Nurses should lie to get patients vaccinated

"A Shiawassee County woman is suing Baker College after she claims she was kicked out of the school's nursing program because she questioned lessons she claims encouraged students to lie to patients in order to get them vaccinated."
 
"Nichole Rolfe filed the lawsuit Monday, April 6, in Genesee Circuit Court on claims an instructor at the private school's Owosso campus told students to threaten and panic patients into immunizations. Rolfe's October 2013 dismissal from the program came 20 weeks before she was set to graduate."
 
"She stated that we would go in there if they declined and then we would use threats to coerce them," Rolfe said of the instructor's lesson. The threats could include, "You're going to lose your Medicaid and if you lose your Medicaid because you refuse the vaccine you will have to pay for your entire hospital stay," she claims."

"The lesson, Rolfe claimed, came two days after another instructor told her that she had to tell potential new fathers that they were to be vaccinated against a number of diseases, including whooping cough, immediately before they could be allowed on the hospital floor with newborn babies."

"The vaccinations would do little to protect the newborns because they would not have taken effect by the time the fathers interacted with the babies, Rolfe claimed."

"The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that everyone who comes in contact with newborns, including parents, be up-to-date on their vaccinations at least two weeks before coming in close contact with the infant."

"Rolfe said she questioned both instructors, trying to understand the rationale behind the two lessons that she believed went against how they were previously taught to inform patients."

"I was asking questions that a nursing student should ask," Rolfe said."

"But the school claimed that Rolfe was overly aggressive and disruptive and it was for that reason she was removed from the program."

http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2015/04/baker_college_taught_nursing_s.html

Smaller homes for smarter cities

 

 

From People for Smarter Cities (IBM Smarter Cities)

The report gives examples of a number of projects:

Each of the city systems described ... can be transformed through the application of Smarter City principles - specifically, through the collection and combination of data, the application of analytics and the creation of intelligence and insight leading to action...

Smarter City initiatives hold the key. These can be at any scale, from large and complex schemes to much smaller projects that can be scaled-up over time.

http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/global/files/uk__none__smarter_cities__ibm_uk_paper_people_for_smarter_cities.pdf

IBM promotes the idea of Smarter Cities and ensures that `Stack `em and pack `em` projects are not mentioned.  However,  Agenda 21 clearly states that suburban households are unsustainable. Densely packed and highly monitored mega-cities are the planned future.
See http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/i-spent-the-night-in-brightons-homeless-shipping-container-housing-project

Predicting child abuse ?

Written by Natasha Phillips

"Whilst New Zealand is at the cutting edge of child welfare policy, the use of data to effectively predict the likelihood of future harm is something we should all be concerned about."

"A uniform system which starts and ends with stats, raises several problems. The first is that we have no definitive data which confirms that factors like poverty, lack of education and family histories of violence are always predictors for child abuse. It also reinforces unhelpful and unkind stereotypes which will filter into the welfare system and become entrenched in its day-to-day ethos, bolstering stigmas and allowing the view that these families are somehow inferior, to endure."

"Those families that do not ‘fit the profile’, also risk going unspotted by child welfare professionals. If poverty and a lack of education increase the risk of abuse in a home, then an abundance of resources and access to high quality education could also increase that risk. That is because highly manipulative behaviours, present in abusers, exist at every level of society, with stress perhaps, being the underpinning commonality which joins demographics together. Any future research would need to focus on stress and its impact on individuals, rather than the more obvious demarcations of class and opportunity."

"Research tells us that social workers already have a natural bias towards families who are known to them as a result of parenting difficulties they’ve faced in the past. Bias is part of the human condition, persistent in all of us, and even affects those who we think are immune to it by virtue of their education or intellect, like judges for example, but high quality training is required, even for judges, in order to ensure that it does not taint reasoning and lead to miscarriages of justice."

"That this new initiative seeks to target areas of support rather than apportion blame and remove children from parents in the first instance, is at least a positive step. The initiative – that of using the collected data to try to preempt abuse – hopes to offer families at risk support, such as parenting programmes. The reality though, is that if stress is in fact the underlying cause of abuse in many homes, parenting classes are not likely to have any meaningful impact on preventing abuse."

Read more 36955-engage-new-zealand-crunches-big-data-to-prevent-child-abuse-or-perpetuate-prejudice

Lord Janner will not be prosecuted

Issued by Leicestershire Police on 16/4/15 at 10:41 a.m.

"The decision not to prosecute a man suspected of sexually abusing vulnerable children who were resident in Leicestershire care homes in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s has been criticised by Leicestershire Police."

"The Director of Public Prosecutions has today announced that, despite sufficient evidence gathered over two years, it would not be in the public interest to bring charges against the alleged offender who is now in his 80s."

"Assistant Chief Constable Roger Bannister of Leicestershire Police, who has overseen the investigation, said he believed the decision was "the wrong one" and it would do little to support and encourage victims of sexual abuse to come forward."

"He said: "Thanks primarily to the courage of 25 victims who have made a complaint and the complete professionalism of the investigation team, we have built a case that the DPP has acknowledged is the result of a thorough investigation, evidentially sufficient and gives rise to a realistic chance of conviction."

"There is credible evidence that this man carried out some of the most serious sexual crimes imaginable over three decades against children who were highly vulnerable and the majority of whom were in care."

"I am extremely worried about the impact the decision not to prosecute him will have on those people, and more widely I am worried about the message this decision sends out to others , both past and present, who have suffered and are suffering sexual abuse."

"We are exploring what possible legal avenues there may be to challenge this decision and victims themselves have a right to review under a CPS procedure."

https://www.leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2015/04/16/force-disappointed-by-decison-not-to-prosecute-suspected-child-abuser

See also http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3041209/Labour-s-Janner-not-charged-alleged-child-abuse-Prosecutors-say-not-public-peer-86-trial-age-dementia.html

The Early Action Task Force wants early intervention as a matter of urgency

"A group of political analysts, including a former adviser to David Cameron, is calling on the next government to prioritise early intervention as a matter of urgency. Early help for children displaying challenging behaviour is one idea put forward by experts."

"The latest report from Community Links-led group Early Action Task Force argues that Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have so far failed to effectively promote the importance of intervening earlier to support families and children."

"Among the contributors to the report, called One Hundred Days For Early Action is Danny Kruger, who worked for Cameron in opposition and now runs Only Connect, a charity for people at risk of offending, calls for the public sector to shift to being a “preventer” of problems rather than clearing them up." [So is Danny Kruger an independent expert ? ]

"Community Links founder and chair of the taskforce, David Robinson said: “The support which has been expressed by the three main political parties for the principle of early action isn’t enough – it’s time for all political leaders to commit to adopting a preventative approach in their manifesto promises and then turn those words into action in government."

http://www.cypnow.co.uk/cyp/news/1150796/public-services-should-be-preventer-of-problems-say-early-help-experts

From One Hundred Days For Early Action:

"The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimate that 45% of the planned fiscal tightening will be still to come when the new Government is elected (£92bn). They will inherit a country of escalating needs, diminishing resources and an alarming direction of travel."

To address these needs some experts in the report suggest:

• parenting classes
• incredible years group training
• an early action social security system
• troubled youth programme
• spend and tax to deliver better outcomes, not to perpetuate existing public services and the current welfare system.
• schools for life initiative, including training in resilience
• working with voluntary and community sectors
• training to work programme
• incentives to increase house sharing
• reducing food poverty by a public campaign to "grow your own food and reduce food waste."

Early interventions serve a bigger purpose than helping young children with challenging behaviour. In the report, the Welsh Government`s Future Generations Bill is congratulated for blazing a trail.

That trail leads to the United Nations Agenda 21 as do the above proposals by the experts in the report.

Compulsory vaccinations

"The federal government [in Australia] is looking to take a hard line with parents who choose not to vaccinate their children."

"Under ground breaking reforms, Social Services Minister Scott Morrison will reportedly scrap a provision that allows parents who don't vaccinate their children to claim welfare benefits, including $726 from Family Tax Benefit A, $7,500-a-year from childcare rebate and $200-a-week from the childcare benefit scheme."

"The way the system works now, children must be immunised to access childcare payments, however, a 'contentious loop hole' means parents can avoid loosing their benefits by simply signing a form that says they object to immunisation based on 'personal, philosophical or religious' reasons."

"Mr Morrison recently said the rules around welfare payments need to be 'tightened' and that while immunising children against deadly diseases protects the wider society, it should be a prerequisite to receive tax payer money."

"'We've got to think about the health and well-being of all the other children that are put at risk, and it's their health that also matters,' he said. "[Why would vaccinated children be at risk ?]

"'And in fact, you know, those parents have taken decisions to immunise their children, and that's obviously the sensible thing to do. We're a free country, and we're for free society, but that doesn't mean you get to take taxpayers' money if you don't want to go along with the rules.' "

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3034965/No-jab-No-pay-Australia-tough-vaccination-parents-set-lose-benefits-15-000-year-child-choose-not-immunise.html#ixzz3XJ5Coyg6

Agenda 21 in Wales

Wales is changing its education system with a curriculum that looks very similar to Curriculum for Excellence, all the better to prepare children for the 21st century.

It is also putting forward a Bill to implement the UN plan for sustainable development and tasks Public Service Boards with early interventions.  So it is fast catching up with Scotland:

The Wales We Want

"The Wales We Want conversation was initiated as a pilot exercise by Welsh Government as part of the development of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Bill and has mirrored the UN "World We Want" process. The Conversation has contributed to the shaping of the Bill and provides important lessons for implementation of the proposed legislation."

"`The Wales We Want' conversation mirrors a global initiative by the United Nations, designed to meet the aspirations of all citizens. (By way of the usual undemocratic consultation process.)  People were asked what sort of Wales they want for their children and grandchildren, considering challenges and ways to solve long-term problems. Responses have helped shape the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Bill."

"The report highlights the overwhelming message that children need to get the best start in life from very early years – better opportunities with the skills, education and knowledge needed to encourage an independent thinking next generation of 'Futures Leaders' and 'Community Champions.'"

"It tasks Public Service Boards with early interventions, through environmental and nutritional factors, to bring a positive impact on children's life chances, improving health, self-confidence and ambition."

"The Wales We Want survey highlighted climate change as the single most important issue facing future generations, while the collation of overall responses in all forms of the Conversation made environment the main area of concern. Investment in growing local economies and creating new jobs is given high priority. "(You mean that was not given top priority. How extraordinary ! )

http://thewaleswewant.co.uk/blog/wales-we-want/wales-we-want-report-reveals-future-you-want

Information about Agenda 21 HERE

GIRFEC and Police Scotland

"GIRFEC is all about early and effective intervention – and of course about putting the child at the centre of that approach." So they say.

http://www.pkc.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=20961&p=0

It is also about Community Planning Partnerships - all state, corporate and voluntary agencies working together with a shared understanding of children`s wellbeing (common language) and a consensus about passing on information about children between the various agencies.

Alongside health and education, the police are an important partner in the Community Planning Partnership. From their document Getting it right for children and families and using language straight from the SHANARRI wellbeing wheel, they assure everyone that their mission is to keep children safe. 

Every child or young person has the right to be safe and protected, and to feel safe and protected from any avoidable situation or acts of commission or omission which might result in that child being exposed to demands and expectations which are inappropriate to their age and stage of development. 

http://www.cen.scot.nhs.uk/files/Outline_CYP_Act_Guidance_April2014.pdf
 

Well if that is GIRFEC (Getting it Right for Every Child) and the Community Planning Partnership it is not working out too well.

The following article from the Guardian exposes the hypocrisy at the heart of the CPP:

"Scottish ministers have appointed a human rights lawyer to investigate a record level of police use of stop-and-search after a damning report by the police inspectorate."

"An inquiry by the Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland found a series of failures by Police Scotland after the force increased the use of common law stop and search, dwarfing its use everywhere else in the UK. After revealing that 83 children under 11 were stopped and searched in six months last year without any proof of a crime – despite the force’s promise that it would end, the inspectorate said Police Scotland’s record-keeping on stop and search was riddled with errors and inconsistencies...."

"The Scottish justice secretary, Michael Matheson, announced on Tuesday that John Scott QC, a leading human rights lawyer and chair of the Scottish branch of the Howard League for Penal Reform, would now lead an expert panel to investigate the future use of stop and search, including considering a ban."

"Stop and search can be a valuable tool in combating crime," Matheson said, "but we must get the balance right between protecting the public and the rights of the individual. "As such, it is vital that stop-and-search powers are used appropriately, and we need to make some key decisions on how such powers should be used going forward. We need a clear, consistent approach which, as a society, we can all be agreed upon."

"Both announcements mark a U-turn by the Scottish government after Matheson’s predecessor as justice secretary, Kenny MacAskill, repeatedly defended the practice, despite mounting evidence that it was being abused and unregulated. They are also a significant blow to the reputation of Stephen House, the former Metropolitan police assistant deputy commissioner who became the first chief of the new force Police Scotland...."

"A study by Kath Murray, at the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research at the University of Edinburgh, found that stop-and-search rates were four times higher than the rest of the UK because Scottish police were heavily using common law powers to search without evidence – a practice banned in England and Wales..."

"She discovered too that children under 14 were searched 26,000 times in 2010 without evidence or suspicion of a crime. That included 500 searches of children aged 10 or under, and 72 searches of children aged seven or younger...."

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/mar/31/human-rights-lawyer-to-investigate-scottish-police-use-of-stop-and-search

All of this, including GIRFEC, leaves us to ask the embarrassing question: How come Police Scotland, one of the important partners in the Community Planning Partnership, does not know that it is inappropriate to stop and search children in a consensual search who are actually below the age of consent?

To use their own words: when the police stop and search children below the age of consent are they not exposing them to demands and expectations which are inappropriate to their age and stage of development?

Social Services staff snoop into confidential files

"The overarching concept of Getting it right for every child is that of a common, co-ordinated approach across all agencies that supports the delivery of appropriate, proportionate and timely help to all children as they need it."

"The practice model includes a structure for gathering and recording information on children and their families." (ALL children and their families)

Unfortunately the co-ordinated Getting it right for every child (GIRFEC) approach did not deliver appropriate, proportionate and timely help for Mikaeel Kular and at least nine social services staff have been fired for breaching confidentiality rules.

Fife Council dismissed the workers for accessing documents about the three-year-old’s murder at the hands of his mother, Rosdeep Adekoya, 34, in January last year.

Mikaeel died from internal injuries after he was repeatedly punched by his mother following a trip to a restaurant. Adekoya is now behind bars after being convicted of battering him to death.

Council chiefs are said to have taken swift action after a probe found the workers had looked at files without permission. Confirmation of the sackings comes as a separate independent review continues into whether Mikaeel’s death could have been prevented. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3034847/Nine-council-workers-sacked-spying-tragic-three-year-old-Mikaeel-Kular-s-personal-files.html

One of the most frequent criticisms made against GIRFEC is that it will flood the system with trivial information about low level wellbeing concerns, making it difficult to notice those few indications of significant risk to vulnerable children. Gathering lots of data is one thing; reading the signs is something else. There is a need to raise the threshold of concern so that attention is focused on high risk cases. We know that Mikaeel was known to social workers but somehow he fell off the radar when the family moved from Fife to Edinburgh.

Lord Laming has noted:

"There are definite advantages to electronic record keeping in place of the previous often inaccessible paper files. Technology offers the potential for professionals to share information more effectively, to make information more accessible, and to use systems to manage the workflow of children’s services."

http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/299693/0093435.pdf

There are also disadvantages to electronic record keeping and a system that encourages data sharing across different agencies. As the snooping into Mikaeel Kular`s file illustrates, it will not be possible to eradicate abuses - there is always the human element - and this will make all children in Scotland vulnerable to those with ulterior motives. There is no good reason why children who do not urgently require services should be put at risk. GIRFEC is a bad idea.

See http://alicemooreuk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/significant-case-review-into-social.html

NHS staff would engage police action against Ashya King`s parents again

"Doctors and nurses at Southampton General Hospital told BBC South about the ‘outpouring of hatred’ they received from members of the public amid the ‘tsunami of media interest’ and how in their view young Ashya’s life was ‘put… at huge risk’ by his parents...." [ I think the public recognised that Ashya`s parents were fighting for his life.]

"Five-year-old Ashya King was removed from hospital, where he was being treated for a brain tumour, by his parents. At the time he could not swallow and had to be fed through his nose."

"Sister Mandy Frisby, who cared for him, told BBC South: "The dangers to Ashya would be that the feed going into his stomach could go into his lungs and that could have very serious consequences… He could die…. It just seemed… so unsafe, this child was so vulnerable, and they were so caring and I just couldn’t put the two together." [Here`s how to put it together. The parents had decided that Ashya was too weak to withstand the NHS treatment on offer. They wasted no time and transported their son safely to Europe for alternative treatment.]

"Another member of the nursing staff, Matron Kate Pye, said: "Through the use of media, through YouTube, they were showing a child who was being fed but nobody knew that they didn’t know how to feed him… We were really glad he was safe, but actually, fundamentally, they put him at huge risk. And if you asked me again, ‘Would I phone the police?’ the answer would be yes every time. Because if something had happened to that little boy in that car, then we would have been accountable for that."...[No it was the parents` decision.]

"The Kings took the decision to take Ashya to Prague to seek proton therapy. His doctors had recommended a course of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. But the Kings were concerned that was a danger to their son and wanted to try a different treatment abroad. The NHS trust involved had agreed to help with this, but the Kings would have to pay for it privately."

"After Ashya had left the UK and gone to Prague, in an unprecedented move, the NHS agreed to pay for his proton therapy, against the advice of its own independent experts. The clinicians at Southampton say that decision has left doctors across the country in a difficult position."

"Dr Peter Wilson said: "It does put clinicians in an impossible position because we now have to try to explain to families why one child... is getting a form of treatment, why they can’t and they’ve got the same tumour… And that’s deeply unfair when the NHS is supposed to be about equal healthcare for all." [Should Ashya have been sacrificed for the sake of equality? What parent could go along with that?]

"Paediatric Oncology Consultant Dr Ramya Ramanujachar said: "I don’t think the parents can look after their own child with a brain tumour and be not only the carers but also the professionals directing, managing and dictating their child’s treatment." [The Kings had done their research and were aware of an alternative treatment. Proton Therapy targets the tumour but avoids damage to other vital organs. Dr Ramanujachar overstates his case.]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2015/ashya-king

Ashya – The Untold Story is available nationally on BBC iPlayer.
　

Judgement by the Honourable Mr Justice Baker

"The course of treatment proposed by Mr and Mrs King is entirely reasonable. Ashya has a serious medical condition. Any parents in the position of Mr and Mrs King would do whatever they could to explore all options. Some parents would follow the advice of the local doctors to use conventional radiotherapy, others would prefer the relatively untested option of proton therapy (assuming the funds can be made available to meet the cost of transport and treatment) in the hope that the toxic effects of radiation will be reduced. Both courses are reasonable and it is the parents who bear the heavy responsibility of making the decision. It is no business of this court, or any other public authority, to interfere with their decision." https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/judgment-ashya-king-08092014.pdf