Files gathering dust...................

There are two new judgements published by the Care Standards Tribunal (CST) and three new cases listed by the GSCC for April.

Of the two CSCT http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/ cases it includes that of Jacinta Hofstetter who is something of a notable GSCC case as can be illustrated in the very complex, detailed and rather lengthy judgement published by the CST: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1074

It is worth reading and although both Wilt and others are highly critical of the GSCC it does make it clear that the regulator did on this occasion not only get it right but bend over backwards to do so – the CST are usually spot-on.

Supporters of Jacinta have posted previously their concerns about her treatment at the hands of Brent Council and in particular the GSCC.

Read, and make up your own minds.

In the second CST case it is Jayne Sedgewick  v The Care Council For Wales (CCW). She is suspended primarily for her activities as a foster parent although it is her social work role that is pending a judgement by a full Conduct Hearing by the CCW.

Presently she is suspended from the social care register and Sedgewick has appealed against this. She has already had her registration removed as a foster parent and no longer employed. The criminal proceedings against her were however dropped.

Here is an extract from the judgement:

“Mrs Sedgewick is a registered social worker and also a foster carer working for an independent agency. In 2006 she and her husband fostered a 15 year old girl (A). Whilst in their care A entered into a relationship with an older man aged 19. It is alleged that Mrs Sedgewick knew about this and indeed allowed the boy to sleep with A at their house. She did not discuss this relationship with the childs social worker nor with her own support worker. As a result of this relationship A became pregnant. It is further alleged that on an occasion in March 2006 Mrs Sedgewick and A went on a shopping trip to Telford and stayed overnight in a Hotel. During the course of the evening it is alleged that Mrs Sedgewicke became drunk, allowed A to drink, became involved with a group of men, claimed A was her stepdaughter and aged 18 and allowed her to go to one of the men’s room where sexual activity took place. It is further alleged that when this matter came out she attempted to influence the man involved to lie about the evening.”

These of course are allegations at present time but if they prove to be correct then she must be listed as about the most dangerous of social workers (and former foster carer) in the UK. Dork would not be sufficiently expletive or descriptive – total fucking idiot comes close to it but I think I will settle on fucking twat.

Why is this woman still on the Register? Again the ever sensible CST give a clue:

“It appears to us given the gravity of the allegations and the matters we have outlined above that continued suspension is appropriate and we therefore dismiss the appeal. We have had cause previously to raise questions about the delay in bringing cases to hearing and the concomitant length of suspensions imposed by the Care Councils. In this case the effect of delay is extreme in that pending a final determination Mrs Sedgewick is actually free to work as a social worker from 31 March as the two year maximum period of suspension will have passed. This cannot be in the public interest. We note the particular difficulties of this case, firstly the criminal proceedings and the complications therein and latterly the hearings brought by her employer and the fostering agency. Nonetheless there is a tendency for the Care Council(s) to treat enquiries sequentially and allow other procedures to take place before they make their own enquiries. We would urge upon them a more proactive approach, particularly in cases like this when time limits are involved.”



In other words Care Council for Wales (CCW), get off your fucking arse and sort it out – twats. What is wrong with these people?

The full judgement can be found here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1075

Meanwhile recently concluded GSCC case matters are listed here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/recently_concluded_hearings/

Again some interesting reading, for those junkies like me.

The upcoming cases are listed here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/

There is an error on the page – the first case will not load-up after clicking on it and so the details are unknown.

In the two other cases http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6A16FCE1-0478-4903-9DDD-FE9D9D5C978B/0/InformationSMITHB.pdf it involves alleged theft of goods and services from a children’s home and in the second casehttp://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/43835DE4-21D7-4CAE-AE8C-8887883E6AC9/0/InformationSALISBURY.pdf falsification of case records (purporting to make visits to children/families).

These are of course allegations – the cases are yet to be proved.

Wilt

One.............

One (yes I am “one”) never really thought that the employers code of practice (GSCC) would ever be implemented as a binding code, as Balls promised. It would be just too costly as employers (both public and private/voluntary) would actually have to be accountable rather than blame the frontline staff even though they have at times been shat on from a great height i.e. Lisa Arthurworrey.

Community Care report here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/04/01/114206/directors-reject-legally-binding-employers-code-of-practice.htm

Costly too as shortfalls in provision or resources (or more often totally disorganised/wasted resources) would have to be addressed if employers were to avoid being sanctioned.

Anyway, what sanction would one bring – sack the Leader of the Council? Tell them off? Give the Chief Executive a strong disapproving look? Let Ed Balls loose on them?

And who would make these judgements – the GSCC. That is probably the biggest stumbling block of all, as they cannot get their own act together. The bigger issue however is savings – big budget savings. Normally Brown and Balls (the Chancellor who never was) will throw money at anything (in the public sector) but even they realise there is no money left in the piggy bank – in fact it has a huge IOU stuffed inside.

Pigs will fly or a blue moon will appear well before the GSCC code for employers becomes statutory.

Nice idea, but kicked into the long grass comes to mind.

And as for the review of the codes of practice - Salty Dog will have earned their driving licence before that is complete!

Someone has to get me home from the pub – taxis are expensive you know.

Wilt (One)