Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Recommended Posts

I kind of Pitied him because I can't imagine any normal (and I use that term in comparison to the thick, pond life scum who he filmed abusing) seeing that and not wanting to intervene.

 

I'm sure he was sold "the greater good" story by the BBC and maybe they'll come good. Hopefully the evidence supplied is so concrete (more so then just one shift, and inclusive of the senior nurses to indicate acceptance of this abuse) that those involved will serve time. Surely to fucking god they will have to

 

I hope so, and I'd imagine they might in this instance because it's been on the telly. Make no mistake though, if that evidence had been shown to company superiors and hadn't been on TV, they'd just suspend the staff and quietly let them go because they wouldn't want their image tarnished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to mention that. I'm guessing that the more evidence they had the easier it would be to take action? If they only had one instance of abuse on camera it would have been easier for the company and regulator to dismiss.

 

He could at least have tried to step in. He had more than enough evidence. If you were walking down the street and saw an adult beating up a child, you wouldn't leave them to do more damage just because there would be a better chance of convicting the attacker. I don't know how he could have gone back filming day after day for 5 whole weeks until he had enough footage to make a 1 hour programme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He could at least have tried to step in. He had more than enough evidence. If you were walking down the street and saw an adult beating up a child, you wouldn't leave them to do more damage just because there would be a better chance of convicting the attacker. I don't know how he could have gone back filming day after day for 5 whole weeks until he had enough footage to make a 1 hour programme.

 

Personally I would have found it impossible not to intervene however I don't think it was his place to do so. He was there to highlight the abuse, not stop it. I'm sure he found it incredibly difficult not to step in and I'm astonished at the level of restraint he showed when it was obviously taking a toll on him. As Section says it was a brilliant piece of journalism that has lead to the arrests of four of the perpetrators and hopefully some close scrutiny of the regulator as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope so, and I'd imagine they might in this instance because it's been on the telly. Make no mistake though, if that evidence had been shown to company superiors and hadn't been on TV, they'd just suspend the staff and quietly let them go because they wouldn't want their image tarnished.

 

I have no doubt that would've happened. The answers the manager and that fella from the CQC gave were laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of Pitied him because I can't imagine any normal (and I use that term in comparison to the thick, pond life scum who he filmed abusing) seeing that and not wanting to intervene.

 

I'd imagine it's the same moral quandary documentary makers have faced from the liberation of concentration camps to countless natural disasters, do you help out or hope your film has a greater resonance. I'm sure the guy thought of quitting but the lesser material he had the easier it would have been swept under the carpet as 'one bad apple'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd imagine it's the same moral quandary documentary makers have faced from the liberation of concentration camps to countless natural disasters, do you help out or hope your film has a greater resonance. I'm sure the guy thought of quitting but the lesser material he had the easier it would have been swept under the carpet as 'one bad apple'.

 

This is what I hope was going through his mind. It must've been hard to take watching that day in day out. Being present but not being able to intervene.

 

I totally see what SKI was saying when she said she thought Panorama was complicit in the abuse by lack of action but I can see the logic of gaining as much information as possible before raising it to the authorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He could at least have tried to step in. He had more than enough evidence. If you were walking down the street and saw an adult beating up a child, you wouldn't leave them to do more damage just because there would be a better chance of convicting the attacker. I don't know how he could have gone back filming day after day for 5 whole weeks until he had enough footage to make a 1 hour programme.
Think of it as any police under cover operation Liz. They see crimes being committed right in front of their eye's but hold back from outing themselves to build a case and catch more fish.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think of it as any police under cover operation Liz. They see crimes being committed right in front of their eye's but hold back from outing themselves to build a case and catch more fish.

 

I do understand that, but I still reckon there is a difference between a drug dealer or an MP offering questions for cash, and the systematic abuse of a vulnerable person.

 

If a child was being abused, you wouldn't put them back in that environment and leave them to be beaten or raped daily for weeks on end just so you had a stronger case. Removing these poor buggers from that environment should have been an emergency, so severe was the physical and mental torture they were receiving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do understand that, but I still reckon there is a difference between a drug dealer or an MP offering questions for cash, and the systematic abuse of a vulnerable person.

 

If a child was being abused, you wouldn't put them back in that environment and leave them to be beaten or raped daily for weeks on end just so you had a stronger case. Removing these poor buggers from that environment should have been an emergency, so severe was the physical and mental torture they were receiving.

 

I haven't seen the programme, but I think they most likely have to make sure that the footage isn't just dismissed as one-offs. If you are proving stuff is systematic, then there has to be plenty of it unfortunately. This balance must be the hardest part of being an investigative reporter, having to think of the bigger picture. same when they are reporting famine etc. Like I said though, I haven't seen it. I am glad I haven't to be honest as it sounds awful.

 

i was a care assistant at a nursing home and some of the staff there were pond life. i never saw any physical abuse, but the way some of them spoke to the patients was bad. I reported a few of them and nothing was done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He could at least have tried to step in. He had more than enough evidence. If you were walking down the street and saw an adult beating up a child, you wouldn't leave them to do more damage just because there would be a better chance of convicting the attacker. I don't know how he could have gone back filming day after day for 5 whole weeks until he had enough footage to make a 1 hour programme.

 

It's called "being a documentary film-maker". Which is his job.

 

If everyone thought like that we'd have no documentaries. We'd have no images of war. We'd have no trials for war criminals. We'd have no media reporting in any form.

 

It's not always an easy choice. I suspect Kevin Carter killed himself for many reasons, but one of them would have been so he didn't have to answer the same fucking question about a million times "How could you not step in and save that little girl from the vulture?"

 

Fact is, many of these people DO get involved. But the shot often comes first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The above is the same point I was about to make, using the same example of Kevin Carter. Another example, in a slighty different way, is Jamie Oliver gassing the hatchlings. As high unpalatable as the scenario may be, sometimes you have to let it play out. Despite me saying this, could I put myself in the same situation and just stand and watch? No is the answer. If it involved somebody I knew, such a family or friends? Definitely not. I'd be cracking heads instead.

 

Whether we like it or not, the message will not get through to the majority unless it's really rammed home. Sometimes the only way to do that is to show the very worst. It's sad but it's true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The above is the same point I was about to make, using the same example of Kevin Carter.

 

 

It is sad but true, which is why I tried to introduce a bit of levity by including a joke about why Kevin Carter may have killed himself. Although it wasn't very funny.

 

But I defy anyone to crack a decent gag about Kevin Carter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's called "being a documentary film-maker". Which is his job.

 

If everyone thought like that we'd have no documentaries. We'd have no images of war. We'd have no trials for war criminals. We'd have no media reporting in any form.

 

It's not always an easy choice. I suspect Kevin Carter killed himself for many reasons, but one of them would have been so he didn't have to answer the same fucking question about a million times "How could you not step in and save that little girl from the vulture?"

 

Fact is, many of these people DO get involved. But the shot often comes first.

 

In the case of that twat he waited ages for his shot.

 

He did the right thing topping himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is sad but true, which is why I tried to introduce a bit of levity by including a joke about why Kevin Carter may have killed himself. Although it wasn't very funny.

 

But I defy anyone to crack a decent gag about Kevin Carter.

 

What's the difference between Kevin Carter and the vulture?

 

Wings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As awful as that a abuse was I do not particular blame those directly responsible. In my opinion the managers and senior nursing staff should take the brunt of responsibility for the treatment of the patients.

 

Placing untrained, non qualified and unsuitable staff into a position where they are expected to deal with patients with such high and specific needs was always going to end in a situation like this. The management were informed of the situation and did nothing about it.

 

I have no medical training and have never worked in such an environment. It does not take too much of a leap in imagination to think that if I was employed in that place, after a bit my behaviour would begin to resemble the norm. The minute any allegations were made management should have investigated it. Removed the perpetrators and brought in professional staff.

But that would cost money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As awful as that a abuse was I do not particular blame those directly responsible. In my opinion the managers and senior nursing staff should take the brunt of responsibility for the treatment of the patients.

 

Placing untrained, non qualified and unsuitable staff into a position where they are expected to deal with patients with such high and specific needs was always going to end in a situation like this. The management were informed of the situation and did nothing about it.

 

I have no medical training and have never worked in such an environment. It does not take too much of a leap in imagination to think that if I was employed in that place, after a bit my behaviour would begin to resemble the norm. The minute any allegations were made management should have investigated it. Removed the perpetrators and brought in professional staff.

But that would cost money.

 

 

Completely disagree mate.

 

They weren't just out of their depth, they were actively tormenting the patients and delighting in their suffering. The managers and 'the system' should take some of the blame of course, but if I hired someone to care for someone, I wouldn't expect them to practice wrestling moves on that person or poke them in the eye, and I'd hopefully be justified in not expecting them to either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My old dear is a social worker and my brother is a carer. We watched it together last night, i can honestly say i have never seen my brother cry but i swear he had tears running down his face watching the reaction on Simone's parents. Utterly shocking, I went to bed feeling sick. As im sure did the rest of the nation. Fucking disgraceful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not had a chance to read this thread yet, I wanted to get on here last night but was watching the programme with Terry Bryan (the nurse on the programme) and some of the families.

 

I am meant to keep this quiet but don't give a shit anymore.

 

I am the whistleblower who contacted the BBC. I worked at that shithole of a 'hospital' for 3 months and walked out in disgust after my numerous complaints were ignored. I complained internally and through the CQC, I was ignored and received the same treatment as Terry.

 

As I still work in the industry and hope to remain working in it the BBC used terry instead of myself as believe it or not whistleblowers are still frowned upon.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
I've not had a chance to read this thread yet, I wanted to get on here last night but was watching the programme with Terry Bryan (the nurse on the programme) and some of the families.

 

I am meant to keep this quiet but don't give a shit anymore.

 

I am the whistleblower who contacted the BBC. I worked at that shithole of a 'hospital' for 3 months and walked out in disgust after my numerous complaints were ignored. I complained internally and through the CQC, I was ignored and received the same treatment as Terry.

 

As I still work in the industry and hope to remain working in it the BBC used terry instead of myself as believe it or not whistleblowers are still frowned upon.

 

Well in, Col. Not watched it yet, but it sounds like a living nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well in, Col. Not watched it yet, but it sounds like a living nightmare.

 

Like you wouldn't believe mate.

 

The process of making this film was incredibly hard and very long. I can not speak highly enough of the beeb (or thank them enough), they wre absolutely fantastic and professional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not had a chance to read this thread yet, I wanted to get on here last night but was watching the programme with Terry Bryan (the nurse on the programme) and some of the families.

 

I am meant to keep this quiet but don't give a shit anymore.

 

I am the whistleblower who contacted the BBC. I worked at that shithole of a 'hospital' for 3 months and walked out in disgust after my numerous complaints were ignored. I complained internally and through the CQC, I was ignored and received the same treatment as Terry.

 

As I still work in the industry and hope to remain working in it the BBC used terry instead of myself as believe it or not whistleblowers are still frowned upon.

 

 

I thought you were mighty keen that everyone should see this, so much so that I very nearly made a light-hearted post last week asking if you had a personal interest in the programme! Many a true word and all that.

 

Fair play for what you did. I am a firm believer that when authorities won't take the action they should, grassing them up to the media is the way to go. If I ran an organisation, I would prefer to have people who were principled enough to blow a whistle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...