Sexy :)The Lancet is actually my fav medical journal. I read that and the New England Journal of Medicine. I have done this since my days as a medical student. It is quite sad that the public do not have easy access to these journals. It causes a gap between the medical profession and the public. Nevertheless, that is how it has been for many years.
I like the editorials written by the very intelligent and articulate Richard Horton. I have to thank him for unmasking Andrew Wakefield some years ago. Richard Smith ex editor of the BMJ was just too smitten with Andrew's good looks to even spot the issue. We can still hear Richard huffing away about how wonderful Andrew was. There isn't a peep out of Richard these days. Cat got his tongue I suppose. There is certainly a Richard Smith on the supporters list for Wakefield. Mind you, the world and his dog is called Smith these days.
Horton's book Science and Fiction is well worth a read. Horton has a clear and logical head unlike his competitor and dizzy BMJ editor Fiona Godlee. Horton has his finger on the pulse most of the time although I often think that the furore surrounding MMR surprised him. As the icing on the cake, Horton is also pretty good looking as editors of straight journals go. Some things are important to the naked eye no doubt.
Talking of charming men, I do have to thank Alistair on Panorama for some interesting correspondence. David Southall can be watched on Panorama this Monday at 8.30. The answer to the programme is - yes, David has been the victim of a dysfunctional group complete with accessory personality disorders.
No doubt, the world of women will throw darts at the television and the rest of us will observe whether he has learned anything in the last few years.
The fight to steal David Southall's fame continues through Jayne Bryant and Lisa Blakemore Brown, two women who don't quite assess matters in a straight line but nevertheless have interesting views from the hill.
There is no doubt that David is an irritating man on many occasions but that's just because I often out argue him and think seven steps ahead.
David has two groups of women - those who love him without questioning him, and those who hate him with a vengeance. There is no middle ground at all.
David needs five more years to develop a more balanced view of the social perception of issues involving child protection. That is because he has spent too much time with his child protection mates and not enough time with real people. I do have to say that in Penny Mellor's own skewed view, she is right about the lack of solutions for those who are accused but innocent. A GMC erasure though isn't vindication or a solution. Mellor for some reason has never concentrated on changing the system to address the allegations that remain on a file despite the person being deemed innocent. I would say the focus of her campaign has been wrong from the start but then no one can teach a dogmatic arrogant self congratulatory campaigner.
The lack of a reality check for David has resulted in the views developed by Lisa Blakemore Brown and Jayne. I just don't think David is very good at dealing with women who challenge him. His solution is to avoid them. I suspect this inability to focus on how other people percieve him has resulted in his erasure. David is a straight line thinker, a man who doesn't deal in emotions or feelings or the needs of others. David has a job in front of him, he does it to the best of his ability. That is the way he approaches the protection of a child. Blakemore Brown and Jayne are rather different creatures - rather more emotive, considerate, heartfelt. The world of David Southall therefore clashes with Blakemore Brown and Jayne - and quite frankly neither understands the other's thought processes.
The bottom line is this - neither women are on the shop floor dealing with child abusers and probably have no idea what it is like making a decision to protect the child. Everyone has an opinion about it - but the buck does not stop with us.
There is though no doubt all that David Southall is one of the best child protection specialists this side of the UK. No child has died out of neglect on David's on call. That remains a fact whether anyone likes it or not.
Anyway, I wanted to feature the best piece so far in relation to child protection in the Lancet.I like the editorials written by the very intelligent and articulate Richard Horton. I have to thank him for unmasking Andrew Wakefield some years ago. Richard Smith ex editor of the BMJ was just too smitten with Andrew's good looks to even spot the issue. We can still hear Richard huffing away about how wonderful Andrew was. There isn't a peep out of Richard these days. Cat got his tongue I suppose. There is certainly a Richard Smith on the supporters list for Wakefield. Mind you, the world and his dog is called Smith these days.
Horton's book Science and Fiction is well worth a read. Horton has a clear and logical head unlike his competitor and dizzy BMJ editor Fiona Godlee. Horton has his finger on the pulse most of the time although I often think that the furore surrounding MMR surprised him. As the icing on the cake, Horton is also pretty good looking as editors of straight journals go. Some things are important to the naked eye no doubt.
Talking of charming men, I do have to thank Alistair on Panorama for some interesting correspondence. David Southall can be watched on Panorama this Monday at 8.30. The answer to the programme is - yes, David has been the victim of a dysfunctional group complete with accessory personality disorders.
No doubt, the world of women will throw darts at the television and the rest of us will observe whether he has learned anything in the last few years.
The fight to steal David Southall's fame continues through Jayne Bryant and Lisa Blakemore Brown, two women who don't quite assess matters in a straight line but nevertheless have interesting views from the hill.
There is no doubt that David is an irritating man on many occasions but that's just because I often out argue him and think seven steps ahead.
David has two groups of women - those who love him without questioning him, and those who hate him with a vengeance. There is no middle ground at all.
David needs five more years to develop a more balanced view of the social perception of issues involving child protection. That is because he has spent too much time with his child protection mates and not enough time with real people. I do have to say that in Penny Mellor's own skewed view, she is right about the lack of solutions for those who are accused but innocent. A GMC erasure though isn't vindication or a solution. Mellor for some reason has never concentrated on changing the system to address the allegations that remain on a file despite the person being deemed innocent. I would say the focus of her campaign has been wrong from the start but then no one can teach a dogmatic arrogant self congratulatory campaigner.
The lack of a reality check for David has resulted in the views developed by Lisa Blakemore Brown and Jayne. I just don't think David is very good at dealing with women who challenge him. His solution is to avoid them. I suspect this inability to focus on how other people percieve him has resulted in his erasure. David is a straight line thinker, a man who doesn't deal in emotions or feelings or the needs of others. David has a job in front of him, he does it to the best of his ability. That is the way he approaches the protection of a child. Blakemore Brown and Jayne are rather different creatures - rather more emotive, considerate, heartfelt. The world of David Southall therefore clashes with Blakemore Brown and Jayne - and quite frankly neither understands the other's thought processes.
The bottom line is this - neither women are on the shop floor dealing with child abusers and probably have no idea what it is like making a decision to protect the child. Everyone has an opinion about it - but the buck does not stop with us.
There is though no doubt all that David Southall is one of the best child protection specialists this side of the UK. No child has died out of neglect on David's on call. That remains a fact whether anyone likes it or not.
Urgent: a UK Commission on Child Protection
Last week, three contradictory decisions made a mockery of child protection in the UK and Ireland by further adding to the confusion around how best to protect vulnerable children.
On May 20, Judge Sean Ryan released the final report of Ireland's commission into child abuse, which revealed that over the past few decades, more than 30 000 children were repeatedly raped, beaten, and molested by priests and nuns in Catholic church-run schools and orphanages. Now aged 50—70 years, none of the victims will have the justice that they deserve because none of their abusers will be prosecuted.
Then on May 22, the second review into the death of Baby Peter—who died in August, 2007, aged 17 months after repeated abuse—was released and stressed that his mother's continuous cover-up of his abuse was no excuse for the multiple agencies and individuals involved for failing to protect him. Indeed, after a media campaign, the General Medical Council (GMC) suspended the paediatrician who did not detect signs of repeated abuse immediately before his death. This second review states that professionals should use their judgment and instincts to pursue the investigation of potential child abuse, even in the knowledge that they may be mistaken.
Therefore, it is incomprehensible that on the same day as the second review was released and the UK Secretary of State for Children, Schools, and Families, Ed Balls, said that all professionals involved in child protection should act to put the child first and not be deceived by parents, the High Court upheld the GMC's decision to strike the paediatrician and child protection expert, Dr David Southall, off the medical register for doing just that. Mr Justice Blake threw out Southall's appeal against the GMC's decision, which was based on him allegedly accusing a mother of killing her son. Justice Blake confirmed the decision of a GMC panel and upheld the view that the mother was “an impressive, credible, and reliable witness in the central issues of the case”. In a press statement, the advocacy organisation, Professionals Against Child Abuse, said that this decision will be a further deterrent to paediatricians and other health professionals from getting involved in child protection work.
So, in light of all these conflicting messages, what are professionals committed to protecting children supposed to do? Child protection in the UK and Ireland is a disastrous mess and it is clear that no amount of reflex retribution, retraining, and tinkering around the edges will be enough to fix it.
One group of paediatricians and child protection workers believes that different types of child abuse need different ways of dealing with it. Premeditated child maltreatment by perpetrators who are deceptive, so this group argues, may need more and earlier involvement of specialist police units since the police cannot be intimidated by dangerous child abusers and can protect social workers and paediatricians.
A different view emerged from evidence reviewed in our child maltreatment Series. The Series authors argued that a change towards earlier police involvement may actually cause more harm to the large number of children who come from chaotic and incapable families with social instability. They advocated a comprehensive child and family welfare approach, where the emphasis is on addressing need, rather than a safety approach, which focuses on determining culpability. In their view, the welfare emphasis means that more maltreated children are likely to receive therapeutic and supportive services. And although they agreed that some types of child maltreatment do require criminal prosecution, the difficulty remains for paediatricians at the frontline to diagnose the different types of child abuse and refer to the appropriate services. Clearly there is no overall consensus among professionals on how to best serve the very people they try to protect—children.
Paediatricians need to speak up loudly and take the lead in a concerted effort to change the current, clearly inadequate system in the most appropriate way. The government should put the Children's Commissioner in charge to urgently set up a National Child Protection Commission that reviews all the evidence emerging from national and international data and devise evidence-based recommendations on how best to protect vulnerable children. Society has the collective responsibility to do justice to the memories of 30 000 Irish victims, Baby Peter, Victoria Climbié, Ainlee Labonte, and all the other countless and nameless victims of damaging and life-threatening child abuse.
There is a PDF on the website as well.
There is a PDF on the website as well.
0 comments:
Post a Comment