonsense that they
have inflicted on the rest of the world in the past? …..
Where else has a population that could spawn Saab and Volvo and Abba, and then
move on, within a generation, to make it illegal to pay the oldest profession
in the world for its services? They may have a low murder rate in comparison
to many European countries, but that’s not what stopped them from being
bonkers
- May 21, 2013 at 23:19
-
…………..and assuming that this pops up in the right place, that was a
response to Jonathan Mason May 21, 2013 at 18:28
-
May 21, 2013 at 13:27
-
Well we all need to despair now- the new DSM- manual for diagnostics of
mental disorder will put nearly all the population in some category of mental
disorder- save of course those making the diagnosis. We may encounter the
worst (? best) of social work in years to come…the rise in dementing illnesses
will add to all of that. This is power at its most dangerous.
- May 21, 2013 at 13:36
-
And, as I just found out last week, doing something sensible like setting
up both ‘Health and Welfare’ and ‘Financial and Property’ Lasting Powers of
Attorney, and getting them registered with none other than the Office of the
Public Guardian, does not come cheap, says he looking at the drafts on his
desk and thinking of the amount quoted
-
May 21, 2013 at 13:40
-
Only just did this in the nick of time for parent – would not get
professional certification of ‘capacity’ now. Only hope I do not loose my
marbles before leaving these nany state shores.as cannot bother with POAs
for self- would not trust anyone to make the right decisions- needs to
‘divest self’ to avoid all that ASAP.
- May
21, 2013 at 21:06
-
My congratulations on having managed to get it done in time; the
wheels of the court grind exceeding slow, as I found to my cost
when a relative landed in hospital and thence to secure (and very
expensive) residential care, for which we could not pay until his house
was sold.
I still can’t quite shake off the feeling that I spent nearly a year
reenacting one of those Dickens novels where interminable lawsuits drag
on at the pleasure of the lawyers involved and, all the while, a host of
creditors are hammering on the door.
- May 21, 2013 at 12:02
-
‘Care in the community’ means abandonment.
No, I do not have any answers, no, all I have are mainly questions and
despair, black despair. ‘Care in the community’, was a euphemism used very
unsubtly to disguise a governmental abnegation of common sense and collective
responsibility. Because, like them or loathe them, the old ‘mental hospitals’
provided vital shelter, protection and structure for individuals who could not
cope with ‘life outside’. I know this to be true,helping patients [and two
friends] I used to visit three different hospitals where I got to know the
stoic patients and some enduring and quite wonderful staff nurses – by any
means it wasn’t perfect but it was better than abandoning these unfortunate
souls [innocents?] – to the perils of a world many were incapable of facing
and dealing with.
- May 21, 2013 at 11:05
-
When a raccoon laments the death of a guinea pig, I think it’s time I
checked my medication. I’m having some strong hallucinations this morning and
I’m not sure where I should leap into the middle of this sick affray. However,
I would say that all social workers suffer from that condition as bus
conductors, leaders of industry, politicians, and Norwegians. It’s known as
‘being human’. Some of them are good people, from good homes, who care about
others and try their best. Others are complete fuck ups. We’re all trying to
muddle our way through life. I’ve not seen a viable answer to any of the big
questions so I’m cautious about learning too much from any one situation. All
we can do is ensure that this guinea pig didn’t die in vain.
- May 21, 2013 at 11:43
-
Seconded
-
May 21, 2013 at 10:25
-
The linked article shown by Moor Larkin got me thinking. The writer
mentions trust, respect, between client and worker. Yes I can think of an
instance where a young man had a long affair with his female ex social worker.
She had found him housing and self respect, even some happiness. He was the
child of an Irish single mother. He hated his stepfather when he came on the
scene. After a divorce he dominated his mother and half brother and sister
until he got violent and an injuction issued, which he broke. My friend, his
aunt, reported he was back at her sister’s house, breaking windows and
shouting and swearing. He was arrested and later diagnosed as schyzophrenic.
The social worker moved him to a city many miles away. Found him protected
housing and obtained disabilty benefits. He made friends, he seemed happy,
until someone split on them. She was disciplined. He was distraught. He and a
friend were found dead with carbon monoxide poisoning in a garage. A school
friend got permission to transport his body back to West London in his van! No
one in his close family could afford the expense of burial. His mum had to get
another job to pay funeral expenses…he was 33. Who was right in this sad tale?
She was no longer his social worker and thought she was OK. He was a weekend
friend, kept happy by their friendship. She enjoyed her weekends in a pretty
city and he was stable and content. Who was right in this sorry tale of a
blighted life?
- May 21, 2013 at 10:58
-
@miss mildred
RD Laing might seem quite relevant again, even though he
has been out of fashion for a while.
“Schizophrenia cannot be understood
without understanding despair.”
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/r/r_d_laing.html#joZLWCdxXjXyClVt.99
- May 21, 2013 at 11:57
-
I remember going to hear RD L at a guest lecture long ago. The next
Student Rag carried a brilliant summary including such gems as (can’t
remember the precise quotes but broadly they were that) the 500+ present
had been treated by the great luminary to a shambling dissertation in
which one of the main highlights was when he picked his ear and flicked
the proceeds – I remember that vividly! – and the most exciting event was
when one young lady in the front row plucked up the bottle to walk out at
some particularly apposite moment when he was rambling on about a
butterfly escaping. No one had a clue as to his context, but it mercifully
gave us all the chance to laugh a bit and relieve the tension. A friend
who was a Consultant Psychiatrist at one of the local metal health units
later told me that he and his colleagues who had attended had, when back
at the ranch, been unanimous in their diagnosis…Happy days LOL
-
May 21, 2013 at 11:08
-
The matter of ‘professional boundaries’ I have previously mentioned is
something unique to Britain and similar countries. I often, although not a
qualified social worker, had no problems with befriending those who rarely
had more than1/2 ‘professionals’ as ‘friends’ . I felt guilty when I was
offered cups of tea paid for by them, but knew it would hurt more to refuse.
Perhaps the line might be drawn at ‘relationships’ which offer more because
there is greater power to cause distress when the relationship is ended- as
your story suggests.
I do think there is a problem in that professionals are not allowed to
develop friendships with ex-clients, or it is deemed that falling in love is
a crime in such circumstances. Somehow control of not uncommon behaviours
seems to be what much social work is about. But policing like this has a
human and fiscal cost. Mankind did not start out like this.
- May 21, 2013 at 11:43
-
Personally, I quite agree that individuals should be left alone to pursue
personal relationships, once professional relationships have been severed,
if there is no evidence that the professional involved has used that
professional relationship inappropriately in developing the ensuing personal
one. Anything else is inhuman, and monumentally stupid. However, as in every
walk of life, there are some professional pharisees out there who can’t see
anything but the sanctity of their own rules and who have the misplaced
belief that they should apply to everyone everywhere evermore, world without
end, or compassion, or forgiveness, or humanity
But in the example you mention, again, we don’t know all the details. The
inherent problem with this sort of case is probably more about the timing of
the personal relationship, and, if it developed before the professional one
ended, did she use her position to organise things and/or use resources in a
way that she would not have done for other clients. If that had been so,
while that might be only human, I struggle to see you thinking that would
really be right either, and if nothing were done about it, what does it say
to everyone else? And you can bet your life that there would be a whole
posse of Mailites, and such like, now out there after her and the managers
who ‘overlooked’ it.
Probably the best clue is to be found in how ‘justice’ was actually
dispensed. Dismissal would most likely indicate that something really
untoward happened, any lesser stricture likely being a recognition that the
balance in such circumstances is difficult to draw and that possibly those
who had the misfortune to have to sit in judgement did have something more
like the wisdom of Solomon, than the vindictiveness of the purist
- May 21, 2013 at 12:15
-
@HoHum
I recall that as recently as the 1980′s I entered the
management echelons of an entertainment company and it was made very clear
that ‘relationships’ must not include staff or customers. Needless to say
there were lots of ‘relationships’ going on all the time. By the time I
left that company twenty years later there were Area managers who were
married to one another. The world continued to turn. Given that the UK
government will very soon have married couples around the Cabinet table I
wonder what the big issue is here. The general tenor of public life over
the last thirty years has been in the opposite direction. It can only be
the notion that Social Workers are in a position of power over their
client that makes it different to this societal norm.
-
May 21, 2013 at 12:25
-
Your last sentence has it. Same issue in healthcare, teaching and so
on.
As it didn’t all just appear yesterday either, maybe, just maybe,
might there not be some good reasons, and substantiating evidence, too?
– as opposed to the notion of its all having been foisted on everyone
just to impose some loony toons left wing socialist dogma? Or is that
altogether too much for people to believe or accept?
- May 21, 2013 at 12:36
-
Having no knowledge about “social work” of my own experience, I am
quite surprised by the general information in here that they seem
primarily amongst us to deal with those people who have mental issues,
rather than to assist ordinary people struggling with short-term
issues like unemployment/homelessness etc., although I can see that
the two problem will have huge overlap.
-
May 21, 2013 at 12:58
-
Mental Health Social Work is a relatively small part of Adult
Social care. And to all intents and purposes, the introduction of the
Partnership legislation some years ago, which was supposed to make for
a ready pooling of LA & NHS resources across the otherwise hard
lined legal boundaries that previously stopped such shenananigans,
broadly resulted in MH Social care’s operation and management being
transferred to the NHS, with a similar reverse transfer of
responsibility for Learning Disability Services. At the time, the only
thing that really actually prevented the transfer of some SW staff
directly into the NHS was that the legislation covering their right to
section people only held good if they were LA employees, so they
effectively were seconded. Organisational structures have moved on
since.
The greater part of Adult Social Care is concentrated on Older
People’s services, with Learning Disability Services
Childrens Social Services transferred out from LA Social Services
into Children’s Services some time ago
The other thing many people overlook is that most LA services are
now ‘commissioning services’, ie they assess need and commission it
from external providers. There’s very little that they actually
provide themselves by way of direct care. Even ‘advice services’ can
be commissioned, as opposed to being provided by the LA
I’m sure Ms R can add to that if I’ve forgotten to include anything
significant
- May 21, 2013 at 00:31
-
I am advancing well in yeara and find that people like ‘ho hum’ think that
their big words and book learniung makes them superior.
Of course being old
and wild of eye I still know that the solution to them is the one used on the
gordion knot.
- May 21, 2013 at 12:17
-
I’m no spring chicken either
However, I’m sad that you seem to think that my use of big words is to
inflict some superior being on others. Far from it, I’m merely trying to
entertain a little, to add some lights, and shades of meaning, some variety
in all too often grey world. Not to mention that they are also a little more
in keeping with the gentility and politeness which normally characterise
this blog, than the shorter, rather more earthy ones, that also reside in my
vocabulary.
But by all means take a sword to them, or me, if you wish
- May 29, 2013 at 13:02
-
Yeah, big word tos**rs.
(Errm, what’s this Gordion Knot thingy?)
- May 20, 2013 at 22:17
-
I was going to take a course in Social Work many years ago and was asked if
I knew the kind of low life people I would have to deal with! that was enough
to put me right off. Those I have met are more into Sociology than Social Work
and seem to have a distinct lack of common sense.
-
May 20, 2013 at 19:44
-
A psychiatrist friend of mine was once killed by a man who had just been
released from prison.
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC1835762/pdf/bmj00218-0045.pdf
The interesting thing was that the killer, whose name was Christopher
Dillas, had killed his father’s German shepherd dog by hanging it the day
before he killed my friend. Cruelty to animals is often a danger sign of a
disturbed mentality, especially since people often regard their pets as family
members. If a person leaves a guinea pig to starve to death, that does not
sound like much, but it could be a child next, because it is a sign that there
is something not right with that person.
-
May 20, 2013 at 21:09
-
Your example gives the rather frequent public perception of the mentally
ill as dangerous or psychopaths. The facts are that those with no known
diagnosis of mental illness are the most frequent perpetrators of homicides
than the mentally ill.
The death of a pet can be for a number of reassons …it does not follow
that children will be so treated unless there is evidence of this or that
the parent shows no interest in the children..
Your take is like that of most social workers in child protection… the
crystal ball gazing of likely risk by association. That is not a basis, nor
should it be, for removing children from birth parents. Many of us might be
removed on that basis- for some that will be necessary. Unless my parents
actually seriously hurt me on an ongoing basis or neglected my needs I would
not have wished to be removed. So it is with many children. But social
workers pay no heed using ‘abnormal attachment theories’ to support their
view in courts. The Rotherham / Rochdale scenarios show how bad child
protection is- social workers pay no heed to the children themselves seeking
help.
- May 20, 2013 at 22:21
-
Your example gives the rather frequent public perception of the
mentally ill as dangerous or psychopaths. The facts are that those with no
known diagnosis of mental illness are the most frequent perpetrators of
homicides than the mentally ill.
This may be true, however homicides committed by the mentally ill are
not statistically negligible and they are often the most spectacular,
perplexing, and random, so their relative scarcity is compensated for by
other factors. Statistically the reverse does not seem to apply, for
example I know that a very large percentage of the people on death row in
Florida do have mental health diagnoses, especially if you include
alcoholism, substance abuse, and personality disorders.
- May 21, 2013 at 10:58
-
@ J Mason- homicides committed by the mentally ill are not
statistically negligible
Actually that is not a fact. But it is likely that those committing
homicides plead insanity to get off on a lighter sentence and yes people
‘under the influence’ of any ‘mind bender’ and psychopathic
personalities might be more likely to commit serious offences like
homicides. But a cheif officer, when investigating a local homicide,
stated that most are committed by those close to the person, i.e.
family, / known persons- not by strangers. This is clear in case of
child murders recently.
- May 21, 2013 at 12:23
-
Murders committed by family members are even more likely to involve
the mentally ill. For example paranoid schizophrenics are the
diagnosis most likely to kill and often they kill family members who
care for them. I have known a few. The next most dangerous diagnosis
is bipolar disorder in the manic phase.
Murder statistics vary tremendously according to the country and
culture where they are studied. A detailed study in Sweden estimated
that more than 90% of murderers were mentally ill. http://www.thelocal.se/1411/20050511/
In the Dominican Republic, where I live, most reported murders seem
to be associated with robberies, home invasions, drug gangs, or the
police. At least 290 people were killed by the police in 2012.
http://www.insightcrime.org/news-briefs/police-killings-dominican-republic
- May 21, 2013 at 16:02
-
The murder rate is Sweden is similar to the UK, but the murder rate
in the Dominican Republic is 25 times higher, so obviously the
proportions committed by mentally ill people will vary wildly.
Incidentally although the rate in the Dominican Republic looks high
compared to the UK or even the US, it is quite modest compared to
murder rates in countries like Jamaica, Bahamas, US Virgin Isles, St.
Kitts and Nevis, Trinidad and Tobago, Honduras, and Venezuela. Jamaica
has double the murder rate of the DR, (even allowing for many
potential Jamaican murderers having emigrated to the US and UK).
- May 21, 2013 at 17:00
-
I’ve always thought it a truism that all murders are committed by
the “mentally ill”. That doesn’t mean they’re mad however.
- May 21, 2013 at 17:24
-
@ Moor Larkin- cannot argue with that.
But that is not the same as saying that most homicides are carried
out by those diagnosed with mental illness and if this myth is
perpetuated it only leads to people being scared of those with mental
illness and making the lives of those afflicted more isolated and
lonely than necessary. I would feel that to be inhuman.
- May 21, 2013 at 18:28
-
But that is not the same as saying that most homicides are
carried out by those diagnosed with mental illness
But, Edna, that seems to be exactly what the Swedish researchers
are saying, at least as far as murders go in Sweden.
We can consider two different statements:
1. Most murders are committed by people who are mentally ill.
2. Most people who are mentally ill are harmless to others.
#1 may or may not be true, depending on what population we are
talking about and how we define mental illness.
#2 is probably statistically true, but is there any evidence that
people who have a mental illness are LESS likely to be a danger to
others?
In most countries when people are admitted to mental hospitals or
acute units for observation and/or treatment, the situation requires
that the person be “a danger to self or others” or some variation on
this.
Should a social worker or policeman not take a person whom they
believe to be dangerous to a psychiatric ward, because it may cause
other people to shun them, which would be inhuman?
I don’t think people should be scared of people just because they
have a mental illness, but if the person is behaving in a reasonable
manner in the community, very few people would know, any more than
most people do not know whether I have diabetes.
On the other hand I have known people who have worked for years in
a mental hospital be scared of certain patients, and perhaps with
justification. A middle aged woman I know had her skull broken when a
male patient repeatedly slammed her head into the floor. Is such a
thing equally likely to happen to someone who works in a bank or
restaurant, or more likely to happen to someone who works in a mental
hospital? What do you think?
- May 22, 2013 at 10:43
-
Johnathan read this as your information is merely anecdotal, (I
have relevantly qualified professionals in family who also work with
the ‘hard end’)/. I have worked with the ‘hard end’ myself. Yes some
are scary- but I managed to form relationships with some of those when
others rejected them- I noted it was merely verbal /shouting throwing
things (not at me/ people) in e.g. manic phases and there was nothing
to be scared of. When confronted one actually was surprised as was
unaware people were scared of them. Few are scary unless drunk
etc.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/174/1/9.abstract-
Homicides by people with mental illness: myth and reality.
P J
Taylor and J Gunn
- May 20, 2013 at 18:53
-
Interesting synergy developing plus old celebrities thrown in for good
measure.
Let’s hope none of them have any history of appearing in
performances of Equus…….
‘Being cruel to people is one thing because they have a voice, but children
and animals can’t fight back – so we have to give them a voice.”
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/brian-may-badgers–team-badger-save-me-protest-cull-trial-june-1-132729936.html#1KeSb3w
“Giving Wild Animals A Voice”
http://www.save-me.org.uk/
- May 20, 2013 at 18:08
-
- May 20, 2013 at 18:37
- May 20, 2013 at 17:13
-
At the risk of offending the genuinely able and decent social workers out
there, I must state that those who I have so far encountered seemed to be more
concerned with their socialist credentials than the work they are paid for.
They are not a ‘caring profession’ in my book and some would themselves merit
the term of social inadequate.
-
May 20, 2013 at 17:33
-
I was once seriously and reliably informed, by a Social Worker, that you
are only an alcoholic if you keep the gin bottle under the bed, and that she
made sure never to take the gin bottle to bed with her. At which point I
realised how lucky I was when they turned me down. But then my observation
might have been sour grapes. I could have done the job standing on my head,
and earned more money than I actually ever did. Until I came here and took
up Gardening. But then even grass needs caring for.
- May 20, 2013 at 16:58
-
It seems the current Private Eye cartoon is apposite:
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/strips/apparently/1340.gif
-
May 20, 2013 at 16:29
-
Oh my goodness, that poor Guinea Pig.
PS. Do grown ups actually keep Guinea Pigs? Obviously they should have
taken it “into care” when they took the children, if in fact they did. The
RSPCA should be suing The Social Services. But then blaming this poor woman
will clear up yet another crime, and add to the statistics of Crime
Resolution.
- May 20, 2013 at 16:46
-
@ Oh my goodness, that poor Guinea Pig. @
Just noticed that youtube has many vids of people showing how they feed
live (often sickly) guinea-pigs to their pet snakes. Doesn’t seem to go down
well with everyone on the internet.
This isn’t one of them……
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1ILPl5FQaM
- May 20, 2013 at 17:01
-
I do not wish to see that, thank you. And I wouldn’t need Guinea Pigs
as there are more than enough mice around here. Or is that a crime? Mice
Poison isn’t cheap. Oh my God, another Crime.
Just how pathetic is
this? I don’t know who or what she is, but if this is the best they can do
then they should be mortally ashamed.
- May 20,
2013 at 16:15
-
“Kirsty was given an 18 month conditional discharge, ordered to pay £150
compensation to the ‘victim’, £85 court costs and a £15 ‘victim’ surcharge.
Presumably out of her benefits, for there is no mention of a job.”
Oh, in my trawls through the local papers, the mayhem and maiming that I’ve
seen ‘punished’ with an 18 month conditional! Kirsty sold herself short there.
A measly jug of water? No stitches, at least?
*tuts*
- May 20, 2013 at 15:31
-
@ I have more concern for the children @
Mr Tarrant told the court that when asked how she felt about the death
Davies replied: “I’m not happy, I still haven’t told the kids.”
http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/Swansea-woman-court-following-guinea-pig-death/story-18979589-detail/story.html#ixzz2TqKteDQV
It might be a long shot but I suspect Kirsty threw the jug of water over
the social worker when she discovered the social worker had dobbed her in to
the Animal Police. Lives being blown apart over a dead rodent. It’s the
Butterfly effect I suppose.
- May 20, 2013 at 15:59
-
Thinking laterally, I remember that my sister had two guinea pigs. Both
died. If anyone has any suspicions as to her treatment of them, and wishes
to carry out a forensic study of the remains, I know where the bodies are. I
buried them both. 40+ years ago. She’s dead too. From the neck up. So I
guess she could plead insanity. Just like her brother. And then we could
both be assigned a social worker.
-
May 20, 2013 at 19:28
-
I don’t know and never have understood what lateral thinking or
thinking outside the box means. I would though, strongly advise you not to
mention the guinea pig incident though just in case the social worker
moves into your spare room.
-
May 20, 2013 at 22:33
-
The one presently in training has already spent some time in the
spare room when visiting. A pre Uni gap year year spent working with
kids from the local social orders in a depressed inner city environment,
with everything that you might imagine goes with that, has not done her
any harm
-
May 20, 2013 at 15:02
-
Without knowing the exact details of this woman’s case it would not be
appropriate to criticise the social workers involved. I have more concern for
the children of this woman.
“Purely my personal opinion, but it seems to me that Kirsty might be a lot
better off without a social worker…”
I believe this is highly
implausible.
- May 28, 2013 at 21:24
-
Couldn’t agree more. So many assumptions. So few ‘facts’. But hey! this
blogger doesn’t let a wee thing like not knowing a thing about ‘Kirsty’ get
in the way of a good, old, biased rant.
Here’s another take on ‘Kirsty’:
falling in love with an older, charismatic man who introduced her to drink
and drugs, Kirsty had three children removed due to her addictions and the
chaos and violence surrounding her lifestyle. All three were diagnosed with
foetal alcohol syndrome and also suffered neonatal withdrawal from the
heroin their mother had consumed throughout her pregnancies. Kirsty’s
distraught, supportive and nurturing parents are unable to reach Kirsty –
such is the hold of her partner. Nor can they meet the needs of the children
who require specialist care. Kirsty is aware that if she has to have any
prospect of ever caring for her own children she must break the link with
her partner and engage with the offered assistance to break the cycle of
addiction. Prior to the adoption action Kirsty simply drops out – she
‘disappears’ having failed to engage with the services on offer and the
children are freed for adoption – their needs being the paramount
consideration. When she reappears she is abusive to her Social Worker who
informs her that her children have been freed…
You can write the rest.
And whilst every sentient being would feel pity for Kirsty – and no one
would want her to ‘fail’ as a parent – the fact remains that it is the
children who command our actions.
Every profession – every workplace in
fact – has its incompetents. Social Workers are no less or more immune from
that very human failing. How many of you critics calling for their heads to
roll would survive a system that’s chronically under-funded; where there is
no money to remove children to places of safety even if there were
sufficient safe places or people to remove them to…
As lawyer working in
Child Protection for many years I think I’ve seen the best and the worst of
human nature. From the incest and sexual abuse to the physical and emotional
abuse and neglect. I’ve seen Social Workers weep and crack under the strain
of the awfulness of what they’re exposed to. I’ve been haunted by the
hideous evidence I’ve had to present – but the Social Workers have dealt
with this firsthand and in far more cases than I. No one should spend more
than 5 years on that hellish front line where you are damned if you do
remove and damned if you don’t.
I am thoroughly sick of the apocryphal
tales and specious claims that the world would be a better place without
this profession. What scurrilous nonsense. And whilst I dream of a world
where Social Workers are unnecessary I have no doubt that I will never see
that day.
- May 28, 2013 at 22:09
-
Thank goodness! At last, a realist who’s not just a cynic
- May 29, 2013 at 00:01
-
@YS
But that doesn’t seem to fit the few facts we appear to know.
Kirsty is said to have “lost her keys”, not her kids, and if she had
“dropped out” and her kids were then taken whikle she was AWOL, it wasn’t
really her that left the guinea-pig home alone was it, so why was she
prosecuted? Kirsty is quoted at the court as saying she “hasn’t told the
kids about the guinea-pig yet”, which strongly suggests she is still with
them, so the story as told by you seems not to fit so well as the raccoon
version. Have you read Ms. Racconn’s most recent blog about the Scottish
intention to put every child into theoretical care? That seems to
guarantee we” always need a social worker or two.
- May 29, 2013 at 08:41
-
@Moor Larkin – a literalist! I was merely demonstrating that there is
a whole lot that you don’t know – and there are many narratives which
could explain why K is where she is. Do you really believe everything
you read in the papers? I’ m concerned that you believe it’s alright to
leave children in the care of someone with such a chaotic lifestyle.
‘The facts as we have them’? You’re reading a lot into very little – and
doing that without the professional experience to guide and inform. It’s
more likely that Kirsty has contact with the kids – but not care. As for
the Scottish Children and Young People Bill (a Bill I have worked on) –
Anna has her facts conveniently twisted and has misunderstood the
provisions.
- May 29, 2013 at 09:24
-
@ I’ m concerned that you believe it’s alright to leave children in
the care of someone with such a chaotic lifestyle. ‘The facts as we
have them’? You’re reading a lot into very little @
We are the same then……
I was merely pointing out that “the facts as you had them” seemed
not to fit half so well with “the facts as I had them” and by
inference as Ms Raccoon had originally them. Of course, in some ways
her blog might have implied more than it attempted to say, and offered
the pettifogging court drama about the death of a rodent as some kind
of of analogy for the dilemma’s the likes of Kirsty might well face in
her day to day struggle to bring up her kids in her own pathetically
chaotic way. Kirsty’s concern about ‘not telling them yet’ about the
poor rodent is some small evidence that she has a considerable empathy
with them and is perhaps embarrassed about this relatively minor
domestic disaster. I once killed a goldfish by neglect and felt quite
some shame, but felt it my duty to explain to my kids about my failing
so that maybe they would learn something about the fragility of life.
I can claim no excuse about substance abuse however as you seem to
imagine Kirsty must – is that assumption because she lives on a
‘council estate’ and statistically they are all likely to be
incompetent parents? I must remember to congratulate my mum and dad
for managing to defy the odds and bring me to adulthood in such a
place.
@ and doing that without the professional experience to guide and
inform. @
Hmmm….. That seems like just another way of saying Nanny knows best
and children should be seen and not heard. I must admit thought that
you seem to be closer to Ms. Raccon who also seems to have had Kirtsy
down as having ‘mental problems’, on little evidence than throwing a
jug of water over someone once. I confess that I still can’t quite
grasp the context of the ‘lost keys’ part of the series of events.
Just as well it was only the rodent locked inside and not the children
too. That makes it moot as to where they were by then. The facts are a
little short in supply of course. They might have been staying at her
mother’s by then because Kirsty couldn’t afford the rent anymore I
suppose.
- May 29, 2013 at 12:37
-
@Moor Larkin – You’re absolutely right – I’ve got no ‘facts’. The
narrative I gave as an example is just one amongst many that ‘might’
be true re Kirsty. Who knows? Only Kirsty, I suspect. A newspaper
report isn’t reliable. And Kirsty could for example have said ‘I
haven’t told them yet’ because she hasn’t had contact with her kids
and thus was unable to tell them. Or she could be a malignant liar who
gets a kick out of hurting kids and killing hamsters…We just don’t
know.
I’m not sure what it is in my comment that implies I’m
pissing on Council House tenants. I’m an ex-schemie wain brought up in
poverty – bred by parents who were dogged by unemployment and
ill-health. I make no assumptions – and not one that Council tenants
make bad parents. The most serious case of child abuse I had to deal
with emanated from an affluent middle class home-owning household
where Mum was at home (home-schooling) and Dad was a company director
– but it hasn’t made me assume that all affluent middle-class
home-schoolers abuse their kids or make the worst parents…
In
Scotland, it’s trained volunteers – lay people – sitting in a Tribunal
who make decisions re the protection measures to be taken (The
Children’s Hearings System). They are not professionals – but even
they recognise the need for training. This ensures that they know
enough of the law and of the development needs of children to make the
most appropriate decisions.
The child protection reality is that
interventions often come too late. That vulnerable children are left
in toxic situations for too long. But it’s also true that even the
most inadequate of parents will love their child/ren. And that even
the most abused of children will be reluctant to leave their abusive
parent…
- May 20, 2013 at 14:46
-
Humans are naturally exist in tribal units like indigenous peoples, in
effect an extended family of hundreds, maybe more.
That’s the only system
that seems to work, I doubt if problems like this occur in an existence like
that, nobody is isolated.
Just an observation.
-
May 20, 2013 at 15:19
-
There are still parts of the globe that do not have a formalised social
worker profession, but there are people who undertake practical work with
those in need and the institutions established to provide help to them. In
these societies the family and its extensions are like the tribe. The
‘social workers’ may ‘admonish parents’ if e.g. their child ends up running
away, but would not seek to remove such a child- unless a criminal offence
is committed then the police would be involved.
The way social work has developed here is as a ‘soft police’ with unfit
for purpose individuals often making judgements which are from theory learnt
in college as opposed to the needs of the child in each case. I know an
educational psychologist who stated this from local authority employment who
told me this, giving me a clear example. I was horrified because the
judgement was not one most people with feeling and common sense would have
made.
-
May 20, 2013 at 14:02
-
Maybe it is something to do with the type of people who are considered to
be acceptable as Social Workers.
I once offered myself for training as a
Social Worker. At the time I had two boys at Boarding School and another at a
local day school, and sufficient private income to maintain them. I was told
that I would be better occupied in caring for my own children. But I did have
a frightfully upper class accent. The fact that I had myself been in a
Children’s Home due to a one time under privileged home life, seemed to be of
no worth. So I guess that I just wasn’t common enough by then.
Never let it
be said that you can drag yourself out of the mire.
- May 20, 2013 at 13:55
-
“Purely my personal opinion, but it seems to me that Kirsty might be a lot
better off without a social worker…”
What would be the point of having tens of thousands of proles rotting on
benefits if you did not create thousands of jobs for lower party members?
And by the way, this country really needs a word for those people who upon
finding a problem think not how to solve it, but how to setup themselves up to
administer it.
- May 20, 2013 at 22:29
-
How about Queenbingo?
-
May 21, 2013 at 13:49
-
She is well, thanks for asking.
- May 20, 2013 at 12:45
-
Kirsty probably doesn’t have a clue about the events that have taken place.
I doubt she even cares and that her only agenda is to find some real support
to rear her children in a safe environment where she can easily access the
local amenities. All of this is doubtlessly beyond the cognitive understanding
of the social worker. Trying to break the circle of misery that will probably
affect Kirsty and her children for the rest of their lives is beyond any
understanding of the average social worker. Taking small steps is very
important for people like Kirsty and piling court date upon court date can
only frighten and confuse her even more. When someone doesn’t have the ability
or eloquence to fight their corner with verbal reasoning they will empty jugs
of water over someone’s head. The social worker in this case has clearly
failed as a social worker and should be dismissed, but worse of all she has
let her client down very badly and in so doing has exposed her to even more
dangerous situations. A lot of people scoff at Maslow’s theory of the
hierarchy of needs, but I think his work was valid in that people only want to
feel that they are a part of society and that they are valued, that they can
succeed. I bet Kirsty doesn’t feel that.
-
May 20, 2013 at 12:53
-
Well articulated Charlotte…to have our basic physical and emotional needs
met it common to all humans, but power relationships negate the ability to
act as a fully fledged human being by those holding the power. I am always
minded of ‘One flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest’ which always makes me upset.
This story is a parallel.
- May 20, 2013 at 13:24
-
‘The social worker in this case has clearly failed as a social worker and
should be dismissed,’
If you look hard, whilst Ms R is concerned about the possible
implications that arise from this matter, she is as astute and clever enough
to state that she has no knowledge of the actual background to the events
recorded, or to the real natures of those involved. You don’t know either,
so making a statement as definitive as that is daft
- May 20, 2013 at 19:19
-
Ho Hum, are you saying that all social workers never do wrong and even
if they do they should be patted on the back because their job is ‘hard’?
I know that very few public servants get dismissed for not doing their job
but cases like this do not improve the public perception of such an
organization.
In the private sector such conduce would see the person out of the door
so fast they might not be able to pick up their pay cheque on the way out,
so it should be with public servants. Keeping dead wood in any
organization lowers the perceived value of that organization. Social
workers get a lot of bad press and from what is revealed most of them
deserve it but the problem is they do not loose their jobs over their bad
decisions when they should. Removing the dead wood would clear the way for
improvements in service and, hopefully, encourage those left to do better
which should benefit everyone.
- May 20, 2013 at 20:03
-
If they sacked a few Social Workers then the rest might pay a bit
more attention.
In France a couple of Social Workers and a Doctor were given prison
sentences for grossly neglecting what was obvious and which resulted in
the death of a child. In Britain they demand compensation, and get it,
if someone should have the temerity to deprive them of their gravy
train.
The real problem in Britain is that they all think that they have no
one to answer to.
-
May 20, 2013 at 22:27
-
If you think, however remotely, that I said that, you need to revisit
your comprehension skills. Furthermore, if you think that social
workers, their managers, others who work in Social Care, or local
government, don’t get sacked because they are incompetent, you really do
not know what you are talking about
- May 21, 2013 at 11:18
-
Personal experience is they ‘move on’ quietly to make the same
mistakes elsewhere. Sacking is very very rare, save for officers who
commit acts of financial fraud. Disciplining only comes when reported
and found guilty by their regulator.
-
May 21, 2013 at 12:16
-
“The real problem in Britain is that they all think that they have
no one to answer to.”
Unfortunately for all of us, Edna;- in practice, they don’t. And
that’s bloody terrifying to any thinking individual.
-
May 21, 2013 at 12:37
-
Edna, you make fair points. These things do happen. But, as an
aside, there is a practical element to consider when looking at
‘chicken and egg’ regulatory involvement. It’s far easier to get the
‘right’ outcome to a disciplinary process if you have already got the
regulator’s adverse judgement, and arguably you incur both less work
and cost in doing it that way round
-
May 20, 2013 at 19:20
-
Why shouldn’t the social worker be dismissed? If she can’t do her job
without running to the courts for protection from a jug of water she
shouldn’t be doing the job.
- May 20, 2013 at 19:57
-
Why shouldn’t the social worker be dismissed? If she can’t do her
job without running to the courts for protection from a jug of water she
shouldn’t be doing the job.
Why should the offender be allowed to get away with assaultive
behaviour? The more latitude mentally ill people are given to behave
badly without any legal sanction, the more they will do it.
I have talked to people in mental hospitals in Florida who are angry
that they have been placed in hospital by legal forces and vigorously,
and seemingly plausibly deny that they have any kind of mental illness,
and yet if you suggest to them that they should just bide their time,
wait until they are released from hospital, then get a job and never
have any future contact with mental health services, they will look at
you like you are crazy.
- May 20, 2013 at 21:11
-
@ Why should the offender be allowed to get away with assaultive
behaviour? The more latitude mentally ill people are given to behave
badly without any legal sanction, the more they will do it. @
But we don’t know why she threw the jug of water over the other
person do we. It seems a girlie sort of reaction really, not like a
proper street person with a stanley knife or something. We have had
more than one famous person pouring water over other famous people but
they’ve never been labelled “mental”. Anna Ford threw her wine all
over Jonathan Aitken and Chumbawumba (whoever he was) poured a whole
bucket of water over John Prescott.
It has crossed my mind that maybe this social worker had become
*too friendly* – persuaded poor Kirsty that she was was her *real*
friend. Perhaps there should be a healthy separation between the
client and the professional. I recall that the only teacher I ever
viscerally detested was the one who convinced me he was “my pal” too,
and then he dobbed me in the headmaster for some rule infringement or
other. Any normal teacher I would have forgiven – it’s his job, but
this guy I truly hated thereafter. Betrayal you see.
I’ve never had anything to do with social workers and never
knowingly even met one, although I have experienced many nursing and
suchlike staff over the years.
- May 20, 2013 at 22:23
-
She threw the water because she was angry about something. That is
not an excuse in law.
- May 20, 2013 at 22:52
-
Social workers are usually fairly long suffering. Most likely what
happened is that Kirsty had made several assaults on staff and got
away with it and a team decision was made to bring in the police if
she did it again to indicate to her that it could not be tolerated. It
doesn’t sound to me like a one-off kind of thing.
Like the Savile issue, every story is an iceberg of which only
about ten percent of the whole story gets covered in the press, and
even then they may still get it completely wrong. To be fair, though,
the press can only report the information that is in the public
realm.
-
May 20, 2013 at 23:18
-
@Jonathan Mason May 20, 2013 at 22:52
‘To be fair, though, the
press can only report the information that is in the public realm’
True, but most people seem to be too stupid to realise that the
information that isn’t in the public realm is not ‘out there’ for good
reasons, and that other people’s lives are not just some sort of
public soap opera for their entertainment. The media, of course, want
it that information out there, so that they can make some more grubby
money from dispensing it to such idiots
If people really want that sort of stuff, they should go and watch
a TV. There is plenty of choice there for them to obtain and satisfy
their vicarious pleasures, and if the rest of us get really lucky,
they might die in the process
- May 20, 2013 at 23:30
-
@ Most likely what happened is that Kirsty had made several
assaults on staff and got away with it and a team decision was made to
bring in the police if she did it again to indicate to her that it
could not be tolerated. It doesn’t sound to me like a one-off kind of
thing. @
The guinea-pig was reported last October, so the lost keys business
goes right back to last Autumn. It was in January that Kirsty was
prosecuted for the jugging and I would guess that serious attack on a
government employee was fast-tracked and came to court long before the
Rodenticide.. As I suggested earlier, if Kirsty had discovered that
the social worker had dobbed her in to the RSPCA, and now she was
being threatened with prosecution by the Pet Police, I can see how
Kirsty would view this as completely outside the social workers remit
and the relationship between them was so fractured she felt determined
to insult. That this is an assault was a price she was probably quite
happy to pay.
From “The New Social Worker”
The following behavioral factors
may warrant or signal violations in the worker/client
relationship:
Worker has given the client his/her personal e-mail,
cell, home address or phone number, or may even disclose his/her
MySpace or FaceBook account
Worker and client communicate with each
other via texting via cell on the worker’s personal and/or company
cell phone
Worker is warm-natured and enjoys physical connectedness
with clients, such as hugging or embracing upon contact, kissing,
rubbing the shoulder, hands, or face to provide comfort and support to
the client
Worker spends lengthy phone hours with the client during
the work day or even on personal time
Worker may tend to dress
provocatively on days when scheduled to see the client(s)
Worker
tends to spend an inordinate amount of time with the client, both
scheduled and unscheduled visits, in comparison to other
clients
Worker talks frequently about the client, and may even
openly share how much he or she likes, fantasizes, or can relate to
the client
Worker may begin to spend frequent time with client at
various restaurants, movie theaters, or other public places outside of
the client’s home, or even at worker’s home, under the guise of a
client visit
Worker freely shares and discusses his/her own
personal experiences with the client
Worker spends his/her own
personal funds to support clients’ needs, particularly if agency won’t
pay for clients’ needs, while worker chooses to assume cost on his/her
own
Worker engages in the use of drugs and/or alcohol with the
client
Co-workers begin to talk about the worker and his/her
relationship(s) with specific clients
Client’s own family and/or
personal friends begin to talk about the amount of time worker spends
with the client, and may even share such information with the
agency
http://www.socialworker.com/home/Feature_Articles/Ethics/Client_Relationships_and_Ethical_Boundaries_for_Social_Workers_in_Child_Welfare/
As
social workers, we have a responsibility to examine the issues of
client relationships and ethical boundaries. This conversation merits
discussion among our peers and other related professionals. In the age
of increased litigation and constituent complaints, it is not a topic
to be ignored. The personal and corporate costs and liabilities
associated with claims of unethical behaviors have long lasting impact
to those in the profession and for those who are served.
-
May 20, 2013 at 22:47
-
Paraphrasing, perhaps not too well, what Ms R has said in prior
posts, it was something to the effect that she often merely puts forward
an issue for others to think about, with regard to the implications, and
then comment, and sometimes act upon them, as necessary. I’m sure she
will correct me if I’m terribly wrong in that analysis
The bottom line here, in this particular case, is that NONE of us
KNOW what the REAL story is. All we have is the summary above, and a
story as presented by various media organisations…and we all know what
they do, don’t we? Even the ‘trade’ press, that covered this one…
So isn’t justice something is supposed to be dispensed when one is in
possession of all the facts, not doled out on mere prejudice? Would Ms R
disagree with that? I do hope not
And if anyone actually did appear on this blog, setting out in
graphic detail ALL the facts pertaining to the events and individuals
involved, as they would have been considered both within the Social
Services department involved, or by the CPS, I would at expect them to
be subject to a disciplinary process, the outcome of which would
hopefully be at least a Final Written warning, or more likely, a
Dismissal
And if you don’t understand why, you’ve clearly never been there and
done it
- May 21, 2013 at
06:57
- May 20, 2013 at 10:28
-
Oh yes, Care in the Community…if ever a term was coined so far from reality
this is the one.
Otherwise known as abandoning poor bloody souls to the whims desires and
treachery of the legion of parasites leeches and predators that infest our
streets.
Not that those huge places of refuge for the downtrodden hurt and lost were
perfect by any means, but offered some form of sanctuary and security away
from the real scum who would otherwise prey on them.
I have nothing but contempt for the new breed of social worker management
and in some cases Chief Constables who by the very nature of their chosen (and
lucrative) careers have a grave responsibility but who fail to take the weight
of that on their own shoulders…looking for scapegoats?…they had good examples
to follow such as WMD.
Honour?
Regards
Judd
- May 20,
2013 at 13:02
-
What is truly reprehensible is that the ‘abandoning’ has been done in the
name of allowing these people to exercise their rights to independent living
or parenthood even when they are clearly unable to cope.
I suspect that, in today’s social services hierarchy, those who see
themselves as ‘facilitators’ and enablers’ greatly outnumber the ones who
are prepared to roll up their sleeves and pick up the pieces.
-
May 20, 2013 at 10:11
-
Anna, once again a very perceptive article.
Like you I have extensive personal ‘insider’ knowledge of the social
work/services field, especially mental health, from my volunteering and
working life past. I was amazed at this story, I took risks without the
‘protected title’ when visiting people alone in their homes’ no longer common.
It also beggars belief that the ‘professionals’ are told seek to keep a
‘boundary’ from their clients. Does not make for good care or human
relationships. Unless you can – IMO- see others as like yourself you create a
defective / indifferent society.
That the publication Community Care, which now almost extensively focuses
on social work promotion, can print such a story without questioning the
values and principles of social work in this case is beyond belief. The
inability to comprehend the extreme power relationships between social
services staff and their clients is the root of all evil in social work- and
more are evil than not nowadays.
Their own kind ‘Kim Bromley Derry was quoted in the MSM some years back to
state that social workers were not infrequently vindictive- why the idiots in
government have not dealt with this and merely allowed the judiciary accept
social work views / attitudes to go unchecked in courts is the question maybe
the likes of a party designed to ‘stir up trouble’ could tackle.
ps. Community Care will not publish my comments- it only publishes those
which do not question social work values of ability. The Guardian has not yet
done this although it aims mainly to attract local authority staff to its
readership.
- May 20, 2013 at 09:24
-
Let’s hope the itv don’t put the gopher-boy on the story………
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/05/article-2227986-15DAD75F000005DC-221_634x233.jpg
- May 20, 2013 at 09:18
-
The only purpose of social workers is to give them an opportunity to suck
at the government teat. It keeps employment
numbers up but other than that
accomplishes nothing of any value to society.
- May 20, 2013 at 10:17
-
If Anna, or anyone else here, says that they subscribe to your comment as
being akin to a statement of almost ineffable truth, as opposed to merely
reflecting the effluent that permeates the mind that can utter it, I shall
truly despair
- May 20, 2013 at 11:37
-
Not sure what you mean, but I find the whole thing deeply
depressing.
How very lucky some of us are.
-
May 20, 2013 at 13:04
-
Using language which is hopefully as polite, but maybe slightly less
oblique, what I meant was that anyone who can write, and really believe,
absolutist statements, even when made against the background of some
manifest abberation, to the effect that …’The only purpose of social
workers is to give them an opportunity to suck at the government teat’
….and that social workers accomplish absolutely ….’nothing of any value
to society.’…..may have a considerable volume of soft brown sticky stuff
between the ears and be as bonkers as should make us all despair
- May 20, 2013 at 12:45
-
Presumably “social workers” might be seen as akin to the British Army
in WWI perhaps. The ones who are in the trenches cannot see very much, and
just follow orders, whilst the ones moving the pins are in a chateau
somewhere, a long way away.
Sara Rowbotham was extremely inspiring when I watched her live on
Parliament TV last year, and she gave a picture of the complications of
delivering “care” within a bureacratic :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20220556
The transcript is here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmhaff/uc182-v/uc182-v.pdf
Q267
Chair: Would you have expected the police and Social Services to have got
to
together to—
Sara Rowbotham: Absolutely.
Q268 Chair: It did
not happen?
Sara Rowbotham: Very rarely and if there were strategy
meetings that took place, in
the early days, we weren’t privy to those.
Eventually, I started to make the Safeguarding
Children Unit aware of
the referrals that I was making, and the Safeguarding Children
Unit
would chair strategy meetings, so they would invite the
professionals together to discuss what
the potential outcomes could be.
So, over that period of time I made 181 alerts to Children’s
Social
Care.
Chair: one hundred and eighty-one alerts?
Sara Rowbotham:
Yes.
Q269 Chair: Is it still going on now?
Sara Rowbotham: In
Rochdale? Yes, absolutely. Unfortunately.
-
May 20, 2013 at 13:16
-
Not too bad an analogy, either, when you also consider the conditions
in the trenches in which the troops in WWI fought and the type of hand
to hand combat which did take place.
You only have to look at some of the improvised close quarters
weapons that were created to get a sense of how terrible that must have
been. I recently researched my grandfather’s WWI records and active
combat record. Having found that he had spent 2 years in the trenches in
some of the most vicious battles of 1917 and 1918, and been seriously
wounded twice, I suddenly realised why, some 50 years after, on the only
occasion I ever spoke to him about it, he was so angry and upset that I
never ever dared to speak to him about it again.
And, having seen what social workers in just Children’s and Families
services do, some of what they see and deal with, on behalf of an often
ignorant and ungrateful British public, is pretty nasty stuff too
- May 20, 2013 at 13:36
-
@ Ho Hum – “And, having seen what social workers in just Children’s
and Families services do, some of what they see and deal with, on
behalf of an often ignorant and ungrateful British public, is pretty
nasty stuff too”.
Most of social work is not nasty problematic. I have first hand
knowledge having worked closely with the SS. In the 1980′s it was a
relatively benign set up, but there were managers who were nasty and
exerted power to get their way. Since baby P the behaviours of social
workers have become seriously nasty and do not always work in the best
interests of the child or other client (again personal knowledge-
recent). A relatively poorly educated group where university entry
grades have been low indeed not to attract the best. Hence the
governments proposed overhaul of social work education and support for
a fast track graduate scheme to enrol the ‘brightest and best’… we do
not have the brightest, skilled or the best across the board. Of
course some are good, but even many of these are patronising to their
clients.
-
May 20, 2013 at 14:06
-
Been there, done that, too. It’s true that Adults Social Services
can be a different ball game, but not every part. And some SWs were
indeed awful, and I dealt with a number whose literary talents were so
poor that it could frighten you. And not all the managers were the
made of the stuff of genius either. But that’s true of every
occupation, and a surprising number of other professions too.
I just get hacked off at the idiots who think that life would be
sunny for everyone if there just weren’t these terrible terrible
people there doing some of the really necessary ‘hands dirty’ work for
them
{ 98 comments }