Social workers sacked over ’sick’ image of paedophile Gary Glitter (however Baby P case, NO-ONE SACKED?)
I recently came over this sick and disgraceful e-mail story, This is our very own professional Social Workers protecting our kids, nice to see how Social Workers think child abuse is a JOKE!!! Well there you go, sick individuals working in our social care system. Well done to the whistleblower that will now lead to the sacking of these individuals that has bought shame on the Social Services System.
HUMM HELLO!! Why, then do we sack these individuals (rightly so) over a picture e-mailed and yet Baby P that was left to be muredered and Social Services did nothing over the 60 referrals about this child’s welfare! AND YET NONE OF THEM GET SACKED? Something is not right here, a child is killed YET SOCIAL WORKERS GET SACKED OVER A PICTURE AND NOT OVER A POOR CHILD THAT GOT KILLED !!! Arrrrggggggggggg
Joe Peters
Story Exposed by Mail On Sunday. by Lucinda Cameron
Fifteen employees of South Lanarkshire Council were sacked or warned over an email image of Gary Glitter
Fifteen council staff, including social workers, have been sacked or reprimanded after circulating a tasteless e-mail of reviled paedophile Gary Glitter carrying a child in a shopping bag.
An investigation was launched after an employee alerted bosses to the appalling image, which shows the convicted paedophile holding a plastic bag with a superimposed child’s head popping out of the top. Staff had circulated the email on the office network, where it spread within hours.
Some of those sacked are trained social workers – whose job is to protect vulnerable children.
A council source said: ‘These emails mocked the very children these people were being paid to protect.’
Yesterday, South Lanarkshire – the authority at the centre of the scandal – confirmed that staff had been sacked or warned. A spokesman was forced to deny reports that the image of the youngster superimposed on the picture had been taken from the council’s own register of ‘at risk’ children.
She said: ‘It is totally untrue that images of children on South Lanarkshire Council’s at risk register have been circulated in an email.
‘We do not hold photographs of children on our at risk register. ‘As of today a number of employees across the council have been dismissed and others have received final written warnings over the circulation of an email featuring the image of a child’s face superimposed on a shopping bag carried by Gary Glitter.
‘The image is one currently circulating throughout the United Kingdom.’
She added: ‘The image is totally inappropriate and represents a gross misuse of council email.’
The council would not confirm how many staff had been sacked or warned because employees have the right to appeal against any decisions resulting from the disciplinary action carried out yesterday. Most of those involved are based at the council’s office in Rutherglen, near Glasgow.
Last night Liberal Democrat MP Annette Brooke, an ambassador for children’s charity NSPCC, said: ‘It is totally unacceptable that anyone, let alone anyone involved in child protection, should find Gary Glitter’s behaviour remotely amusing.’
Former rock star Glitter – real name Paul Gadd – served almost three years in prison in Vietnam for sex crimes involving two young girls.
He was deported at the end of his prison term and flew to Thailand and then Hong Kong.
But airport officials refused to let him into their countries and he returned to Britain in August. Glitter has a prior conviction for possessing child pornography, for which he served two months in jail in 1999.
On Friday it emerged he is to begin a legal challenge to have his name removed from the sex offenders’ register.
If he is successful it will allow him greater freedom to travel abroad.
November 24th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Hi Joe
I have been enraged about the case of baby ‘P’ (wish I knew his name)I am equally enraged about the lack of reality shown with regards to survivors of abuse, that we have experience and knowledge that could help so many others as you do, not without a fight I know. The papers have been full of social services trying to justify their failings in this case and the other day I read an article in the Daily Mail that made my blood boil….. This may be of interest to you as your book was used as an example this is my posting on my blog…
In strong response referring to the article written by Carol Sarler in the Daily Mail on Wed 20th Nov, ‘I’ll tell what’s ugly… this shameful appetite for misery porn’
Can I firstly say this is Child abuse she is talking about not porn! As there are thousands of victims of child abuse suffering right now as we read the paper, there are also thousands of survivors of abuse who have kept the secret for their perpetrator to protect them for 30 years or more. The writer is saying that it’s ok for a child, now an adult to have been abused and still silent so as not bringing to justice their perpetrator, that the ‘hurtful titbits’ as she so disregarding puts it are merely a bit of gossip that have got out of hand within a family… what planet is she on?
In the article, it seems to me that books written by survivors of abuse are being slated as untrue accounts that are exaggerated for point of sale, also that the survivor has only one objective to writing their memoir and that is to make money from a story. These are true accounts of terrible violations and experiences that as children they were subjected to and have kept secret like they were told. Why? Because they felt dirty, they felt like it was their fault and that they were in the wrong. They were not wrong, bad or dirty.
The writer of this article clearly lives in a gloriously protected world filled with hearts and flowers where there are pink fluffy rabbits running in daisy filled meadows. Happy memories you say, well actually if you ask any survivor of abuse what they remember about that time and they will tell you that at the time there were some happy times, the bits they grabbed for comfort and life as an abused child at the time feels ‘normal’. Normal is pretence; normal enables survival because they know no difference.
The reason these books are so popular? Just maybe statistics could be a little out and there are many more survivors of abuse and violation out there that maybe interested may need camaraderie and may need as an adult survivor to not feel alone anymore… Just maybe? What do you think? I cannot believe that someone would generalise this type of book as disgruntled adults that have had a bad time and want pay back. I cannot understand how anyone can attempt to justify any form of abuse unless they are an abuser.
The article states that ‘these books’ are seeking to make a few bob out of old abuse’ Old abuse! What! You think that once the touching, the rape, the violence, the years of being tortured and keeping the secret is over, it simply goes away?
Let me tell you it doesn’t, a survivor of abuse in childhood carries the belief they are worthless and inadequate into adulthood, thus unable to form healthy relationships, unable to be rational at times, unable to be free of the filth inflicted on them and the confusion of feeling guilty, taking responsibility for the blame they have had to carry because they dare to mention they were wronged. But most of all ‘us’ the survivors are aware that it exists, it is real not just a story. By telling the story, the once victim, now a survivor gives the story clarity and truth that has gone unsaid, it gives the story worth and by unleashing the awful truth the survivor is able to be free of it, put it in the past and use it positively to grow as a person and help others.
In the article it also mentions that, ‘these books’ on the shelves at home, in shops and in airports read by holiday makers are not acceptable reading for our children. That she says, in fact, by having these books on our bookshelves we are inflicting abuse on our children, the children the government feel the need to teach sex education to at 5yrs old to prevent teenage pregnancy. So, we don’t give that sort of information, we protect the children from reality from potential risk, we keep abuse a deep dark secret so if, God forbid, our children were approached by an abuser we have actually taught them that this violation is just an unsaid secret as the perpetrator will confirm as he/she whispers ‘this is our little secret’ is that what we do? Or do we make it known that unfortunately in our society there may be some bad people and we have to keep ourselves safe and tell someone we trust if something that doesn’t feel right is happening. Perhaps every parent should have a trusted person as an extra confidant, maybe it could be a good idea to make it clear to our children we are there for them and it’s safe to tell us anything.
These books are written from a place of compassion, from a place of passion and deep deep self discovery, so don’t slate them, don’t take away their clarity and don’t try to disregard these real human beings that have survived the worst of violation to a child, the betrayal of trust taking advantage of a venerable trusting child. These books have reason for being, to give insight and awareness to the very person who wrote the article because ‘what do you know?!’
June 9th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Baby P’s real name is Peter Connelly. I cannot believe those social workers who failed tro protect Peter are still working. This world has gone mad that is why I always hated the song ”what a wounderful world”. The place is not a dangerous place of those who do evil, but of those who watch and do nothing.