| Non-motoring > Appalling journalism | Miscellaneous |
| Thread Author: Westpig | Replies: 42 |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 10:17
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-31359158 First of all the person in custody was regularly offered food and drink, but declined to take it. Secondly that person was only there because there was nowhere else for her to go as the other more appropriate agencies do not have the facilities. Thirdly she would have been seen at least once, but probably a number of times, by a police doctor and has to be checked every hour as a minimum, every half an hour if vulnerable (which she was) by a gaoler. Lastly, at 16 you can marry, legally copulate, etc...so you are not exactly a 'child' as most people see it, (although being under 18 she'd still fit some definitions). Crappy, sensationalist headline. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 11:16
Appalling journalism - madf
|
|
They should have force fed her. New headlines "police restrained girl and forced her to eat as a result of which she choked and died". |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 12:21
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
| She was mentally I'll and should never have been in police cell. That's the point and explains both why its newsworthy and wy WPs glib explanation is likely to be way off beam. I'd want to read the hmic report before coming to conclusion on whether she has complaint or not. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 14:33
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> She was mentally I'll and should never have been in police cell. Agreed. Now please do tell me where else you think she should have been, WHEN, not if, other agencies do not have a vacancy. That's the point >> and explains both why its newsworthy and wy WPs glib explanation is likely to be >> way off beam. Would you care to explain why? I think my statement was exactly 'on message'. The agreed protocols for mentally unwell people, agreed between the NHS and the police are that sectioned people go straight to a psychiatric care unit. This is all agreed by the senior managers. Then when the worker bees try to implement it, they are refused.. time and time and time again. So off to the police cells they go, there being no other alternative... unless of course you can dream one up. Do you not think the custody sergeant wouldn't refuse to take the prisoner if there was a more palatable alternative..or isn't trying his/her utmost to get rid... I did in the 15 years I did that sort of work. I'd want to read the hmic report before coming to conclusion on >> whether she has complaint or not. My main point is the ignorant t***s that sit there in the safety of their offices or armchairs moaning about police locking up someone mentally unwell..and/or... poor journalism concentrating on this angle, rather than the fact the police are stuck with a problem and cannot win whichever way they deal with it. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 17:48
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
|
WP, We both know that the system doesn't work as it should. One Chief Constable (IIRC either Hants or Dorset) went out publicly on a limb publicising a similar case late last year. Government then committed to 'do something' but since Mental Health is forever the Cinderella of health provision I'm not holding my breath. The bit of your OP I take particular issue with is the penultimate paragraph 'Lastly at 16.....'etc. Even for 16/17 year olds with full capacity being in police custody is an area where they need support, being 'legal' copulate and work notwithstanding and the law recognises that. at least for 16 year olds. Perhaps the headline should have read 'Mentally Ill Woman Held in Nottinghamshire Police cell had no food or water for 44 hours' Would it be all right then? Of course not. The HMIC report is at www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/publication/nottinghamshire-national-child-protection-inspection/ and example picked up by BBC is at top of page 23. I'd suggest that whatever protocols are supposed to be in place were not effective hence use of words It was only after the girl had been in custody for 44 hours that custody staff realised that she had gone without food or water . BBC report is an accurate summation of events and police were rightly criticised. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 21:54
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> and police were rightly criticised. >> What do you propose as the police alternative then? Hold her down by the nose and poor water down her neck? She is only in the police station because the NHS cannot place her anywhere else. That situation arose right from the word go i.e. on the street... because the protocols dictate she should have gone to a medical facility rather than a police station. The police officers would rather she went to the medical facility. I had a situation once where the custody sergeant refused to accept the prisoner in similar circs, but I had to overrule him, because the patient had been sat in a police van for 4 hours o/s the psychiatric unit at the local hospital.. whilst we all had a bunfight as to why they wouldn't accept him. Once at the police station they regularly see a police doctor. You've stated the police have been 'rightly criticised'... something that I just cannot see... perhaps you could enlighten me with what they should have done then? |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 10:17
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> You've stated the police have been 'rightly criticised'... something that I just cannot see... perhaps >> you could enlighten me with what they should have done then? The issue seems to be that the protocols you mention were not followed properly or perhaps at all. I'm drawing that inference from the words I quoted above: It was only after the girl had been in custody for 44 hours that custody staff realised that she had gone without food or water. Shortly after realisation dawned she was seen by a paramedic and taken to hospital. If they'd followed the proper process, (a) alarm bells would have rung well before almost two days elapsed and (b) there would have been evidence of the process and the force would be off the hook. The inspector also stated that the facility in which she was detained was not appropriate for vulnerable arrestees and that she could/should have been taken elsewhere. Furthermore the inspector found that some custody staff lacked awareness of, and knowledge about, child vulnerability, the staff themselves admitted that they lacked training in this area. That's why the report is critical and why the BBC were correctly reporting its findings. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 12 Feb 15 at 10:18
|
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 10:34
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> If they'd followed the proper process, The 'proper process' is for the girl to have never been in a police cell. The 'proper process' cannot be followed, because the NHS cannot or will not achieve it. How can the police affect that? >> (a) alarm bells would have rung well before almost >> two days elapsed and The alarms bells ring right from the word go.... but you have to put them somewhere. >> (b) there would have been evidence of the process and the >> force would be off the hook. Evidence of what process? The one that fails to work every time, the one that says she should be in a hospital? She's sat in a police cell, she's regularly offered food and drink, but declines it... you don't want her in there, you want her in a hospital, but the hospital authorities cannot or will not accept her... eventually I'm guessing they called an ambulance, probably at the request of the police doctor and put her in A&E... but then you'll have two police officers guarding her, because the hospital staff won't and A&E don't speak much with the psychiatric unit. >> The inspector also stated that the facility in which she was detained was not appropriate >> for vulnerable arrestees and that she could/should have been taken elsewhere. Yes, very good, but WHERE? There isn't anywhere. Furthermore the inspector found >> that some custody staff lacked awareness of, and knowledge about, child vulnerability, the staff themselves >> admitted that they lacked training in this area. Yes, that's normal, they won't have any expertise in that area, they are either omni- competent police officers or civilian gaolers.... none of whom have expertise with mental health... and never will do. >> That's why the report is critical and why the BBC were correctly reporting its findings. I cannot see your point. You seem happy for the HMIC and BBC to blame people who have been unfairly left to deal with something they shouldn't have to, haven't had any training in, don't have the facilities, don't have the resources and shouldn't have to deal with if joint police/NHS protocols were adhered to. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 10:57
Appalling journalism - Manatee
|
|
>> You seem happy for the HMIC and BBC to blame people who have been unfairly >> left to deal with something they shouldn't have to, haven't had any training in, don't >> have the facilities, don't have the resources and shouldn't have to deal with if joint >> police/NHS protocols were adhered to. Everything you say is correct. Leaving blame out of it, the police need to have a process for ensuring that people in their custody do not come to harm, and to follow it. Either there isn't a process that works, or it wasn't used effectively enough. Either way, there seems to be some scope for recommendations. The fact that the police should not have had to look after her at all, leaves scope for some more! I hope there isn't a witch hunt - a pragmatic review of what happened that does not seek to allocate blame would be the most constructive approach. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 12:12
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> Everything you say is correct. >> >> Leaving blame out of it, the police need to have a process for ensuring that >> people in their custody do not come to harm, and to follow it. Either there >> isn't a process that works, or it wasn't used effectively enough. Either way, there seems >> to be some scope for recommendations. OK, the 'crap happens' scenario, so prepare to deal with the crap. No problem with that, that's a sensible thing to do if you are an emergency service and especially so if you know in advance you'll be left holding the baby. So, you have: - CCTV in custody suites - Lay Visitors turn up unannounced to check on the welfare of prisoners - very easy access to regular doctor's attendance - some custody suites have nurses - well trained staff with regards First Aid - good facilities (clean, spacious, reasonably equipped e.g. kitchen area, modern) - good compliance with legislation e.g. PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) - IT systems that do the job well, inc comprehensive recording of cell block activity. It's all there. What do you do though if a 16 year old, very unwell mentally is there when she shouldn't be.. and she won't drink or eat? Eventually call an ambulance and take her to casualty...like they did? |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 13:29
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> It's all there. But in spite of all that it took 44hrs to 'realise' a prisoner who was vulnerable on account of being both a minor and mentally ill was not eating or drinking. That is the nub of the criticism. She should have been subject to much closer attention and on the ambulance>casualty route MUCH sooner. While we all agree she shouldn't have been in a custody suite at all this stuff happens with monotonous regularity. Procedure should cover it but it didn't get applied properly in this case. The report suggests that the Nottinghamshire force had a custody facility at Mansfield which was equipped for these sort of cases and she should have been there. Instead she was what sounds like a busy nick focussed on dealing 24/7 with acquisitive crime in the city centre and which could only worsen her already aggravated condition. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 13:51
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> But in spite of all that it took 44hrs to 'realise' a prisoner who was vulnerable on account of being both a minor and mentally ill was not eating or drinking. Someone or something should be criticized, but is it the police? And how true is it really that this girl hadn't drunk any water for two days? I repeat: we have no reliable systems for early detection and treatment of mentally ill individuals. In all too many cases diagnosis is delayed until 'something happens', when the signs have been clearly apparent perhaps for years. It takes an astute patient, patient's partner or relative, or GP to blow the right alarm whistle in the right way. Usually it comes down to pot luck, a bit stupid really for a civilized country. Trouble is, mental illness has a hallucinatory side - is it really there? people wonder - and is difficult in other ways too. Everyone is a bit scared of it and people tend to look the other way when possible. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 17:07
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> But in spite of all that it took 44hrs to 'realise' a prisoner who was >> vulnerable on account of being both a minor and mentally ill was not eating or >> drinking. That is the nub of the criticism. She should have been subject to much >> closer attention and on the ambulance>casualty route MUCH sooner. You miss the point. They'd have realised she wasn't eating or drinking on the first occasion she was offered a drink... and in any case at a recognised meal time when offered a meal and drink. The offer and refusal would be electronically recorded on her individual custody record. So at that point, possibly and probably relatively soon after she was incarcerated... would you advocate an ambulance then... or wait? How long would you wait? Would you call a police doctor and take his/her advice?.... I would. Then when the doctor says, this has got beyond a joke, call an ambulance she's de-hydrated, you do so. Then some clown from HMIC criticises you, as does a BBC article.. and a few armchair critics. >> >> While we all agree she shouldn't have been in a custody suite at all this >> stuff happens with monotonous regularity. Procedure should cover it but it didn't get applied properly >> in this case. Which bit of 'procedure' do you think wasn't applied properly and how would you suggest they should have acted? >> The report suggests that the Nottinghamshire force had a custody facility at Mansfield which was equipped for these sort of cases and she should have been there. If that's the case, I'd agree with you, however not all cells at Mansfield would be so equipped and was someone already in it/them? Last edited by: Westpig on Thu 12 Feb 15 at 17:11
|
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 17:46
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
|
WP, We're reading this in different ways. My usual practice when trying to understand any controversy arising from a media report is to find the source document whether a court judgement, Hansard or, as here, an official report. In this case it's the HMIC report which I linked yesterday and that's the only account I've used. The 16yo we're talking about is a single example over less than a page in a long report which identifies other, more serious, failings in the Notts force's child protection arrangements. It may be that it's set the police/ex-police bush telegraph alight and that for that or other reasons you have more to go on. My reading is that the force took its eye off the ball and that in some way/ways the safeguards which should have applied to this young woman failed. I base that particularly on use of the phraseology about 'realising' after 44 hours that she'd not eaten or drunk. This was therefore not a 'normal' s136 detention, it was one that went wrong. That's it. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 12 Feb 15 at 17:50
|
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 18:35
Appalling journalism - No FM2R
|
|
Here we go, virgin waters..... Westpig is quite right and I can totally see, and support, his point. "Management" have dictated how it must be, without providing any of the required support and/or infrastructure and is now trying to blame the worker for it not working. In my world I would be hunting down the management. Presumably you would all have been happier if the police had turfed the person out on the street since no crime had been committed? No? So what then? Talk about a rock and a hard place. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 20:22
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> "Management" have dictated how it must be, without providing any of the required support and/or >> infrastructure and is now trying to blame the worker for it not working. In my >> world I would be hunting down the management. >> >> Presumably you would all have been happier if the police had turfed the person out >> on the street since no crime had been committed? >> >> No? So what then? >> >> Talk about a rock and a hard place. >> Thank Christ for that. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 20:10
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> WP, >> >> We're reading this in different ways. >> >> My usual practice when trying to understand any controversy arising from a media report is >> to find the source document whether a court judgement, Hansard or, as here, an official >> report. In this case it's the HMIC report which I linked yesterday and that's the >> only account I've used. So if the HMIC report is flawed and/or has been written by someone with a fundamental lack of understanding of the situation... then your understanding of the issues would also be flawed. >> The 16yo we're talking about is a single example over less >> than a page in a long report which identifies other, more serious, failings in the >> Notts force's child protection arrangements. I have only ever been talking about this one case. If there are wider failings that need addressing, then so be it. >> >> It may be that it's set the police/ex-police bush telegraph alight and that for that >> or other reasons you have more to go on. Nope... it's just annoyed me. I've been that poor sap the custody officer on many, many occasions... sat there with a burning pain in my groin because I needed a 'p' two hours ago, but haven't managed it, because it's just been too damned busy and/or I don't dare leave the ship temporarily to junior staff. >> >> My reading is that the force took its eye off the ball and that in >> some way/ways the safeguards which should have applied to this young woman failed. I base >> that particularly on use of the phraseology about 'realising' after 44 hours that she'd not >> eaten or drunk. As said above, they would 'realise' each and every time she declined food/drink and it's recorded on her custody record. The custody sergeant is in overall charge and the buck stops with him/her... trouble is they can be so damned busy they cannot think straight. This was therefore not a 'normal' s136 detention, it was one that >> went wrong. I'll ask again. What went wrong? If you accept she shouldn't have been there, but was.. and it'll happen again... and a police officer cannot force someone to eat or drink... and eventually they'll become unwell and an ambulance will be called... which is what happened... what else? |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 20:17
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> What went wrong? Did anything go wrong? My impression was that nothing did, but the newspaper published a silly miserablist piece that really didn't amount to much. Stopped well short of appalling journalism though. Commonplace crap. I worry about the girl who may well be confused by all this faff. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 20:22
Appalling journalism - sooty123
|
|
and eventually they'll become unwell >> and an ambulance will be called... which is what happened... what else? >> >> I think that waiting 44 hours to reach that point might not be the best, perhaps getting there in a shorter time might be better. I'm not having a go I do understand where you are coming from. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 20:36
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> As said above, they would 'realise' each and every time she declined food/drink and it's >> recorded on her custody record. The custody sergeant is in overall charge and the buck >> stops with him/her... trouble is they can be so damned busy they cannot think straight. >> >> This was therefore not a 'normal' s136 detention, it was one that >> >> went wrong. >> >> I'll ask again. What went wrong? I'm drawing an inference from use of the word 'realised' that there was an 'oh s***' moment a T+44 hrs or thereabouts. Some failure of process, communication, recording etc meaning the dots were not joined until that point? Perhaps not a failure to record as such but a failure to link what was recorded to her status as both a minor and a s136 detainee. Maybe even something in Notts forces methodology in these cases and linked to fact that she was in a busy 'City Bridewell' type setting rather than Mansfield where she should have been. I'm seeing a criticism of Notts' systems rather than the individuals on the three or four overlapping shifts covering her time there being 'hung out to dry'. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 21:04
Appalling journalism - sooty123
|
|
>> I'm drawing an inference from use of the word 'realised' Perhaps you are drawing too much inference from that word. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 12:37
Appalling journalism - Manatee
|
|
I think most "journalism" is crap, but that story seems to have taken a reasonable line. If someone in custody "under the Mental Health Act" has refused even water for over 24 hours, at the very least they should be seen by a doctor, which sounds like a mistake by the police I agree that detention by the police for more than a short period before being transferred shouldn't happen, and that is the thrust of the story. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 14:18
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
Manatee's right. That isn't very appalling by appalling journalism standards, just sexed up a bit to tug at the heartstrings in vulgar fashion. But Westpig seems to be right too. He says the mad girl 'would have' been seen at least once by a doctor, and would be looked at every hour while in police custody. Police cells aren't cheerul or happy places even for adult men, let alone mentally ill adolescent girls. There are a lot of holes and gaps in our national arrangements for protecting the barmy from themselves, and the rest of society from the barmy. It obviously isn't something that should just be dropped in the laps of the police, but it seems that it very often is, faute de mieux so to speak. Of course there are callous and incompetent policemen, but frankly the same can be said about the medical services (especially the psychiatric ones). |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 14:33
Appalling journalism - Manatee
|
|
I missed your point WP about the doctor, which also appears at the end of the story...but I'd be surprised if a doctor wasn't taking action to prevent dehydration after 44 hours - maybe that is what happened. As is often the case, there are simple unanswered questions in that report. Going without food for a few days might not be dangerous - water is a different matter. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 14:43
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> Going without food for a few days might not be dangerous - water is a >> different matter. >> Every cell has a bog, with running water in it, so ultimately no one is 'deprived of water'. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) dictates timings of meals and drinks. Every prisoner has a written record of their detention, constantly updated, which has to be available for a solicitor or 'appropriate adult' to look at. There are half hourly checks done on vulnerable people by a gaoler who has to record it and most cell areas are now covered by CCTV. There are cupboards full of food and drink in a proper kitchen area. A vulnerable person, such as this girl will have an 'appropriate adult' look after their interests, so another family member or social services.. or if stuck, a local volunteer. This is all about someone who is mentally unwell being stuck in a cell instead of being in a hospital... and the fact she refused drink or food could easily have been the case in a psychiatric unit. It has been written to look like the 'big bad police' locked up a 16 year old and she was deprived of food and drink.. which is utter scheisse. The police would rather she was never there. She has been failed miserably by a crap system.. and the blame is being pointed at the wrong people by some crap journalism. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 14:56
Appalling journalism - Manatee
|
|
>> It has been written to look like the 'big bad police' locked up a 16 >> year old and she was deprived of food and drink.. which is utter scheisse. Which is actually what HMIC said, so as far as that goes it has been reported accurately. Zoe Billingham, from HMIC, said the area of significant concern was the detention of children in custody for their own protection under mental health legislation. She highlighted the plight of the 16-year-old-girl as the most serious case. "It is essential that the force takes steps to ensure that this never happens again," she said. "It is clear that that despite good work in many areas, Nottinghamshire Police needs to do more to improve its approach to protecting children." She said the practice of keeping children with mental health problems in police custody "has to stop". >> The police would rather she was never there. She has been failed miserably by a >> crap system.. Agreed. >>and the blame is being pointed at the wrong people by >> journalism |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 16:25
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> >>and the blame is being pointed at the wrong people by >> >> journalism Is it the job of a journalist to merely regurgitate what someone else has erroneously stated? ... or should they research their piece and ensure they 'get it right'. What the clueless lady from HMIC has said... was being said to my knowledge over 25 years ago... and probably longer than that again. It is absolutely correct that vulnerable mentally unwell people shouldn't be locked in police cells. However a viable alternative has yet to be found. So why blame the Old Bill. Yes the HMIC lady got it wrong... but so has the journalist.. because these things happen periodically, (it's easy enough to find with the internet).. so why not be professional and do a good job. So for me, it was crappy journalism. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 16:27
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
(it's easy enough to find with the internet).. so why not be professional >> and do a good job. >> >> So for me, it was crappy journalism. >> This being a recent one: tinyurl.com/k8an4lx |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 17:29
Appalling journalism - Manatee
|
|
>>Is it the job of a journalist to merely regurgitate what someone else has erroneously stated? I'm not really bothered about defending them, and a bit of investigation or comment could have added some value and taken a better slant, but I don't think that reporting a claimed finding of the official inspectorate (I assume it is) is quite on a par with "reporting" press releases generally. Noted that you are a former police officer of course. I think reading press reports on topics we know a lot about ourselves from a professional standpoint, and finding them deficient, is a fairly common experience! |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 17:48
Appalling journalism - madf
|
|
>> >> Noted that you are a former police officer of course. I think reading press reports >> on topics we know a lot about ourselves from a professional standpoint, and finding them >> deficient, is a fairly common experience! >> Most beekeepers complain that journalistic coverage of bees is usually sensationalist and wrong. To be fair to journalists, few are experts (in anything) so they rely on their sources. As we know, some sources are either incompetent or have an axe to grind or both. Anyone who believes what journalists write is as naive or brain dead as those who believe what politicians say and write...or take what is on the internet as truth..:-) |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 18:03
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> I'm not really bothered about defending them, I am, having been one. It's a hurried, ephemeral profession. The work is often done under great pressure of time, and sometimes discomfort, poor facilities, etc. Those who think it's so easy should try it themselves some time. It takes a certain agility to mask areas of ignorance, to minimize their importance, without seeming utterly useless. It's true of course that journalism on a subject you know well - whether news about someone you know or a feature about some pet hobby of yours - will always seem a bit rough and flawed, and will contain a mistake or two. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 17:52
Appalling journalism - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Every cell has a bog, with running water in it, so ultimately no one is >> 'deprived of water'. >> >> The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) dictates timings of meals and drinks. Every prisoner >> has a written record of their detention, constantly updated, which has to be available for >> a solicitor or 'appropriate adult' to look at. There are half hourly checks done on >> vulnerable people by a gaoler who has to record it and most cell areas are >> now covered by CCTV. I think point of report is that non of that prevented a situation where a mentally ill 16yo neither ate nor drank for nearly 48hrs while in custody. Which is what the headline says. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 18:50
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> a mentally ill 16yo neither ate nor drank for nearly 48hrs while in custody. Which is what the headline says. Headline or no, is it strictly true, and would anyone know if it wasn't? With a tap in the cell, and a copper peering in once an hour, it would be madness indeed not to take a drink of water when no one was looking through the peephole in the door. It's already been said that a fairly healthy person isn't really bothered by two days without food, but two days without water would leave anyone looking and feeling extremely ill. If not dead. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 15:05
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> two days without water would leave anyone looking and feeling extremely ill. If not dead. Harrumph... apparently a fit person can survive 'up to' five days without water. But from memory, you feel very crap after two. |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 15:31
Appalling journalism - Runfer D'Hills
|
|
Oh come on AC, when was the last time you actually drank water except in the form of ice!? ;-) |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 18:00
Appalling journalism - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> when was the last time you actually drank water except in the form of ice!? Point taken of course... but I drink a lot of water, sometimes between tinctures. It's good for you and I've always liked it. Running a bit short of orange juice to dilute the vodka. Tsk. I'll have to resort to Apple and elderflower, watery muck, when that runs out. Don't mind ice in proper cocktails from a shaker. But it's a step too far in vodka-naranja... if you keep them both in the fridge you don't need ice. The melted water spoils the taste. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 22:05
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> I think point of report is that non of that prevented a situation where a >> mentally ill 16yo neither ate nor drank for nearly 48hrs while in custody. Which is >> what the headline says. >> What do you propose then, to ensure the person does utilise the food/drink offered?... bearing in mind most police staff are not trained in anything other than basic first aid. There is access to a police doctor and some custody suites have nurses in them... however, ultimately they'd recommend removal to NHS accommodation... you know that facility that has already been found to be unavailable. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 18:15
Appalling journalism - Haywain
|
| Yes - I think there is somewhere where this girl could be looked after properly; ISTR it's called something like 'Care in the community'. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 21:23
Appalling journalism - Dutchie
|
|
I know all about the suffering parents go through when one of their children becomes mentally ill. Happened to me and my wife our oldest became ill at seventeen.Top marks at school very intelligent and learning to become a master at sea.He is in his forties now lives a good independent live with proper medication and plenty of support from family.A sixteen old girl is still a child.I don't want to blame anyone but in this case who is responsible for this cock up? Maybe that is the reason our daughter became a mental health nurse seeing her elder brother going through his hell. |
|
New Wed 11 Feb 15 22:01
Appalling journalism - Westpig
|
|
>> A sixteen >> old girl is still a child.I don't want to blame anyone but in this case >> who is responsible for this cock up? It has been like it for as long as I was in the Police, which was 1981. If someone is mentally unwell in a public place and is a danger to themselves or others, police have a power under s.136 Mental Health Act 1983 to detain them for 36 hours, take them to a 'place of safety' and have them assessed professionally. For at least 25 years the place of safety should be a hospital not a police station... only you can't get them in there usually. So I think it is a bit rich of someone senior in HMIC to criticise this, it shows their extreme ignorance ... and equally so the BBC article. Police cells have limited facilities and if someone doesn't wish to take the food/drink offered, what on earth are you supposed to do? |
|
New Thu 12 Feb 15 20:11
Appalling journalism - Roger.
|
|
I realised that crap journalism was the norm in 1956! I was in Cyprus with 45 Commando based in Troodos (hunting EOKA terrorists). We had a lady journalist from the Daily Mail attached to us for an "in-depth" report. She was afforded every courtesy and given correct information. When we read her piece in the paper, later on, we could not believe the farrago of nonsense and inaccuracies (being polite here!) that she had written. She could have written it in Fleet St, and saved us all the trouble. |
|
New Fri 13 Feb 15 05:58
Appalling journalism - Duncan
|
|
>> I realised that crap journalism was the norm in 1956! >> I was in Cyprus with 45 Commando based in Troodos Didn't they whisk you off to Suez? |
|
New Fri 13 Feb 15 16:09
Appalling journalism - Roger.
|
|
Just missed it! Still got the Naval General service Medal for Cyprus, tho'. Puzzled the chaps in the TA, (Sherwood Foresters & The Royal Sussex) in later years, who didn't recognise it! |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
