The GSCC continue to operate as ‘normal’ pending the transfer in March 2012 to the to be renamed Health Professionals Council http://www.hpc-uk.org/ – or one should say the proposed move in 2012. Many in the Community Care Blog Care Space http://www.communitycare.co.uk/carespace/forums/gscc-to-be-scrapped-health-professionals-8085.aspx#32964 have mixed feelings about it.

The GSCC gives advice on the implications of the recent announcement of their demise here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Home/ and click on big red “i” icon. In short business as usual – mmmmm.

Meanwhile the GSCC has published a number of recent outcomes from their Conduct Committee. This is a very odd one: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/435BAC0D-2BA8-493F-B815-9DD47CB9FFBC/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONHIBBERTS.pdf

Essentially the GSCC dropped the case after it was unable to convince a local authority manager to give evidence and to proceed without it would amount to hearsay. Now you would think the GSCC would have realised this before taking it to Committee.

The GSCC are in a difficult position because they cannot force either a registrant or witness to attend – they have no teeth in effect. Not helpful. And of course they have no powers over employers and the code of conduct relating to them is not worth the paper they are written on – it’s just a wish list in effect.

Whoever drew up this legislation and the employers codes needs a jolly good lesson in ‘how not to make a balls-up.’

Other recent concluded hearings include this one: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/AA176AF6-7A81-4CB7-8BD5-12FE7E710EA0/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONSIMPSON.pdf

Note the offending behaviour relates to 2008 – either this was part of the backlog or the GSCC were not previously aware of it. The naughty boy was looking at pornography on his employer’s computer.

He was suspended for two years.

Another: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/30BF47BA-8D5E-4B6B-8329-DCE583C46253/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONMAHABIR.pdf resulted in a one year suspension. This did go back to issues between 2004 – 2008 and the GSCC were made aware of his drink-drive conviction of December 2004 (after he was first registered by the GSCC) in, and I find it odd how they term it, “around 19^th November 2008;” either it was or it was not the 19^th November 2008 – what’s with this “around” business?

So exactly what were the GSCC doing between (“around)” the 19^th November 2008 and 21st July 2010?  Not a lot it would seem. The registrant had asked that his GSCC hearing be postponed as he claimed it would prejudice his Employment Tribunal, which it appears is still pending.

And the disposal by way of a one year suspension, is that proportionate especially as he did eventually cough up the details to the GSCC, albeit four years later? Wilt thinks no – far more appropriate would have been an admonishment.

However, the registrant only has himself to blame as he was not in attendance to defend himself or give evidence. With the GSCC that, as a friend would say, is like a turkey voting for an early Christmas.

Each case is worth a read – click on the links above.

The GSCC have published their latest up-coming hearings here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/

Among some interesting ones are:

http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DC31BFE1-A33D-4596-A2C9-F4925B29C6D8/0/SummaryJanjua.pdf

AND:

http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/134F01BD-EEF2-4797-92BD-3F07B424BDA3/0/SummaryNia.pdf

AND

http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F6D734C8-77A7-4D4D-B828-54CA474507A7/0/SummaryHenderson.pdf

Why does the GSCC need to get involved in this matter http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B002178D-48C2-4B2F-ADF0-D1309F474498/0/SummaryNyabunze.pdf one is left to wonder?

Wilt

Which is worse, a one year suspension or a 5 year admonishment? Does either fit the circumstances applied in each case?

It is difficult to go behind the GSCC Committee on such matters as they are charged with handing down their disposal – albeit subject to potential appeal. See the Community Care article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/07/23/114970/social-worker-banned-for-offering-client-weekend-of-ecstasy.htm

The formal notice of the GSCC findings is here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4DD0DB39-84FE-48C2-8938-42325E89D56A/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONCARNEY.pdf

And here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/9E64FE17-F80A-4A86-8F24-7536079B13A5/0/CAHILLNoticeofDecision.pdf

Let us start with the latter case, Cahill.

He takes a service user/client down to the pub, touches up her bum and offers to take her away to Paris for a dirty drug filled weekend. What a fucking Dork of the first order. Cahill is suspended for 12 months as it was essentially a one off incident. It was however probably one of the most serious of acts of professional misconduct – a breach of professional boundaries and of trust in his capacity to hold the service users right to self determination and needs as paramount.

Some might think Cahill was quite lucky to get away with just a year suspended.

In contrast, Carney who admitted the offence of harassment and was convicted as such was subsequently admonished for 5 years by the GSCC. Why 5 years for Gawd sake?

There is no doubt it was a serious offence but it was both confined to a particular set of private circumstances (does not reduce its seriousness) and limited to a small number of events. The GSCC acknowledge he was under extreme personal pressure and again emphasise an otherwise long and successful career in social care, plus it did not involve a service user.

The man admitted his offence and regrets his actions. What then, exactly was the purpose of a 5 year admonishment?

His outcome is far worse (Wilt believes) than the year long suspension by Cahill and whose offence (in professional terms at least) is the worse. Yes Carney got it wrong, yes domestic abuse (emotional in this case it seems) is a no go area and highly serious – but 5 year’s admonishment after he admitted his guilt and dealt with by the Courts. Is that proportionate? What exactly was the GSCC thinking it might achieve?

You see Cahill after a year has, as it were, done his time and moves on – there is no mark against his name on the GSCC Register and, we assume, moves on. No one is any the wiser.

Carney however does not serve his term for 5 years – instead he carries the yoke of his GSCC Registration (a public name of shame board) until 2015. We find this very odd.

Most people will experience some crisis in their life, some several and a few many. Social workers, and others, aim to help people out of crisis and hopefully develop the skills to cope with crisis better (crisis intervention theory). Generally speaking, putting a yoke around their neck (labelling – give a dog a bad name) is not the accepted best method to help achieve better outcomes.

Regrettably the GSCC has confused, yet again, ‘outcomes’ with ‘outputs.’

Pick a number, any number between 0 – 5 and you tell me what seems fitting for Carney.

Now tell me what would you hand down to Mrs C for her harassment?  Not for her a one off or limited harassment of one person over a period of eight years, but together with basket case Dune Boy James Plaskitt (ex MP) harassment  IN FACT of numerous persons who by a process of other investigations are proven innocent of any harm to her/him.   Well, we will find out when it gets to Court, with her big black files.

We think Cahill was very fortunate; Carney dealt a very poorly judged disposal and Mrs C/Plaskitt will discover in all good time the meaning of breaking the law.

Wilt

What a fucking twat: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/07/21/114947/Doncaster-social-services-bomber-jailed.htm

You see social workers are in the eyes of some legitimate targets. This twat joins the ranks of the likes of Mrs C although her brand of terrorism is (to date) a little less physically violent.

What is it of late with these Northerners roaming the towns and countryside with guns and bombs? Now the latter bloke (the “screw” bomber) might have been tipped over the edge, but the two gunmen, and those that support Moat, were/are just fucking evil.

Wilt

Gulp: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/childrens-services-blog/2010/07/marion-davis-to-gove-dismantle-the-role-of-independent-sws.html

Wilt feels an earlier than planned ‘early retirement’ might be coming on.

Actually Wilt has always believed that local authority social workers are “experts” in their own right (notwithstanding the occasional idiot) but to totally exclude the option of independents (ISW’s) in the Court system would be both unwise and unworkable. As Wilt has said many times on these pages, it is possible to reduce the number of experts and indeed to be more selective when appointing Guardians – and of course getting rid of Cafcass.

Both Guardians and ISW’s can and do make a very significant difference in terms of their much broader and greater experience. Most often ISW’s (Independent Social Workers) save money by shortening proceedings, despite Marion Davis claiming:

“Removing this role from the family justice system would not only contribute to reducing delays in care proceedings, but would also reduce costs.”

In fact as Wilt knows only too well, not infrequently ISW’s are brought in by social services because they lack either the resources or skills. Thus excluding ISW’s would cause more delay.

Very often local authority social workers are not given the “status” they rightly deserve and in that sense ISW’s are drafted in on occasions unnecessarily – that is because inevitably birth parents (etc) demand another opinion and Guardians, who should in appropriate cases challenge, fail to resist the instruction of an ISW. Judges depend greatly on their Guardians – who are hopefully rooted into reality. On occasions Wilt has thought that his appointments were unnecessary – the evidence was already there?

On the other hand, ISW’s play a vital role, not just in terms of expertise and to overcome a lack of resources in the local authority, but also because many social workers actually welcome it, and regrettably on occasions because local authorities are quite simply incompetent.

Yes reduce the number of experts, and Guardians can be more robust in this regard, but Marion Davis has, it seems, attacked the ISW outright as a waste of money. That is not very clever, unwise and the next time her authority is looking for an expert they may just say, “No thanks.”

Now where was it Marion Davis works – must add it to the Dork list.

Wilt

One less social worker from the profession: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/06/03/114636/disabilities-worker-jailed-for-stealing-19000-from-client.htm and jolly good ridden to him too – just the kind of person the profession does not need.

One wonders how long the GSCC will take to remove him from the register. No rush one supposes but an easy task for the Conduct Team one can imagine.

Wilt

It was nice up in North Wales just chilling out after a week overseas working. Weather was brilliant and Salty Dog went for a paddle in the bay. Proper cider, too!

Meanwhile at the House Dave the man did his first PMQs today and absent was various faces from all sides. Particularly notable was the absence of basket case Plaskitt – twat. Cameron did rather well, we think – mind you Harriett Harman as the stand in opposition leader is not exactly a huge challenge.

Of course also absent from the front bench was a certain Mr Laws – otherwise a thieving bastard whatever excuses he might make. There is no doubt though that he is a loss to the Government. His replacement looks like a spotty teenager that lives here in the village – it is probably Wilt just getting older.

In the high pay disclosures why is Wilt not surprised that Behan and that utter fucking Dork Christine Gilbert (Ofsted) are being paid more than the PM: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/06/01/114622/behan-and-gilbert-among-whitehalls-top-earners.htm

And of course Ofsted and a whole host of quango are up for review, especially Ofsted: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/06/02/114630/ofsteds-inspection-criteria-to-be-reviewed-by-bureaucracy-tsar.htm

Thinking of going to work in Doncaster: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jun/02/eric-pickles-doncaster-mayor

We suggest not just yet but Wilt will be offering his services to the hit squad sent in by our man Eric.

Wilt is around for a few days before flying off again to his ever growing contract work offshore – and it aint an oil rig. Only a few days away this next time, but various other trips are planned for the summer, autumn and indeed the New Year. Good money too.

The air miles are totting up too – and you know because flights are funded by my contractors, Wilt will use the air miles to obtain free flights for business trips. We do not use such perks to line our own pockets but instead feed it back to the contractor. That is what a reasonable person does. We wonder what MPs do with their air miles?

Who will keep Regulator Watch warm and cosy in my absence? Why of course Mrs C – she keeps visiting several times a day. Obviously she does not have enough to do. More to the point she does not earn her wages and wastes public funds as if they were a bottomless pit.

Well, at least Behan can sleep well at night on his salary and no doubt has fond memories of, nicely, telling Plaskitt and Mrs C to fuck off. We think it was him that signed those rather large cheques paying out compensation to those people Mrs C and Plaskitt harassed. They too sleep very well, comfortably and with a clear conscience – unlike Mrs C.

Life is good for those who work for it.

Wilt

In a matter close to Wilt’s heart (and his wallet) Community Care report on the fiasco with the LSC (Legal Services Commission). See article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/05/05/114425/lawyers-hit-out-at-court-fee-cap-on-social-workers.htm

Another article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/05/04/114412/cut-in-independent-court-report-fees-imperil-expert-input.htm

This has been going on for months – it’s an effort to restrict the ever growing public law court costs in child care cases. Essentially reducing the costs paid out in expenses to expert witnesses in preparing reports and in giving expert evidence. However it is restricted to reducing the costs of social workers specifically, as distinct from other experts such as psychologists/psychiatrists etc., etc.

Now Wilt, even though this work is the backbone (although not exclusive) of his business, has mixed feelings.

YES, all budgets need cutting back, and in my opinion far too many experts are engaged and not always successfully, Dr David Southall being a prime example http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8661639.stm

But why single out social work experts? Use them less is my answer, not cap their fees – but of course the LSC aint got any control over that.

And it is true, very experienced and competent experts will simply “fade away” and do something else – no doubt the LSC will have factored that scenario into their equation – I would as a business person, managing a budget.

The overall problem lies with the Children Act. The so called “charter for children” (as it was hailed) was nothing remotely resembling anything concerning children or putting their needs as “paramount.” The pecking order is as follows:

i)             Lawyers

ii)            Children’s guardians

iii)           Expert witnesses

iv)           Parents

v)            Children

Court proceedings involving children is big, big money. Utterly hopeless cases are examined to such a degree that is bewildering – however justice has to be done and be seen to be done, but not before the lawyers, guardians and experts have taken their (several) pounds of flesh in fees, and yes sometimes very high fees – you ever seen a poor solicitor?

If the Act is to do justice to children, it needs a massive overhaul. Do not get me wrong, there are some excellent lawyers, very sound guardians, very competent experts and some brilliant magistrates/judges – between them they resolve some highly complex cases, and in others cut through the crap and get to the point.

Expert social workers are sometimes necessary because, we know, some local authorities (not necessarily their social work staff) are utter crap. But folk can we please also recognise some local authority social workers (because of or despite of their organisation) are experts in their own right – yes there are indeed good social workers, and good organisations. It should not, as is common practice, to require an independent social worker to confirm this.

The simple message is – reduce demand on experts and do not cap fees. How that is done?  Change the legislation.

Community Care reported earlier here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/03/16/114063/court-fees-insult-to-independent-social-workers.htm

Wilt being both an “expert” witness (I prefer the term professional witness) and Independent Children’s Guardian has some insight into these matters. How many social workers, for Gawd sake, does it take to change a light bulb or indeed resolve a court matter – typically there is the local authority social worker (even several in some cases), possibly an “expert” social worker and then a children’s guardian.

Wilt is of limited ability but even he can count – that accounts for a minimum of three, and very possibly more, social workers per case.

There is already an expert in the proceedings – they are called a Children’s Guardian. Does it really need several more social workers?

Wilt

According to several reports to Wilt Mrs C has also been busy, talking to the BBC, ITN News and the Mirror Group about her woes. A certain Salop person reported a visit on their website from ITN and the Mirror Group – not by any means by accident. He also reports certain persons in Oxon had similar visits to their website (BBC/ITN) – the person in Salop is disappointed he had no visit from the BBC!

By some very strange coincidence Regulator Watch has had visits from all three! Excellent, we love it. Bring it on.

What fucking story is she now promulgating, apart from “I am a victim” and “people are out to get me”? No doubt she claims she is “misunderstood, misrepresented and people keep saying things about me. I am a solicitor you know”, as she frequently and (FRAUDUENTLY) claims. We like the word “fraud” as it is so synonymous with Mrs C.

Munchausen Syndrome is a serious condition – it means you staying up all night and spending all day on tasks associated with promoting victim status for the sufferer. Never mind fostering, children, family, doing work  or generally having a normal life – in this case Mrs Fax is faxing, emailing, surfing the net, phoning anyone who is willing to hear from her – not many anymore.

She is a spent cause; she is a “dead parrot” in another scenario and a very, very sad case. Very sad indeed, and very desperate! Her health and that of her family, those she is meant to care for her so called career will be suffering, and if she persists will suffer even more as she and her pet (no longer) MP fail consistently to get even a fingernail hold on her desperate, stale and fraudulent claims.

Bully Girl Mrs C is fast becoming a total non-entity. She digging deeper down that dark hole and a hollow voice cries out – “hello!” Sadly no one listens, no one wants to hear her FALSE cries of despair and victimisation. The truth is that all those agencies, press, local authorities, the Milk Marketing Board and quango have now for a long time “sorted” Mrs C into the category of a “minor irritation.”

It is not nice being in a dark hole – it is damp, dark and rather restricted. Putting yourself in that dark hole is just plain stupid. Some people however just cannot help it.

Dit………dit……….dit…….dot….dot……..dot etc., etc there is more news coming in – oooooooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrr Mrs C. Did she really do that!? Gawd forbid, Gawd help her.

Wilt

Oh dear, Mrs Shoesmith! And I do mean oh dear because it will be a blow to her and Wilt had hoped (and predicted) she would win this case. Obviously Wilt was wrong, but only technically. Technically the judgement was on a narrow and limited aspect of the case in accordance with the limited scope of the Court to judge.

It is quite clear the Judge was troubled and indicated that the Employment Tribunal would have a much wider brief – and he has indicated where, had he been able, the Tribunal could rightly question Haringey, Ofsted and Ed Ferkin Balls. All the main broadsheets (Guardian, Times & telegraph) reported on the matter as did community care, and in their latest post on the matter summarise where things are left:  http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/04/27/114382/implications-of-verdict-for-ed-balls-haringey-shoesmith.htm

One correspondent (to Regulator Watch) has also highlighted this article: http://www.clearlyhenderson.co.uk/uncategorized/sharon-shoesmith/

Meanwhile, Brick who has also been away on a break, has posted on Wall this article: http://wallofbrick.wordpress.com/2010/04/27/shoesmith-ofsted-and-the-obligation-of-candour/

One thing I think all are certain about, this is not a closed case. And in a further article: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/04/27/114367/ofsted-faces-legal-probe-over-shoesmith-case.htm Ofsted aint free of yet further criticism, nor Ed Balls.

Meanwhile, on an unrelated matter Ed Ferkin Balls http://wallofbrick.wordpress.com/2010/04/26/balls-phone/ would rather risk the life of his kids, himself/wife and others by using his phone in the car – utter fucking Dork.

Wilt

BASW are back in the news again: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/04/21/114332/tim-chittleburgh-seeks-re-election-as-basw-chair.htm

Its chairman is throwing his two pennies into the debacle over the social work college, whilst others in BASW are considering a vote of no confidence in the chairman over allegations relating to his business affairs. In turn he has made a police complaint of harassment – now that scenario reminds me of something! Oh yes, I remember, Mrs C was warned by the police, in writing, to desist from her repetitive complaints and bad mouthing certain people. She tries to keep that quiet.

Anyway, back to BASW – what a fucking mess and a disgrace. As for Tim Chittleburgh, who knows where that story is going.

What would Lewis Carroll make of it all? See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweedledum_and_Tweedledee

Wilt (from his desk in Malta)