Libel? (ctd from ulm)

[Big Les Wade]

Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> posted
>On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 18:25:02 +0000, Big Les Wade <L...@nowhere.com>
>wrote:
>>IOW I was referring to what the child protection lobby has been stating
>>in public. And I can produce plenty of examples to show that they said
>>that allegations of abuse must be believed without question, as I am
>>sure you can too.
>
>I certainly can't.
>
>I have never seen any such statement by anybody in a position of
>influence or authority.


A quick google search on words like "disclosure", "always believe" etc
yields many documents like the following.

http://dedworthmiddle.co.uk/Websites/dedworth/files/Content/985009/Child%
20Protection%20Policy.doc

http://www.bridgend.gov.uk/web/groups/public/documents/policy/016362.hcsp


--
Les

[The Todal]

That's a good start, but can you quote any text which implies that
allegations of abuse must be believed without question?

[Big Les Wade]

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> posted

That's exactly what they do say.

--
Les

[Jacob Von Hogflume]

In two words - Esther Rantzen.

[Percy Picacity]

The second document says:

"Always believe what the child is saying or conversely try not to show
disbelief."


This sentence is fundamentally gibberish, but appears to want to be
saying that one should take the complaint at face value, and assume
that the child is not lying when listening and referring to the
statutory authorities. It does not for a moment suggest that the
conclusion of an investigation must be that the statement is true or
that someone has to be prosecuted. It is of course possible for
someone to be truthful but mistaken.

--

Percy Picacity

[Cynic]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:47:02 +0000, Percy Picacity
<k...@under.the.invalid> wrote:

>"Always believe what the child is saying or conversely try not to show
>disbelief."

>This sentence is fundamentally gibberish, but appears to want to be
>saying that one should take the complaint at face value, and assume
>that the child is not lying when listening and referring to the
>statutory authorities. It does not for a moment suggest that the
>conclusion of an investigation must be that the statement is true or
>that someone has to be prosecuted. It is of course possible for
>someone to be truthful but mistaken.

Yes, it is. It is also perfectly possible for a person to tell
deliberate lies in order to get attention, deflect attention from
something they have done wrong or to get someone into serious trouble
- and that is true of children as well as adults. In fact it is
probably *more* likely wrt children.

I'll also add that IME the "child protection experts" will always act
on the assumption that a child is telling the truth if the child makes
an allegation of abuse, and will not ask particularly searching
questions. But if a child claims that a suspected abuser did *not* do
anything inappropriate to them, they will express disbelief and start
pressuring the child to "disclose".

--
Cynic

[Percy Picacity]

I don't doubt you are right, but the policy documents we are discussing
are not aimed at the child protection experts and merely instruct the
staff on the ground to listen non-judgmentally and report concerns to
either SS or the police. This is clearly better than routinely
punishing them for lying when they disclose abuse: we have to rely on
the "experts" to deal properly with the investigation, but I don't
think Big Les Wade will find a document actually advising them to
behave as you describe. This is clearly a cultural issue within their
organisations.

--

Percy Picacity

[Alex Heney]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:26:03 +0000, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
wrote:

The second of those links does have the text:
=======================================
9. DISCLOSURE
The Directorate places great emphasis on effective communication
between staff and children/young people and their parents/carers.
However staff must recognise that where there are child protection
concerns they must deal very differently with both the child or young
person and their parents/carers. If someone discloses that they or
another young person has been, or is being, abused, staff should:

• Always believe what the child is saying or conversely try not to
show disbelief. Show that you have heard what they are saying, and
that their allegations will be taken seriously.
=======================================

Now personally, I would read that slightly differently to how Les is
reading it, but then I don't have his agenda.

And taken in isolation, it certainly doers say exactly "Always believe
what the child is saying".

I think the second part of that sentence is just as important and
actually makes the first part more meaningful.




The first link can't actually be made to work directly, but you can
get to the document by going here:
http://dedworthmiddle.co.uk/policies
and then clicking on the child protection policy link.

And that has the following text (in appendix 2)

===============================================
ALL STAFF must be aware of the procedures regarding child abuse. If
any pupil makes a disclosure to a member of staff they should:-

Listen – always believe what the child has to say.
===============================================

This one does not have any further qualifiers on it :(
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Faith is good, but scepticism is better. - Giuseppe Verdi
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom

[Big Les Wade]

Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> posted

>The first link can't actually be made to work directly, but you can
>get to the document by going here:
>http://dedworthmiddle.co.uk/policies
>and then clicking on the child protection policy link.

Thanks Alex. I can't work out how to stop my news client breaking up
URLs in my posts.

>
>And that has the following text (in appendix 2)
>
>===============================================
>ALL STAFF must be aware of the procedures regarding child abuse. If any
>pupil makes a disclosure to a member of staff they should:-
>
>Listen – always believe what the child has to say.
>===============================================
>
>This one does not have any further qualifiers on it :(

There are hundreds of similar documents, with and without what you call
"qualifiers".


--
Les

[totallyconfused]

I can confirm that when I did my PGCE, we were told 'the child is
always right and must be believed'.

At the time, I was having a dispute with my then 13 year old
daughter. Basically, she made an accusation against her step father-
rang that great 'childline'. She did not realise the implications.
After a week, she went to her Headmistress and admitted she 'made it
up'; she thought the accusation would result in us caving in and buy
her the £100 dance shoes she wanted. We told the truth about it from
day one. The Head told the SS 'she admits she made it up'; did they
pay attention? of course not!

Meanwhile, my boys were attending assemblies at school with 'child
protection experts' telling them, 'if you are not happy at home,
phone childline'. My youngest stood up one day during one of these
assemblies and yelled 'Don't believe them....they are State sponsored
child abusers and take children from their beds'.

Now if a 5 year old couldn't be fooled.......
TC

[The Todal]

On 14/11/12 10:37, totallyconfused wrote:
> On Nov 14, 9:13 am, Big Les Wade <L...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> posted
>>
>>> The first link can't actually be made to work directly, but you can
>>> get to the document by going here:
>>> http://dedworthmiddle.co.uk/policies
>>> and then clicking on the child protection policy link.
>>
>> Thanks Alex. I can't work out how to stop my news client breaking up
>> URLs in my posts.
>>
>>
>>
>>> And that has the following text (in appendix 2)
>>
>>> ===============================================
>>> ALL STAFF must be aware of the procedures regarding child abuse. If any
>>> pupil makes a disclosure to a member of staff they should:-
>>
>>> Listen – always believe what the child has to say.
>>> ===============================================
>>
>>> This one does not have any further qualifiers on it :(
>>
>> There are hundreds of similar documents, with and without what you call
>> "qualifiers".
>>
>> --
>> Les
>
> I can confirm that when I did my PGCE, we were told 'the child is
> always right and must be believed'.

Who said that, though? A lecturer in social work? And in what context?

>
> At the time, I was having a dispute with my then 13 year old
> daughter. Basically, she made an accusation against her step father-
> rang that great 'childline'. She did not realise the implications.
> After a week, she went to her Headmistress and admitted she 'made it
> up'; she thought the accusation would result in us caving in and buy
> her the £100 dance shoes she wanted. We told the truth about it from
> day one. The Head told the SS 'she admits she made it up'; did they
> pay attention? of course not!

Interesting story, but the trouble with it is that we, as outsiders,
have absolutely no way of knowing whether your daughter was being abused
by her step father. The fact that she recants and claims to have seen
the light tells us nothing about which version was actually truthful.
The world is full of women who are unaware of the abuse committed by
their male partners, or who are in denial. I don't suggest you are one
of those, but I don't know how the authorities are supposed to be able
to fathom the truth without first proceeding on the assumption that a
child's allegation might be truthful.

[Big Les Wade]

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> posted

>I don't know how the authorities are supposed to be able to fathom the
>truth without first proceeding on the assumption that a child's
>allegation might be truthful.

How did that "might" sneak in there? You know perfectly well that that's
not the word being used.

--
Les

[GB]

Is not this all about risk mitigation for the social worker, though? If
the social worker misses a case of abuse, the social worker is very
much in the firing line later on. On the other hand, if the social
worker pursues the case relentlessly, even to the point of breaking up
the family, no finger of blame will be pointed. You work it out.

[totallyconfused]

> child's allegation might be truthful.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yes, it was said by a 'child protection expert' brought in to 'train
us'. Our lectures avoided the issue as much as possible.
I did my PGCE via a SCITT programme. I had an Asian girl who was
really really good at the topic I was teaching...I wanted to give her
an 'A star' for an assignment and tell her she was uni material. My
manager/mentor said 'You can't- if you do that her father will pull
her out of school immediately.' (apparently if she was too intelligent
or independent in 'their' culture, she wasn't good marriage material-
contrary to my mindset.)

I do appreciate what you are saying, but in this case, the step father
never abused her. She claimed that her step father failed to give her
'emotional warmth'; as a step father he was afraid to be to 'close'-
especially given her age and stories on TV. She was crying and moaning
about me not buying the 'jazz shoes' and thought he would give her a
'cuddle and talk mum around'; when he didn't do so, she had a fit. So
at first she was being 'emotionally abused' by him; then she admitted
that she had said he had 'touched her' thinking I would kick him out
and buy the 'jazz shoes' and all would be right with the world. Then
she admitted the touching was a lie; and she didn't realise how much
questioning was involved in the allegation. 9 months of hell created
by a 13 year old over a pair of shoes. (Even her own biological
Father said 'I am not having her-next she will accuse me') As I have
said, I love my daughter more than anything..but I did to an extent
create a complete spoilt brat.
TC

[The Todal]

Look, when you call the fire brigade they have to assume that a building
is on fire. They can't drive at half the speed because it "might not" be
on fire and they "only have your word for it".

[Big Les Wade]

GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> posted

Perhaps, but there is no doubt that social workers are indoctrinated to
"always believe the child" to the extent that anybody who challenges
that belief must be "in denial".

I first came across this phenomenon first-hand when doing jury service
fifteen years ago, and since then I have seen it stated in dozens of
documents similar to the two I have just cited.

--
Les

[Big Les Wade]

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> posted

But investigating a child's allegation of assault is not like driving a
fire engine to a fire.

--
Les

[Alex Heney]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:06:17 +0000, Big Les Wade <L...@nowhere.com>
wrote:

>Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> posted
>>The first link can't actually be made to work directly, but you can
>>get to the document by going here:
>>http://dedworthmiddle.co.uk/policies
>>and then clicking on the child protection policy link.
>
>Thanks Alex. I can't work out how to stop my news client breaking up
>URLs in my posts.
>

It isn't just that - I did try "unbreaking" it.

You can cut and paste exactly what is in the URL bar and then try
putting it in again and it just doesn't work (not in Chrome anyhow).

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager

Program too small to fit into memory.

[Steerpike]

> Interesting story, but the trouble with it is that we, as outsiders,
>
> have absolutely no way of knowing whether your daughter was being abused
>
> by her step father. The fact that she recants and claims to have seen
>
> the light tells us nothing about which version was actually truthful.
>
> The world is full of women who are unaware of the abuse committed by
>
> their male partners, or who are in denial. I don't suggest you are one
>
> of those, but I don't know how the authorities are supposed to be able
>
> to fathom the truth without first proceeding on the assumption that a
>
> child's allegation might be truthful.

You know for certain that 500,000 children have died as a result of crimes committed by the state...........is this more or less serious than the constant MSM inspired gibberish about "child abuse"?

[Alex Heney]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 00:07:31 -0800 (PST), Steerpike
<gloomy....@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>You know for certain that 500,000 children have died as a result of crimes committed by the state.

There is no possibility whatsoever that anybody "knows" that.

There are some stupid people who would like to believe it, and who
push it as if there were some sort of factual basis for it.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager

Beware of Geeks bearing gifs.