nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

the Cork teen tragedy

thebaz

The media are all over this case hammering the HSE, but for once surely the mother (or father ) should take responsibility not the State - his mother put him in care at 9 , didnt see him for 6 months prior to his death - but the State/HSE tried to house him wherever possible including at Jurys hotel , at an employees expense - it is a tragedy and I don't know all the facts but from whats given, surely the media and family should show a little more dignity on what seams an incredibly tough life , and stop blaming the state for this one

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/a-beautiful-affectionate-boy-2270963.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

caseyann

thebaz wrote: »

he discharged himself against Doctors advice

I know its wrong,but this touches close to home right here

i lost a family memember and he signed himself out of hospital a week previous to dying.They knew something wrong but couldnt make him stay,he would have been alive today if only they could have made him stay.I wish they could have

Poor kid

dying with no one there for him

thebaz

Einhard wrote: »

The parents obviously have to share the burden of responsibility in cases like this, but I don't think that it's too much to ask that once the state take a child into care, they discharge their responsibility towards him or her in a reasonable manner. The parents of this boy clearly failed him, but the HSE did also. That's not a liberal thing to say, or an attempt to deflect blame, it's a statement of fact.

did the state not try to house him in all types of accommodation , and each time he absconded - if they had committed him to a Psych Ward against his wishes there would have been outcry - the fact that someone from the HSE put him up in Jurys at there own expense shows that they cared - in fact it was society and his own family who failed him if anyone

[Deleted User]

thebaz wrote: »

did the state not try to house him in all types of accommodation , and each time he absconded - if they had committed him to a Psych Ward against his wishes there would have been outcry - the fact that someone from the HSE put him up in Jurys at there own expense shows that they cared - in fact it was society and his own family who failed him if anyone

the hse are a state funded body we the taxpayer fund them i am sure the hse didnt do a whip round from their wage packets .

thebaz

[quote=[Deleted User];67095932]the hse are a state funded body we the taxpayer fund them i am sure the hse didnt do a whip round from their wage packets .[/QUOTE]

are you implying his death then, is the HSE's fault ??

Dudess

I just knew this horribly sad case was gonna get the heartless, cold AH treatment...

Einhard

thebaz wrote: »

did the state not try to house him in all types of accommodation , and each time he absconded - if they had committed him to a Psych Ward against his wishes there would have been outcry - the fact that someone from the HSE put him up in Jurys at there own expense shows that they cared - in fact it was society and his own family who failed him if anyone

I'm not saying they didn't care. But they didn't take care of him. there's a huge difference. I'm sure individual social workers tried their best for him, but the system failed. A child of 12 needs a stable, secure environment in which to grow and develop. This isn't some liberal, airy fairy supposition on my part either; it's a generally acknowledged reality. And part of HSE child protection strategy. And yet this boy was bounced around from temporary home to temporary home without any semblance of stability. No child could have prospered in such a situation.

The fact that he had to be housed in a hotel is an indictment of the failure of the HSE system. He was placed ther because there was no where else to go. And it was purely on the initiative of a social worker. If the system was fit for purpose, she would never have found herself in such a situation.

thebaz

I agree Einhard - the sad thing is when he was alive no one seamed to want him - the HSE had to lie about him to get him accommodation - thats what I meant about a society thing - I'm not a fan of the HSE myself, but i know there are good people there, as well as the beurocratic pen pushers - sometimes when no one wants you it is left to your family - and in this instance there concern was 6 months too late

[Deleted User]

thebaz wrote: »

are you implying his death then, is the HSE's fault ??

no read my previous posts .

stovelid

aDeener wrote: »

maybe you should stfu :rolleyes:

You've trumped me with the deployment of rolleyes, it must be said.

aDeener

stovelid wrote: »

You've trumped me with the deployment of rolleyes, it must be said.

no i think the common sense approach regarding personal responsibility which you don't believe in is what come up trumps....

i got drunk last night and got in a row, will you back me up when i blame the state for my behaviour, it was obviously their fault??

[Deleted User]

oh my word

rovert

Must say there some heartless pricks in this thread using this case for a trolling job.

K-9

There's a lot of stuff coming out about the HSE and the care it gives children, children going missing under their care, 440 missing since 2000:

One fifth of foreign children in care 'go missing' - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie

Cases like the OP's need to be highlighted. Yes, the mother failed him too but the state is supposed to look after children like this. I know 17 isn't a child, but the background is shocking.

dreamers75

one less, one less, one less smackhead we gotta worry about.

rovert

dreamers75 wrote: »

one less, one less, one less smackhead we gotta worry about.

^ Probably cant hold his drink.

Handsome Bob

Tragedy that the poor chap couldn't of had a better upbringing.

round tower huntsman

thebaz wrote: »

The media are all over this case hammering the HSE, but for once surely the mother (or father ) should take responsibility not the State - his mother put him in care at 9 , didnt see him for 6 months prior to his death - but the State/HSE tried to house him wherever possible including at Jurys hotel , at an employees expense - it is a tragedy and I don't know all the facts but from whats given, surely the media and family should show a little more dignity on what seams an incredibly tough life , and stop blaming the state for this one

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/a-beautiful-affectionate-boy-2270963.html

often wonder where the extended family are in these cases. i know in some cases there's no one else but the state to help but if it was my neice or nephew they'd be with us and not left in the hands of a state that doesnt give a fcuk.
but fact is he was left in hands of the state and they failed him totally.

stovelid

aDeener wrote: »

no i think the common sense approach regarding personal responsibility which you don't believe in is what come up trumps....

i got drunk last night and got in a row, will you back me up when i blame the state for my behaviour, it was obviously their fault??

Nice automatic link-up with crime there. Just what I'd expect from the fuckwit brigade.

My original point was that this person had a terrible life. If you want to call it that. To badly paraphrase an old quote: "no door ever opened for him when it could have closed".

I'm of the paradoxical opinion that decent rehabilitation should always be available for junkies while acknowledging (from far more experience than most people here) that some of them do take the piss.

That said: I really don't get how people cannot see at least some causality between the wretched, truncated life of this teenager and his drug abuse. Are some of the people here so blinded by a comfortable upbringing that they cannot acknowledge that some (if not all) of these people would have taken a different path with a stable background?

And before Joe Duffying the parents out of it: they themselves are probably grown-up versions of that child albeit that they survived.

[Deleted User]

stovelid wrote: »

Nice automatic link-up with crime there. Just what I'd expect from the fuckwit brigade.

My original point was that this person had a terrible life. If you want to call it that. To badly paraphrase an old quote: "no door ever opened for him when it could have closed".

I'm of the paradoxical opinion that decent rehabilitation should always be available for junkies while acknowledging (from far more experience than most people here) that some of them do take the piss.

That said: I really don't get how people cannot see at least some causality between the wretched, truncated life of this teenager and his drug abuse. Are some of the people here so blinded by a comfortable upbringing that they cannot acknowledge that some (if not all) of these people would have taken a different path with a stable background?

And before Joe Duffying the parents out of it: they themselves are probably grown-up versions of that child albeit that they survived.

exactly well said !

K-9

Enough of the considered, thought out responses Stovelid.

We do moral unthinking outrage here. Don't take to the PC, Do Gooder, Bleeding Heart, liberal agenda kindly round these parts.

aDeener

stovelid wrote: »

Nice automatic link-up with crime there. Just what I'd expect from the fuckwit brigade.

My original point was that this person had a terrible life. If you want to call it that. To badly paraphrase an old quote: "no door ever opened for him when it could have closed".

I'm of the paradoxical opinion that decent rehabilitation should always be available for junkies while acknowledging (from far more experience than most people here) that some of them do take the piss.

That said: I really don't get how people cannot see at least some causality between the wretched, truncated life of this teenager and his drug abuse. Are some of the people here so blinded by a comfortable upbringing that they cannot acknowledge that some (if not all) of these people would have taken a different path with a stable background?

And before Joe Duffying the parents out of it: they themselves are probably grown-up versions of that child albeit that they survived.

big hardy man eh

you are of the opinion that just because you are not born in a well off family that it absolves you of your own failings which is bull. i guarantee you were in here making snide remarks at katie french.... which i was too, but at least im consistent

Dan Dare

There is a vast difference between the lives of Katie French and that unfortunate boy. Both deaths are awful.

Einhard

aDeener wrote: »

big hardy man eh

you are of the opinion that just because you are not born in a well off family that it absolves you of your own failings which is bull. i guarantee you were in here making snide remarks at katie french.... which i was too, but at least im consistent

Nobody is saying that except you aDeener. Maybe if you quit with the posturing for a moment you might see that. Not everyone is born with the same opportunities in life. Not everyone has the support of a secure, stable family around them as they grow up. That makes a huge difference, and it's not "liberal" or "leftie" to say so. Of course personal responsibility is hugely important, but we aren't born with such traits. They evolve in us as we grow, and positive role models and example play a huge part in their development. It seems that this boy had neither of the latter, and therefore had little chance of developing the former. That's not to excuse him, it's just stating the obvious.

rovert

Cue weak sauce reply.

Dudess

aDeener wrote: »

you are of the opinion that just because you are not born in a well off family that it absolves you of your own failings which is bull.

A person is not in a position to take the "I'd have done things differently" stance when they come from a completely different background.

ondarack

aDeener wrote: »

don't see how its a tragedy when he got pneumonia as a result of drug abuse. no one forced the drugs on him

personal responsiblity - everyone knows the dangers of drugs

do they know from the age of 10?? thats alot of responsibility for a very young child

oppenheimer1

Einhard wrote: »

The parents obviously have to share the burden of responsibility in cases like this, but I don't think that it's too much to ask that once the state take a child into care, they discharge their responsibility towards him or her in a reasonable manner. The parents of this boy clearly failed him, but the HSE did also. That's not a liberal thing to say, or an attempt to deflect blame, it's a statement of fact.

As for the remarks about the boy himself showing more responsibility, it is clear from the reports that he had serious mental issues from an early age, and that these were exacerbated by dysfunctional family circumstances. He didn't really stand much of a chance. Some people do seek to absolve the individual of personal responsibility and transfer it to the state, but equally, others, especially it seems in AH, show a rather callous disregard for individual circumstances. The reason this boy didn't make the right decisions was because he wasn't equipped to make them. For this, his family are primarily responsible, but the state also have to accept some blame. They had him for 5 years, and failed to provide him with the most basic of needs- a secure, stable environment in which to live.

I don't buy the argument that he was not equipped to make decisions, unless he didn't know the difference between right and wrong. What ever about not knowing of the dangers of drug abuse (which is drilled into youngsters in primary school, let alone the family home) When it became clear he was abusing substances you can bet the dangers were outlined to him by care staff. As for not providing him with a secure stable environment, he was given one but was thrown out due to his behaviour.

Yes, at an early age it is obvious that the parents failed him, but I cannot lay much blame on the HSE for what happened. They clearly tried their best for him, which can be seen from the compassion shown him by care workers who paid out of their own pocket to give him a bed for the night. He was offered treatment but refused it. What more could they have done aside from have him committed to a psychiatric institution essentially imprisoning him for the rest of his life?

Dudess wrote: »

I just knew this horribly sad case was gonna get the heartless, cold AH treatment...

I hate to say it but maybe it deserves it. All too often "tragic" stories are dressed up and made to look less like the individual at the centre of the tragedy was responsible for their own fate. Every week this happens in the case of road traffic accidents. A boy racer who dies speeding will have his love of cars celebrated at his funeral. The press will report a 15 year old boy who dies driving a car as being in his sixteenth year. Even in this case it is a clear failing of the individual and the parents, and to a lesser extent the State. The State always has to take the brunt of the blame because it is faceless, not the person due to some misguided notion on not speaking ill of the dead or wanting to upset grieving relatives.

What more could the HSE have done? You can only help someone that wants to be helped.

Einhard

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Yes, at an early age it is obvious that the parents failed him, but I cannot lay much blame on the HSE for what happened. They clearly tried their best for him, which can be seen from the compassion shown him by care workers who paid out of their own pocket to give him a bed for the night. He was offered treatment but refused it.

The HSE was responsible for his care from the age of 12. They clearly did not discharge this responsibility in any reasonable manner. He was bounced around from home institution, institution to home, and never had a chance to settle down in a stable environment. He rarely saw a social worker or a physiatrist, even though it was clear he needed such supports. Had the HSE provided effective care for the boy, his tragic fate could have been averted.

The fact that, after 5 years under their care, the only option open to a concerned social worker was to book him into a hotel room using her own money, clearly shows that the HSE as an institution failed this boy. It's not deflecting from the failure of his family to point this out.

oppenheimer1

Einhard wrote: »

The HSE was responsible for his care from the age of 12. They clearly did not discharge this responsibility in any reasonable manner. He was bounced around from home institution, institution to home, and never had a chance to settle down in a stable environment. He rarely saw a social worker or a physiatrist, even though it was clear he needed such supports. Had the HSE provided effective care for the boy, his tragic fate could have been averted.

The fact that, after 5 years under their care, the only option open to a concerned social worker was to book him into a hotel room using her own money, clearly shows that the HSE as an institution failed this boy. It's not deflecting from the failure of his family to point this out.

The reason for moving him around isn't stated and it wasn't done without due consideration. They were obviously trying different strategies to tackle his behaviour, finding it wasn't working, then trying something new. They didn't move him around just for the hell of it. These people are professionals and they know what they are doing. It appears this person was beyond help and didn't want to be helped. That is not the HSEs fault. No matter what a persons upbringing they have to begin to exhibit some personal responsibility at 17

What more could they have done apart from have him committed?

Feeona

thebaz wrote: »

and the media just launch an attack on an uncaring health service

Very few people know this, but the original article was entitled 'DRUGGIE PUT UP IN HOTEL AT TAX-PAYERS EXPENSE'

They changed it when he died though. The meeja aren't cold-hearted, cruel b*stards......... UNLIKE THE HSE!!!!!!