I have to apologise for the lack of detail about this case, but I am
constrained by confidentiality issues and a desire not to engender bias
in your replies.
It would be very helpful if every one who reads this could send me a
personal reply. I will let the list know the outcome and will be able
to give further details about the complaint I made. I really need at
least 50 replies to help me , so PLEASE contribute.
BACKGROUND
A baby had their name added to the Child Protection Register under the
category of Actual Physical Abuse and two weeks later when it was
decided that the baby had not been abused had their name erased from the
register. I was present at the initial case conference and was unhappy
about the procedural method that was followed. I made some informal
approaches to the Social Services, about my concerns, and got no-where.
I ended up making a Formal Complaint. The pivotal argument revolves
around the interpretation and understanding of the following sentence
which comes from their Code of Practice.
A requirement for registration is that, "The Professional judgement is
that further incidents are likely."
The Question I really need a consensus about is " What is the definition
of the word likely" in the above sentence.
Rob
Dr R I Johnson
The Family Practice, Church Lane, Sleaford, NG34 7DF
Tel. 01529 305595 Mobile 0378 206475 Fax No 01529 305589
Single handed GP. Send email to [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|