Skip to main content

Plumbers to spot child abuse

The link is to an article about how plumbers at Lincoln City Council are going to be trained to spot child abuse.

What all of this ignores is that more people that are under pressure to report things the more reports there will be. The system's problem is not a lack of reports, but instead a lack of action.

The more reports there are the less action there will be as there is no additional resource going into the system to handle the reports.

Obviously people should be concerned about child abuse, but we really need to concentrate on the serious cases and not overwhelm the practitioners with masses of reports of situations which frankly often don't require any intervention.

Comments

Costigan Quist said…
We've seen exactly this problem with terrorism. More people are encouraged to report anything vaguely suspicious. Seems like a good idea, but in reality it means the police waste huge amounts of time invesitigating false alarms.
moira said…
There are people that think a few bruises on a toddler must mean child abuse. I should think that they will have to report untidy houses as SS seem to be hot on this!
The council says common sense will be used but they are not an organisation renowned for their common sense approach.

I just can't see the plumbers etc relishing this idea at all.If a plumber etc bears some kind of grudge to someone does this mean a report to SS?
Andrew said…
Just plumbers, not electricians? I believe either it would be all staff not just some.

Can you imagine when a child dies, it will be said "why did nobody notice?"... Answer... "Hrmm well they never had a leak just faulty wiring".
Andrew said…
LOL it states "electricians", but they same principle applies, what about a joiner?

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…