bubblypop wrote: » El duderino, I think jack or whatever the name is, just likes to argue with anyone they can. No one who thinks normally could think that studying past abuse cases could in no way assist in future child protection. Obviously anyone with a sane understanding brain realises than any little help is advantageous in child protection. I wouldn't bother trying to educate jack anymore.
bubblypop wrote: » Forty seven, I do agree with you to an extent. There is a big problem in this country because there is a huge turnover of social workers. We have mandatory reporting of child protection incidents, & it should work, because it should follow the family around. This is relatively recent, but it does seem to work well to an extent. Social workers have such a hard job, they all start with great intentions, they all want to help. Then they start, & their workload is horrendously large. Impossible I would think, they can't physically do everything they are supposed to. Which ends up with social workers becoming burnt out, dissolutioned & trying to ' cover their own ass' and eventually leaving, in a lot of cases. I wouldn't be a social worker for any money. They are over stretched, under resourced & constantly looking over their shoulder trying to ' cover their own ass' The country needs to put money into these services. We need to at least double the social workers in this country. Maybe then, any referrals they receive, they might have time to investigate cases correctly. And anything we can learn about these types of cases, can only assist going forward.
KERSPLAT! wrote: Are you two still at it!?
LexieOnRale wrote: » It disgusts me to think of 7 little kids absolutely traumatised and frightened in their own home with strange drunks walking in and out like it was some sort of half way house, with nobody to give them a hug and a kiss and make them feel loved and like none of what was happening was their fault. How are they ever going to be okay after that? She's ruined their lives. There is no coming back from that.
One eyed Jack wrote: » El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Are you making a point about all profiling being useless or do you think it's specific to child abuse? Do you think it's useless because they can't make a 100% reliable profile? Or do you think it's completely useless? Well as we're specifically talking about perpetrators of child abuse, I'm saying that profiling is useless. I know why researchers investigate cases, but profiling itself is full of confirmation bias. I personally don't believe it's actually possible to create a model that would predict with any degree of accuracy, either potential victims of child abuse, or potential perpetrators of child abuse.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Are you making a point about all profiling being useless or do you think it's specific to child abuse? Do you think it's useless because they can't make a 100% reliable profile? Or do you think it's completely useless?
melissak wrote: » One eyed Jack wrote: » El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Are you making a point about all profiling being useless or do you think it's specific to child abuse? Do you think it's useless because they can't make a 100% reliable profile? Or do you think it's completely useless? Well as we're specifically talking about perpetrators of child abuse, I'm saying that profiling is useless. I know why researchers investigate cases, but profiling itself is full of confirmation bias. I personally don't believe it's actually possible to create a model that would predict with any degree of accuracy, either potential victims of child abuse, or potential perpetrators of child abuse. Add your reply here. Are you talking about these called ritual abuse fiasco in England? That was a pretty shocking version of false flag hysteria. 230 or so kids took into care based solely on confirmation bias and hysterisa on the Part of social services. The younger kids actually believed they had been abused because it was put in their heads
melissak wrote: » Add your reply here. Are you talking about these called ritual abuse fiasco in England? That was a pretty shocking version of false flag hysteria. 230 or so kids took into care based solely on confirmation bias and hysterisa on the Part of social services. The younger kids actually believed they had been abused because it was put in their heads