- Joined
- 7 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 8,836
- Reaction score
- 1,230
- Country
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aimed-vulnerable-patients-care-home-hell.html
Good job I'm not a judge.
Good job I'm not a judge.
Can you get low life scum worse than this ?
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
Sponsored Links
That's what you get when you put profits before care...
Minimum wage monkeys let loose on vulnerable people whilst the bosses make their millions..
Maybe G4S will now put in a lower bid...
how true....the pay for these workers is really at the bottom end of the scale and that is why they have to rely on the type of people they employ...I know its still not right but if these companys put care before profit and upped the wages you will get decent employees but this is just a reflection of the whole care system in the country
J
joinerjohn
As a Dignity in Care Champion, I too found the behaviour of these people abhorrent in the extreme.
I do hope people don't tar all care homes with the same brush though, as not all care homes are the same. Yes wages are low in the care sector in general, but I think it takes a special type of person to work within the care sector.
What's needed is something with a bit more teeth than the CQC. Some body that will set standards of care and administer them fully. The CQC don't even recommend a minimum staff/ resident ratio, but state a vague "Adequate or appropriate ratio of staff /residents" (whatever that means) (could even mean 2 carers per 20 residents , for all I or they, know)
I do hope people don't tar all care homes with the same brush though, as not all care homes are the same. Yes wages are low in the care sector in general, but I think it takes a special type of person to work within the care sector.
What's needed is something with a bit more teeth than the CQC. Some body that will set standards of care and administer them fully. The CQC don't even recommend a minimum staff/ resident ratio, but state a vague "Adequate or appropriate ratio of staff /residents" (whatever that means) (could even mean 2 carers per 20 residents , for all I or they, know)
Sponsored Links
Even the best care homes pay not much more than average wage, they do around this anyway!
Its about vetting staff better...did any of these people have a CRB done?
If I was a family member of one of those victims.....I dont think I would be able to stay calm.......people like that make me sick!
Its about vetting staff better...did any of these people have a CRB done?
If I was a family member of one of those victims.....I dont think I would be able to stay calm.......people like that make me sick!
Yes, I am sure this all would have been avoided with a few bit's of paper and some more bureaucracy.
And of course if low wages is the cause (I don't think so), I am sure also that all those extra checks and licenses wouldn't possibly mean more money for admin and less for the "frontline".
I mean, look at how labours target driven culture improved the NHS.....
Yes, what we need is more targets and checks and bits of paper
Would that be the bit of paper that Ian huntley would have been able to obtain?
And of course if low wages is the cause (I don't think so), I am sure also that all those extra checks and licenses wouldn't possibly mean more money for admin and less for the "frontline".
I mean, look at how labours target driven culture improved the NHS.....
Yes, what we need is more targets and checks and bits of paper
Would that be the bit of paper that Ian huntley would have been able to obtain?
Yes, I am sure this all would have been avoided with a few bit's of paper and some more bureaucracy.
And of course if low wages is the cause (I don't think so), I am sure also that all those extra checks and licenses wouldn't possibly mean more money for admin and less for the "frontline".
I mean, look at how labours target driven culture improved the NHS.....
Yes, what we need is more targets and checks and bits of paper
Would that be the bit of paper that Ian huntley would have been able to obtain?
Yes....its also the bit of paper that has stopped 1000's of other lunatics getting jobs in the care industry.
Although Ian Huntely did apply for a CRB under the name Ian Nixon, so maybe that contributed to him slipping the net.
You do of course have evidence to show before and after stats for CRB checks, and the fall in care abuse?
You wouldn't be doing a joe-90 and be talking out of your bum?
Huntley had NO previous convictions prior to him getting the job as a caretaker.
He would have passed a CRB, no question about it.
I've not seen anything which suggests that those involved in this care home abuse have previous convictions - so CRB wouldn't have barred them out either.
It would, however, barred out anyone with a 20 year old conviction for shoplifting from back when they were little more than a kid. Or anyone who had worked with disturbed kids in the past and had false allegations made against them - something which happens every week.
CRB is a sledgehammer being used to crack a nut, and by denying large numbers of people with skills and empathy the chance to enjoy a fulfilling career has opened up those jobs to any old Tom, Dick or Harry off the street. And also any Pole or Hungarian with a rap sheet for abuse as long as your arm back home, but a clean record so far here.
He would have passed a CRB, no question about it.
I've not seen anything which suggests that those involved in this care home abuse have previous convictions - so CRB wouldn't have barred them out either.
It would, however, barred out anyone with a 20 year old conviction for shoplifting from back when they were little more than a kid. Or anyone who had worked with disturbed kids in the past and had false allegations made against them - something which happens every week.
CRB is a sledgehammer being used to crack a nut, and by denying large numbers of people with skills and empathy the chance to enjoy a fulfilling career has opened up those jobs to any old Tom, Dick or Harry off the street. And also any Pole or Hungarian with a rap sheet for abuse as long as your arm back home, but a clean record so far here.
Paedophiles, violent thugs and drug dealers were among more than 4,000 offenders who applied to become teachers last year despite having almost 10,000 criminal convictions between them. These included more than 50 sex offences, 11 for arson, and two for making threats to kill. Some 830 violent offences were highlighted overall, along with more than 550 drugs offences and 11 for causing death by reckless driving.
Some 4,735 of the 287,353 applicants to become teachers in 2010 had a total of 11,327 offences between them, including 71 sex offences, 77 child sex offences, 801 violent offences and 770 drugs offences
The sex offences included four indecent assaults on children, 13 on adults, eight acts of gross indecency, 12 of indecent exposure and 19 involving prostitution
The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) said that to date checks had helped stop more than 130,000 unsuitable people from working with children and many of the offences would lead to an automatic ban on the offenders becoming teachers.
Although that applies to people applying to be teachers, it does show that CRB, and advanced CRB checks work. Downside is, many people have been branded a criminal because of small crimes committed years back, so it does need a bit of an overhaul.
He had a conviction of burgalry, which would have stopped him getting the job if the CRB was done properly, although he did give a false name for it.
J
joinerjohn
The CRB check is mandatory, for all people working with children and Adults at risk. The big failing is it simply can't pick up anyone who doesn't have a criminal conviction in the previous few months , prior to the check.
Mine last year picked up my drink drive conviction almost 5 yrs ago and a minor conviction from almost 30 yrs ago (none of which would stop me working with adults at risk)
What it fails to find though, is people with previous convictions in other countries, outside the EU (and it doesn't automatically find those with convictions within the EU)
Of course there are those who would abuse (and it can take many forms, from sexual, to physical, to financial, and everything in between), who have yet to be caught or convicted. for which I don't believe any system in the world could detect.
Mine last year picked up my drink drive conviction almost 5 yrs ago and a minor conviction from almost 30 yrs ago (none of which would stop me working with adults at risk)
What it fails to find though, is people with previous convictions in other countries, outside the EU (and it doesn't automatically find those with convictions within the EU)
Of course there are those who would abuse (and it can take many forms, from sexual, to physical, to financial, and everything in between), who have yet to be caught or convicted. for which I don't believe any system in the world could detect.
So what do people want instead of CRB's, telepathy? If you don't already have a record then no one will ever be able to tell if people will commit a crime after being given a job. They are the only thing we have to check somebodies previous criminal behavior. They are not perfect but they are better than nothing. Is the other option to have someone like a behavioral psychologist at every interview? People would still slip through the net. Nothing is 100% effective!
J
joinerjohn
Dunno Vibro, but it just seems from some of the posts here that people realise the limitations of the CRB check. Perhaps if the employer was made liable for the cost of the CRB check, they could then filter out unsuitable people at the interview stage. When I applied for my present job, I had to pay for the CRB check myself.
I see from reading previous posts, that someone actually thinks a previous conviction for shoplifting , would stop someone from working in the care industry. This simply isn't the case with the CRB check. The only previous convictions , prospective employers are interested in, are convictions for violent offences and convictions for abuse, etc. I'm sure there are many mature people, who have convictions dating from their teenage years, for minor offences, and have not been barred from working, because of some skeleton in the cupboard, in the care industry.
I have found at the home I work in, that older, more mature people, are the ones who possess the necessary empathy , and life skills to help vulnerable adults.
I must admit however, that in my experience of the care industry (and this includes NHS hospitals) , that staff seem to be driven by paperwork these days. The way I look at it, an hour spent filling in paperwork, is an hour less spent caring for the people in our charge. (and I'm just the maintenance man, but you'd be surprised at the amount of paperwork I have to fill in each week)
I see from reading previous posts, that someone actually thinks a previous conviction for shoplifting , would stop someone from working in the care industry. This simply isn't the case with the CRB check. The only previous convictions , prospective employers are interested in, are convictions for violent offences and convictions for abuse, etc. I'm sure there are many mature people, who have convictions dating from their teenage years, for minor offences, and have not been barred from working, because of some skeleton in the cupboard, in the care industry.
I have found at the home I work in, that older, more mature people, are the ones who possess the necessary empathy , and life skills to help vulnerable adults.
I must admit however, that in my experience of the care industry (and this includes NHS hospitals) , that staff seem to be driven by paperwork these days. The way I look at it, an hour spent filling in paperwork, is an hour less spent caring for the people in our charge. (and I'm just the maintenance man, but you'd be surprised at the amount of paperwork I have to fill in each week)
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- Locked
- Lincsbodger
- General Discussion
