the Cork teen tragedy

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

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

aDeener wrote: »

maybe you should stfu :rolleyes:

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

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

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.

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 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?