NS January 19th, 2009

Some news stories that caught my attention in the news today, for one reason or another:

1. Care applications soar after Baby P case

More applications to take children into care are being issued than at any time since the present system of child protection was established.

The sharp increase comes after the reporting late last year of the death of Baby P, when the Government instructed all local authorities to look again at cases of children at risk and subject to a child protection plan, to see whether they really were safe from harm.

New figures seen by The Times show that 693 applications to take children into care were issued in December, 66 per cent higher than in December 2007 and 89 per cent higher than the all-time low in June 2008, when 367 requests were made.

Some might consider this good news but I find it rather alarming. A 66 per cent jump from the same time last year? All after a very public and embarrassing case of social care gone wrong, embodied by Baby P? Something smells. At first glance one might think “Oh good, they’re getting off their arses and taking children who need help into care,” but if you stop and think about it, this can’t be what’s happening, not least of all because these are most likely the exact same case workers that existed last year and their professional intuition has unlikely changed. What this means is that they have drastically altered the way they work in a very short space of time and with little guidance. Many are now running on fear of public scorn and fear for their jobs — never good indicators for honest results. Either that or they were rubbish at their jobs to begin with and are only motivated to do it properly under threat of it effecting them personally. Neither is a desirable outcome.

What I fear is that children may be taken into care now quite rapidly and after little investigation or chance for the family to defend or improve itself. Don’t get me wrong, I am immensely grateful that systems are in place (or at least try) to protect vulnerable, abused or neglected children, as evidenced in my previous post and if a child is being hurt or neglected in some way then that absolutely must stop and if the law has been broken, it must be upheld. I don’t want to see children being hurt any more than the next person. But I also believe that if a family is able to stay together and carers are able to learn better parenting, emotional and/or practical skills to better the way they interact with their children, the time, money and effort spent assisting them in that is far better than simply removing a child and placing them in a foster care system that often produces a less-than-desirable outcome; an outcome that is sometimes worse than the situation from which the child was removed.

What are your thoughts? Do you find these numbers reassuring or suspicious?

2. Court challenge to NICE over osteoporosis treatment

The medicine regulator faces a legal challenge this week over its ruling that thousands of women with thinning bones should be denied effective treatment on the NHS.

Draft guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) states that doctors should prescribe the cheapest drug available to women with the early signs of osteoporosis, even though up to one in five patients cannot take it.

The National Osteoporosis Society and the drug manufacturer Servier say that this is unethical and will do nothing to prevent fragility fractures that contribute to 13,000 premature deaths a year, as well as causing widespread disability and pain.

They will contest the NICE guidance in the High Court, as part of a full judicial review, claiming that the watchdog has not been transparent about its processes and is infringing the human rights of patients by denying them alternative medication on the ground of disability.

So a debilitating condition that over half of women are likely to suffer from is so insignificant that NICE thinks it is okay to force them to actually be seriously afflicted by it before prescribing the drugs that would’ve prevented the condition from worsening in the first place. Right, that makes perfect sense…in a man’s world. I wonder how many of the top executives at NICE are women? My guess is zero or one. Not only is this sexist but ageist too.

I hope they all fall down and break their hips in later life, whilst in the shower, and have to be picked up and carried — naked, wet, wrinkly and helpless — to safety by their (young, female, tax-paying) housekeepers. Bastards.

3. Obama has the courage of a great leader

I really like Obama. I think he is a good person and might very well be a great leader. He’s certainly a fantastic speaker and has a confident, charming public persona. But the way he’s being built up in the media scares me. Everything he does is touted as historic, ground-breaking, moving, etc.. Often it is, but the above cartoon seems over the top to me. Suggesting that Obama would have the full attention and admiration of Abraham Lincoln, before he’s even taken office, makes me nervous. The media and the public love nothing more than building someone up only to tear them down. We love to see the great and the good fall from the pedestals we place them on. At some point, what the world loved about Obama will become what they pick on or loathe. I think we must be careful to temper our enthusiasm and optimism with reality and remember that he is still human and a politician. He is likely to disappoint everyone at least once and I think we’d be wise to acknowledge that now and again. That said, I understand that there will be plenty of time for that in the four years to come and that right now the world is still celebrating the historic election, deservedly so. I just hope that this historic moment isn’t soured by lofty aspirations being cruelly dashed by the inevitability of the political beast.

4. Amanda Knox flirts with Raffaele Sollecito at Meredith Kercher murder trial

Amanda Knox sought to patch up relations with her estranged former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, behind the scenes, at the opening of their trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher, Ms Knox’s British flatmate, it emerged yesterday.

During the seven-hour opening hearing on Friday, Ms Knox, 21 smiled and laughed repeatedly, joking with her lawyers and interpreter. Although sitting only a few feet from the bespectacled Mr Sollecito, 24, she barely acknowledged his glances along the row.

As far as is known the two, who have been held in separate prisons, have not spoken since they were arrested after the murder of Ms Kercher in November 2007. But during a recess on Friday, Ms Knox approached Mr Sollecito and broke the ice by asking: “Ciao, come stai?” (“Hi, how are you?”). She smiled at him and said: “You look good with your hair cut short.”

Mr Sollecito, who had grown his hair long in prison, blushed at the compliment, according to Italian reports from legal sources who witnessed the exchange.

Since when did telling someone you like their haircut constitute flirting? I have no idea if this woman is guilty or not but the way the media have portrayed her as a cold-hearted nymphomaniac, black widow spider from the get-go bothers me. For whatever reason, they’ve latched onto that persona and are using it to turn public opinion against her before she’s even had a fair trial. Disgusting behaviour.

• In The News
• Comments(3)