The tragedy of Baby P (please, no jokes, folks)

Yesterday, I had to turn the news off for the first time ever. Today, I stopped reading a newspaper article halfway through - both times because I was too angry and upset to continue.

What kind of society are we living in where people can treat a kid like that and get away with it? Where doctors and social workers alike completely fail to take responsibility for their positions and don't bother to do anything about this horrifying, gut-wrenching case? I cannot possibly fathom the mentality of a person that could do that to a kid not even out of nappies. He apparently hid every time the social worker came around - what an absolute strawberry floating coward. But the system is just as culpable for Baby P's death - the child was visited SIXTY times, the mother having been arrested twice for beating the child up. And still the poor boy remained in her care. Unbelievable. Utterly unbelievable. The people who ignored this are apparently to receive written warnings and will retain their jobs. Astonishing.

Sometimes I wonder what kind of world I'm bringing my son up into. Stories like this just stagger me, they really do.

Not sure what else to say, really.

Hero of Canton wrote:what an absolute strawberry floating coward

This.

Also, how the hell is he allowed to retain his anonymity?

Been following this too, after I first read about this, I sat in stunned silence, close to tears.

Hopefully the tabloids will kick up a fuss, the authorities have been breathtakingly negligent here. Heads need to roll.

Hero of Canton wrote:Also, how the hell is he allowed to retain his anonymity?

Yet, the lodger's identity was revealed. Strange.

Drunken_Master wrote:Been following this too, after I first read about this, I sat in stunned silence, close to tears.

Yeah, Mel came home with James last night and we just stuck the news on in the background while we had tea. The story came on, and she said "oh God this is awful - it made me cry when I saw this earlier" - a couple of minutes in and I genuinely couldn't listen to any more as I was welling up.

Hopefully the tabloids will kick up a fuss, the authorities have been breathtakingly negligent here. Heads need to roll.

Front cover of the Mirror puts the X-Factor Diana Vickers 'scandal', I'm A Celeb line-up and an ad for its own website ahead of it. Sigh.

Who would want to be a social worker? You are damned if you take children into care and damned if you don't. Mistakes may have been made, but this sort of thing is rare. We don't know the whole story, so rather than crucifying the social services wouldn't it be better to wait for the full story rather than pandering to tabloid sensationalism?

Commander Jameson wrote:Who would want to be a social worker? You are damned if you take children into care and damned if you don't. Mistakes may have been made, but this sort of thing is rare. We don't know the whole story, so rather than crucifying the social services wouldn't it be better to wait for the full story rather than pandering to tabloid sensationalism?

Child protection charity Kidscape called for “heads to roll” and said: “This child was seen 60 times and yet nobody did a thing. It’s pathetic.”

C'mon CJ, if that isn't negligent, I don't know what is.

Commander Jameson wrote:Who would want to be a social worker? You are damned if you take children into care and damned if you don't. Mistakes may have been made, but this sort of thing is rare. We don't know the whole story, so rather than crucifying the social services wouldn't it be better to wait for the full story rather than pandering to tabloid sensationalism?

It's the same borough as in the case of Victoria Climbie. And it's not tabloid sensationalism - unless you count all news channels as such. Are you saying all the reports are incorrect?

Another thing - the doctor who examined the baby 48 hours before his death failed to notice his broken spine and eight broken ribs. It's a quite astonishing catalogue of failure. Seemingly at every turn, people just didn't care enough to do anything about it.

Drunken_Master wrote:

Commander Jameson wrote:Who would want to be a social worker? You are damned if you take children into care and damned if you don't. Mistakes may have been made, but this sort of thing is rare. We don't know the whole story, so rather than crucifying the social services wouldn't it be better to wait for the full story rather than pandering to tabloid sensationalism?

Child protection charity Kidscape called for “heads to roll” and said: “This child was seen 60 times and yet nobody did a thing. It’s pathetic.”

C'mon CJ, if that isn't negligent, I don't know what is.

If Kidscape says that then it must be true? As for 'heads rolling', wonderful. Less social workers FTW?

Commander Jameson wrote:
If Kidscape says that then it must be true? As for 'heads rolling', wonderful. Less social workers FTW?

The Grauniad leads with this.

50 injuries, 60 visits - failures that led to the death of Baby P

They can't all be sensationalising it, can they?

It is indeed a tragic and very upsetting case. I don't think the press and media should forget that the only people to blame are the parents themselves that commited these crimes. Yes the social workers and doctors failed completely, but the only people that killed the child were the parents. Have the parents been named yet? I saw this morning that everybody else seemed to have been named but I never saw who the parents were.

I think the most worrying thing I heard on the news is that in future cases all parents should be viewed with a respectful suspicion. That is completely the wrong answer to what happened here and will only lead to more innocent parents being wrongly penalised.

Hero of Canton wrote:Also, how the hell is he allowed to retain his anonymity?

This.

It must be because of how horrific the case is, the authorities are afraid if his identity was revealed, he will be severly beaten, even killed, while he's in clink. Shame, I'd like to be locked in a room with that banana split.

And I cannot understand the mothers actions. Why she tried to cover it up? Smearing chocolate over bruises while the social worker visited?? This is awful. Heads should roll in the social, how the strawberry float can you not see anything wrong in over 60 visits.

Gandalf wrote:It must be because of how horrific the case is, the authorities are afraid if his identity was revealed, he will be severly beaten, even killed, while he's in clink. Shame, I'd like to be locked in a room with that banana split.

I've a feeling, the identity of the 'parents' will be disclosed by the tabloids. The truth will out.

Hero of Canton wrote:What kind of society are we living in where people can treat a kid like that and get away with it?

Presumably the same world in which the media repeatedly insists the greatest danger to our kids comes from 'without' ('stranger danger', online chat rooms, etc), rather than 'within' (families)... According to Newsnight last night 45 children were killed by their parents in the UK alone. Think about that. I wonder how many kids met their deaths at the hands of 'predatory paedophiles' in the UK over the same period..? Oh, and Newsnight also revealed there are well over 30,000 kids on the 'at risk register' in the UK. 'At risk' from whom? The 'dirty old man' hanging about in the park or someone closer to home? Hmmm...

Hero of Canton wrote:Sometimes I wonder what kind of world I'm bringing my son up into. Stories like this just stagger me, they really do.

It's a horrible case, but a very under reported phenomenon. The media don't like to have to admit that children are most exposed to danger - of whatever sort - from within their own families first and foremost (almost every study shows this) - they prefer the sideshow pantomimes of the likes of 'Maddie' and even the Shannon Matthews affair (until it was revealed it was, of course, the girl's own family who were involved in the whole sorry affair - and now that story's gone cold, despite the mother going on trial yesterday).

In the end, we get the society we deserve. It ain't pretty.

You may remember a few months back I posted to say the people in the house opposite me had beaten their baby to death, over the course of several months, they'd just beaten her into a worse and worse state, when she eventually died, she had two broken arms, a broken leg, jaw, about 5 broken ribs, and a cracked skull, aparently the injuries dated from early March through to May.

It was absolutely disgusting, and obviously it was very upsetting for people in the area, I rang the Sun to see if they would run the story (imo a better punishment for the banana splits that anything the courts would hand out) and they said it wasn't something they were interested in. Which makes me fear that this happens all too often and goes unreported.

Shadow wrote:You may remember a few months back I posted to say the people in the house opposite me had beaten their baby to death, over the course of several months, they'd just beaten her into a worse and worse state, when she eventually died, she had two broken arms, a broken leg, jaw, about 5 broken ribs, and a cracked skull, aparently the injuries dated from early March through to May.

It was absolutely disgusting, and obviously it was very upsetting for people in the area, I rang the Sun to see if they would run the story (imo a better punishment for the banana splits that anything the courts would hand out) and they said it wasn't something they were interested in. Which makes me fear that this happens all too often and goes unreported.

Well if its true that 45 kids died as a results of violence from their parents this year then most must go unreported, as i don't remember reading stories like that once a week.

Gandalf wrote:

Hero of Canton wrote:Also, how the hell is he allowed to retain his anonymity?

This.

It must be because of how horrific the case is, the authorities are afraid if his identity was revealed, he will be severly beaten, even killed, while he's in clink. Shame, I'd like to be locked in a room with that banana split.

He might be under 18.

Memento Mori wrote:

Gandalf wrote:

Hero of Canton wrote:Also, how the hell is he allowed to retain his anonymity?

This.

It must be because of how horrific the case is, the authorities are afraid if his identity was revealed, he will be severly beaten, even killed, while he's in clink. Shame, I'd like to be locked in a room with that banana split.

He might be under 18.

Maybe it's a celebrity, let's play guess the celeb.

Also in local news (for me) a man is charged with seriously injuring a 4 week old baby http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Dad-admits-attacking-fourweekold-daughter.4683649.jp

Yeah this is the first I heard of the case. Picked up the paper and the first few pages are just strawberry floating grim in the Metro. The babys death and the pensioner being beaten severely. F**king papers. The case is heartbreaking. I couldn't carry on reading and just put it down.