Inconsistent.................

The regulators have been busy again. The Care Council for Wales (CCW) case was something of a no brainer: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/04/22/114349/Children39s-worker-struck-off-for-meat-cleaver-attack-on.htm

Generally a meat cleaver is not a social work tool, not of course that Wilt is prejudiced against social workers with meat cleavers – he is more scared of them, or indeed anyone who has a meat cleaver.

As it was such an easy case to analyse (all the work was done by the police and the employer) there was little time lost in CCW arriving at its judgement.

Meanwhile the General Social Care Council (GSCC) has taken a little longer (3 years) to impose an i8 month sanction in this case: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/04/22/114341/social-worker-admonished-for-putting-vulnerable-adult-at-risk.htm

Personally, I think 18 months is rather disproportionate and especially after the woman admitted her error and it was a professional error three years ago. What exactly does this 18 month admonishment achieve? A far shorter admonishment or even a no sanction outcome could be justified.

Readers may remember this case: http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/2009/08/mooo/ and more particularly this article: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/08/13/112353/gscc-criticised-for-lamentable-delay-in-bringing-conduct-case.htm

Now the GSCC conduct committee did qualify their reason not to make a sanction by stating:

“However, it said this was an isolated incident in a 25-year career and no service user was put at risk or harmed by McLauchlan's actions, making a sanction unnecessary.”

That is a reasonable point, but it still does not explain the very different outcomes of disposal in the two cases. Another Care Standards Tribunal matter, perhaps?

Perhaps the GSCC is slipping into old ways again?

Wilt (from his desk in Malta)