Quote by staffcple
It is both from the heart and the head, and nothing will convince me this artical is inaccurate in any way.
There's the problem Kent,
The facts contained within may not be inaccurate, however her additions to those facts, her opinions, her emotions are agenda led. They will fit around her editors wishes, the papers political standpoint and her desire to sell more copy.
I see this as society's responsibility to solve, in fact somewhere down the line society is to blame, we allow these things to happen, we make this behaviour if not acceptable then accepted, we allow ourselves to be sheep, fit only for paying tax to our masters, kept in line with broken and empty promises, worrying more where our next HD TV or shiny car is coming from, rather than whether that child we see with a bump on the head, which the parent says was an accident is in fact being savaged.
So Kent, two questions,
Do you plan to fall on your sword, as part of society, you did nothing to stop this happening, you share some of the blame, as do I, as does the woman who wrote the article, as does everyone. Or are you going to wring your hands, talk about how sick and evil it all is whilst doing nothing to help.
Or.....
Are you going to get yourself into the front lines of child protection, work to change a system you obviously feel is failing, save the children, take the abuse, offer yourself up as a sacrificial lamb when the inevitable happens, no matter the true facts behind the stories.
Difficult choice isn't it?
That is one point which is not true. The artical was written by somebody who lets nobody influence her views...that is a fact.
Your first question.... How as somebody who has nothing at all to do with this case be accountable in anyway? I am a printer not a social worker, or child protection officer. How can I or the journanlist be held responsible? That is a silly arguement with no substance at all.
Your second question.... No I am not going to get into social care, or child care. That is my choice in life. The social workers took the choice to take that line of work, and in this case they failed that child, and must and will face the consequences of their inability to do their jobs.
When somebody CHOOSES to take that course of work, they take the money, so when things go wrong, if that is that persons fault, then sacrificial lamb they should become. If you cannot do the job you have been trained to do, after you have banked your money, then either get out or face the sack. I am sick and tired of seeing people in all walks of life, not being capable of doing the job they are paid to do.
If these people are found to be guilty of these things and are sacked, will your attitude be different? Or will you still think they are " lambs to the slaughter "?
How on the evidence of the child minder and the social worker who has now been gagged from talking, I wonder why? can your opinions still be how they are? For me it is very clear cut here....a child dies in the most horrific of circumstances, he was under the care of social services, sixty visits and still noticed nothing. If anybody cannot see this child was failed by the very people who were supposed to be there to protect him, then I am at a loss to say anything else.
I will wait for these people to be sacked and I will not shed a tear for them, and will accept peoples attitudes to be different when the real facts are proved.
These of course are my opinions and if I am proved to be wrong I will of course appologise in this forum...will others if they are wrong too?
:x :x 
:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: ^^^^^
