By: pol_pak
9/05/2009
7:29 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The reports are at www.ombudsman.nt.gov.au
.....select 'publications'
.....select 'public statements'
Read:
FINAL VOL 1 OMBUDSMAN investigation Medical Services Act 16.pdf
FINAL OMBUDSMAN REPORT VOL 2 - Investigation into the Unjustified use of Restraint etc.pdf
IMHO the Ombudsman is correct.
Ombudsman appears to be concentrating upon management for those orders and procedures which management set in place which staff are required (in good faith) to act upon.
Examples appear to be where URGENCY, NEED TO ACT IMMEDIATELY, required in the legislation in order to bypass the usual checks and balances appears not present.
. |
|
By: pol_pak
9/05/2009
7:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
For mdoinit
the meaningless rant about tangents and people with cognition troubles... is about how those in power, in management, for their administrative convenience have a tendency to adapt their authorities beyond the original intentions, to where they may be breaking the law.
Usually the people subject to these authorities are NOT in positions themselves to call them to account, to question their authority to do what they do.
This is a problem with all management, all administrative, all authoritative positions.
As they say: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
. |
|
By: pol_pak
10/05/2009
12:15 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The Ombudsman's report is considering one small area where exist many examples of such abuse of authority.
For NT the issue to consider is whether this history of authority from far away, developed to where such abuse of authority became - and whether it remains, part of the culture.
Removal of children from their families, with little opportunity to challenge the authorities created the "stolen children" culture.
This regardless of whether some such removals were appropriate for their particular cases which actually made it into judicial consideration.
The "stolen generation" culture was created by the flow on effect, into the treatment, the abuse of many others - without "just cause" without the accountability essential for "common decency".
Many Territorians still denied their otherwise held rights to valid leases for "their homes" using dubious claims of racial testing "to assist them" through "special benefits" which actually justify denial of their otherwise held rights and responsibilities as present throughout otherwise required terms and conditions with valid leases for "their homes".
IMHO purpose for such denial of leases is with purpose of denying them the very securities for their person and property which leases otherwise support and enforce.
Such Territorians thus also denied otherwise held rights, such as their right for their own personal guests visit, stay with them, or assist them, in "their homes".
The dubious claims of racial testing "to assist them" form basis for abuses arising via the "permit system".
People subject to such authorities are NOT in positions themselves -whether knowledge, ability, or finance, to call these authorities to account, to question such claimed authorities, review such practices.
Legal Aid is denied regularly to such cases... even after courts accept exist serious legal issues needing resolution, so denial of judicial determination, extends the initial injuries.
. |
|
By: dallone.ranger
10/05/2009
3:32 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dallone.ranger Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
By Pol;
Removal of children from their families, with little opportunity to challenge the authorities created the "stolen children" culture.
~~
I cannot allow that Pol, and I will quote from someone who was involved at the time, patrol Officer Colin Macleod in his book, Patrol in the Dreamtime.
He says that many children were assessed as better off staying where they were, although many were not.
Quote, "Never , however, were children taken from families with a mother and a father, They were 'always' from very young and unprotected single mothers, often young girls between 10 and 13 with no family member to properly care for them." |
|
By: pol_pak
10/05/2009
5:16 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
By Pol;
Removal of children from their families, with little opportunity to challenge the authorities created the "stolen children" culture.
~~
dallone.ranger quoting patrol Officer Colin Macleod in his book, Patrol in the Dreamtime.
Quote, "Never , however, were children taken from families with a mother and a father, They were 'always' from very young and unprotected single mothers, often young girls between 10 and 13 with no family member to properly care for them."
- - - - - - - - -
In almost all cases, as PO Macleod referring, concerned children taken WITH the administrative "Just Cause".
Some historical issue whether then periods administrative "Just Cause" was adequate, whether ability to lodge and pursue challenges were handled appropriately in then periods administrative decision process - at then periods measure not todays 20-20 hindsight.
MOST were handled in accordance with then periods administrative process.
Some children were taken from families with a mother and a father.
Am not suggesting many, but some were.
The issue of then periods "opportunity to challenge" and evidence available complicates most cases raised here (reference Peter Gunner).
However:
Some cases plans to separate were NOT announced beforehand (even today) AND opportunities to challenge were NOT available, ALSO where available rarely understood as available in practice.
Patrol Officer Colin Macleod is in error, am NOT implying any intent of him to be misleading, rather a simple error in reference to his knowledge and experience - a failing we all can make ;-)
Self, Alison, and others, each know some children who were taken from families (with a mother and a father), and, others where attempts to take were made without success.
. |
|
By: pol_pak
10/05/2009
5:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
patrol Officer Colin Macleod in his book, Patrol in the Dreamtime
Quote, "Never , however, were children taken from families with a mother and a father, They were 'always' from very young and unprotected single mothers, often young girls between 10 and 13 with no family member to properly care for them."
- - - -
Best acknowledged also policy of separating single mothers from their children was carried out in accordance with, or supported and promoted, through welfare in the wider Australian community. Particularly where the single mothers under 21.
Exist "stolen generation" groups from within the wider (non-racial tagged) Australian community.
For flavor reasons they have not received equivalent publicity and support.
. |
|
By: unidentifiedbloke
11/05/2009
8:55 am Yahoo! Profile:
unidentifiedbloke Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Examples appear to be where URGENCY, NEED TO ACT IMMEDIATELY, required in the legislation in order to bypass the usual checks and balances appears not present. "
There are times when hospital staff have to act immediately in order to prevent patients doing something that is potentially life threatening, eg patient threatening to remove drains or intravenous needles. This is tantamount to suicide; such actions could result in the patient bleeding to death and may result in legal action being taken against the hospital for failing in its duty of care to the patient. In such circumstances, the hospital staff need to act immediately to restrain that patient. There is no time to get permission. It is a difficult situation and each one is different. It would be nearly impossible to write up legislation that covers each scenario. Hospital staff may be damned if they do and damned if they don't. I have a lot of sympathy for them and wouldn't like to be in their shoes when these decisions need to be made. I'm sure any decision to restrain a patient is never made lightly. It should be remembered that most patients in the hospital are not like guests at a motel; either in circumstances or attitudes. Many act in unreasonable or illogical ways and this needs to be taken into account when considering why a patient has been restrained. |
|
By: pol_pak
11/05/2009
2:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Self and the law agree there exist times when others - such as these hospital staff, do need to act IMMEDIATELY in URGENCY in order to prevent potentially life threatening or serious injury.
The Ombudsmans report recognised this as well, raising the issue where it appeared patients were NOT in such need of IMMEDIATE URGENT action.
This where the criticism appeared to concentrate.
. |
|
By: mdoinit
11/05/2009
3:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mdoinit Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| yep ok...maybe you should blame them then. |
|
By: pol_pak
11/05/2009
5:28 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
counsel assisting, Christopher Hoy, said the cause of death was clear.
--deleted--
Mr Hoy said a "simple question" arises from the baby's death.
"Whatever failings a parent may carry, how is it that in 21st century Australia, a baby can die of such a third world condition, particularly when that baby was apparently under the close purview of the NT authorities, and in particular, Family and Community Services [FACS]?"
He said FACS had been given numerous notifications about the welfare of the baby and its six siblings, including one alert two weeks before the boy's death, when it was described as "just skin and bones".
Several days later, FACS met with the mother and urged her to take the baby to hospital, but she did not do so.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/11/2566 444.htm
===============
Comment:
Seems is a waste of time calling Family and Community Services [FACS].
Know of other current cases where they appear to still be doing nothing... Cases where they supposedly monitoring for Mental Health and/or Domestic Violence issues.
Some cases children in care of friends and or relations for three months at a time, reappearance just enough to maintain centrelink monies.
Extended family support groups are double hit, first trying to care for the children without support, then being brunt of blame IF centrelink stops the money... Those caring for the children left on their own doing their best to support the children without support.
Health, education, and other staff to frightened to report the cases as will also get blamed for causing the trouble.
When they do, aggressor is treated as victim, with their involvement all handled as a mental health episode....
. |
|
By: pol_pak
12/05/2009
9:14 am Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
By: mdoinit:
yep ok...maybe you should blame them then.
- - - -
Appears the Ombudsman's report started by recognizing need for urgency to act when need was IMMEDIATE URGENT action to prevent loss of life or serious injury.
The Ombudsman's report was looking at the failure of administration - this can be hospital or departmental or legislative administration, attempt for administrative convenience to abuse specific exemptions which exist to permit actions where URGENCY for IMMEDIATE URGENT action to prevent loss of life or serious injury.
The abuse is misuse of URGENCY where the URGENCY which permits the exemptions does NOT exist.
The Family and Community Services [FACS] IMHO abuses their URGENCY provisions, exploits these authorities for administrative convenience, also hiding behind the privacy provisions to protect themselves not the real victims.
IMHO FACS fails exercise its authority, its responsibility, where early low key minimalist monitoring approaches would IMHO prevent many cases changing from minor concern to serious concern to where exists real urgency or worse as in the case reported just to late.
In this area FACS - and political. negligence are real causes of our current abuse of children in communities drama.
. |
|
By: mdoinit
12/05/2009
8:42 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mdoinit Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Yes pol pak you rang!! |
|
By: mdoinit
12/05/2009
8:56 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mdoinit Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Yes pol pak you rang!! |
|
By: pol_pak
12/05/2009
10:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| which time ? |
|
By: mdoinit
13/05/2009
7:11 am |
Message deleted. |
|
By: mdoinit
13/05/2009
11:40 am |
Message deleted. |
|
By: pol_pak
13/05/2009
6:04 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
After writing IMHO "FACS - and political. negligence are real causes of our current abuse of children in communities drama."
Read the Australian : Baby died despite supervision by Family and Community Services
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197 ,25462231-5006790,00.html
The Australian claims:
- - - -copy and paste START- - - -
BY the time she had her seventh child the Alice Springs woman was well known to authorities.
Her kids were hungry, dirty, bruised and neglected. She had bashed and bitten them, and on one occasion threatened them with a knife.
Two of her brood suffered from failure to thrive as infants, with a baby girl almost dying from malnourishment.
---deleted----
The coronial inquest will examine whether NT government agencies, in particular police and FACS, could have prevented his death.
"There was a steady stream of notifications about serious physical abuse and neglect of the children,'' Mr Hoy said.
''(There were) general concerns that the children were hungry, dirty, wearing the same clothes for days ...
"There were also further reports concerning the mother using and dealing drugs.''
The inquest was told the woman had a "long and troubled'' history that included threatening her children with a knife and possible "smothering''.
She was seen in public biting and slapping her two-year-old daughter, whom she was heard to call "a little ***[deleted]*** ''.
"One episode was serious enough for the assailant to be imprisoned,'' Mr Hoi said of the incident involving her eldest son.
The children had been taken into foster care at various stages in their lives, with FACS receiving reports she injected drugs in front of at least one of them.
"Through all this FACS approached the mother and commenced an investigation - apparently to no avail,'' Mr Hoy said.
- - - -END copy and paste- - - -
The obvious questions include: why did she still have the children ?
. |
|
By: pol_pak
13/05/2009
6:23 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The coronial inquest may well determine the NT government agencies, in particular police and FACS, could have prevented the babies death.
Will say do have some sympathy for the police here, based on personal experience, police attempt follow these cases up as much as they are able.
Government policy often directs Police decisions on such cases to referring them to FACS, Health or other departments, particularly where drugs, alcohol or "racial" are "deemed" to be factors.
Problem cases need to be dealt with on a national basis.
People in such as this problem case do play upon crossing the border to avoid being held to account, where earlier appropriate minimalist actions would probably work.
Stress on "minimalist actions" because FACS uses hammers far to freely.
. |
|
By: dallone.ranger
13/05/2009
9:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dallone.ranger Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I believe that FACS is way understaffed, which could help explain some things. |
|
By: mdoinit
13/05/2009
10:03 pm |
Message deleted. |
|
By: pol_pak
14/05/2009
9:20 am Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Also agree FACS is way understaffed.
Understaffing is IMHO NOT the problem here, rather the problem is FACS approach generally.
In particular FACS manner of dealing with, alienating, the informants, families and friends, even mothers and fathers they are investigating is the problem.
Generally informants will NOT go near FACS until they feel they have run out of alternatives, largely because of the way FACS alienates them, ignores them, then when things go pear shaped blame them.
Refusal to provide feedbacks to close relations who are informants, here refer to the sort of feedback relations need that appropriate actions are being taken.
Have been through various structured meetings and processes, structured to tick of the boxes in their internal assesment process, whilst ignoring the actual impracticality of the solutions presented - particularly where they are not prepared to follow up and ensure commitments completed... is it so hard for them to check the kids are attending school ?
Schools inform where risk concerns.
Exists a cultural problem within government and FACS which alienates the community at large.
This cultural problem arises from poor political leadership, partly in terms of how they approach investigations, however greater in how investigations are actually assessed.
Investigations often do end up in court, however FACS culture is to approach the courts with URGENCY rather than to approach the courts earlier to set in place simpler goals, simpler assesments and more importantly more cooperation from the families and friends involved.
FACS have ignored relations caring for the children, proclaiming they have no legal position in these cases, denying them the ability to be a part of the process.
FACS appears restricted from becoming involved where other departments, the federal government, and their policies are involved.
Even when they can be seen as contributing to problems experienced by families. |
|
By: mdoinit
14/05/2009
9:31 am Yahoo! Profile:
mdoinit Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
yes vey good this is right and another thing is the laws that are and the lawmakers and the people become equally culpible as consciousness and apathy we all become are a part of.... stand up stand up stand up for your rights...
get up get up don't give up the fight.. |
|
By: dallone.ranger
14/05/2009
10:57 am Yahoo! Profile:
dallone.ranger Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Don't get up Mdoinit, have another drink instead. |
|
By: mdoinit
14/05/2009
11:22 am Yahoo! Profile:
mdoinit Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| thanks, I had a warm glass of choc. put me to bed wonderfully and now am arisen have had a glass of water and OJ. |
|
By: pol_pak
14/05/2009
6:21 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pol_pak Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
When you stand up for your rights you may well become subject to paying damages to whoever your sort justice upon...
Yes, you can easily lose your house or car or superannuation or the whole lot...
The idea of the State is for the state to obtain vengence not the citizen.
IF prisons were single person per cell, four times a day out for fresh air walks in a line then back into the cell to exercise and attend re-education sessions using computers and monitors IMHO most of our prisoners would NOT re-offend.
However for many prison is often a more comfortable home away from home, with three reasonable meals every day, just without the booze and sex - except where being taught the realities of AC/DC...
. |
|
