Haringey had a beautiful paper trail of how they failed to protect this baby.
– Eileen Munro, London School of Economics, as paraphrased by Simon Jenkins.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
8 comments to Samizdata quote of the day |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Failed to diagnose a broken back? WTF?
Yet, of course, there’s a less than zero chance of any of those incompetents being struck off by their guild.
Before you blast people not named, and whom you probably don’t know, for incompetence (based upon a few lines in the Guardian-THERE’S a fine source right there!-written about events that you probably didn’t see for yourself), consider what competence and success is:
“Ma’am, it looks to me like this child is in danger. She’s coming with me. No, I didn’t ask for your permission. You can step back and quit blocking the door or you can spend the night in jail.”
Prevention: having cops wandering through your house, inventorying your groceries, bedding, and clothing, canvassing your neighbors about suspicious sounds and when’s the last time they saw all of your kids[1] and ordering you out of the room in order to interview the kids.
[1] There was a case of this a year or so back, not too far from me. One little girl disappeared and it took about a year for anyone to notice. The smart money IMHO is on mom’s boyfriend killing the child and hiding the body, but the investigation was hampered by, among other things, racial identity bullshit.
This case is terrible, but cases like it are vanishingly rare. But it will be used to justify all manner of extra intrusion into our lives.
The problem is,not that we want a “nanny state” but that the state now has a monopoly in so many social areas,ordinary citizens and excluded. Taking into consideration the state having these powers,it is not unreasonable that we demand it discharges its duties properly.
Until there is societal involvement in,what is after all, our problems,not the government,nothing will be done.
The misery farmers will keep collecting their £100,000 a year.
“No amount of control that is tolerable in a free society can ensure that a Climbié or a Baby P will “never happen again”.”
This is the key quote, I think. The article suggests that if procedures were looser, and human intuition more valued, then this particular case might have ended better, and perhaps that’s true. But if so, other cases would have been missed, because human intuition isn’t infallible, and process and procedure isn’t a complete waste of time.
The real flaw in the thinking is the expectation that a local authority can ever be perfect in detecting these things, and that no price is too high in improving their ability to detect these things.
Someone needs to come out and say that some wicked people doing wicked things, undetected, is a price worth paying for the law abiding to do lawful things unmolested.
HI There, just discovered your postings, and find them most interesting. I began my blog site earlier this year at 84 years old. Writing what I think and reading what others think is a wonderful pass time for me. Thanks Anne Cleveland
The weirdly ironic/sad fact is that the only upshot of this is that it will to be used to justify a strengthening the immunity from prosecution that Social Services have when they wrongfully confiscate children.
“”No amount of control that is tolerable in a free society can ensure that a Climbié or a Baby P will “never happen again”
Again ,this misses the problem. The control is already there in abundance,it is simply that the system has too much power and excludes the rest of society.