Skip to main content

Southall - what about the research

My biggest concern about the matters releating to David Southall is that there has not been an independent investigation into his research and the impact it had on the subjects of that research.

That remains a concern notwithstanding the fact that he has now been struck off.

This issue is, however, raising another smokescreen. (with the RCPCH helping to generate smoke).

Paediatricians who report in the Family Court make substantial additional money from reports relating to alleged Child Abuse. If they did not get fees linked to each case I would be more comfortable with the situation.

Obviously some people maltreat children. There are people who Fabricate and Invent Illness, there are also people who do this by proxy.

The key question for a judicial process (be it family or criminal division) is
a) How much evidence is required to initiate an investigation.
b) What standard of evidence is required for findings to be made.

These are not zero sum issues. We are doing badly in this country at preventing the abuse of children. Many children are dying at the hands of abusers. If inappropriate investigations are occurring that are overwhelming the system with work that prevents it concentrating on the more risky situations then that is not helpful in achieving the objective of protecting children.

To get this right needs proper analytical thinking rather than the creation of a false dichotomy between two invalid logical positions.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.