'Apology' for daughters raped by father

[DTeacher]

Not sure if this has been posted but I didn't see it anywhere on the forum......

From ITN News on yahoo.co.uk

Two women who were raped and abused by their father for over 25 years have received an apology from the authorities which failed to protect them.
The 56-year-old father is serving a life sentence for repeatedly raping his daughters, who went through 19 pregnancies between them.

The man, who has been likened to the infamous Austrian rapist Josef Fritzl, fathered seven children with his daughters, two of whom are severely disabled.
The apology was made during the publication of the executive summary into a serious case review, which acknowledged the family had contact with 28 different agencies and 100 members of staff over 35 years.

The Sheffield and Lincolnshire Safeguarding Children Boards, which were responsible for the family over the period of abuse, apologised for their failings and insisted changes have been made to protect families from abuse.
Chris Cook, independent chair of Lincolnshire Safeguarding Children Board, added: "We are genuinely sorry. We should have protected you. This is a tragic and complicated case that involved more than 100 professionals working in 28 agencies."

Sue Fiennes, independent chair of Sheffield Safeguarding Children Board, said:

"We want to apologise to the family at the heart of this case. It will be clear that we failed this family. This report will not make comfortable reading for any of the organisations concerned with the family. We are all committed to working relentlessly to do all we can to minimise the risk of this happening again and indeed we have taken action.

"Lessons are being learned by the agencies involved."



The last line is an interesting one.

How many cases like this do these 'agencies' need - is the 'learning process' really that difficult?

Why does this continue to happen and is our judicial system to blame in any way? Who is culpable (if anyone?) apart from the obvious offender, the Father?

Do YOU feel strongly about any aspect? What are your thoughts?

 

[Seasideblue]

Just heard it on the news................... Fookin Astonishing and disgracefull

But everything is ok now cause they have said sorry ....................Again

Having said that makes you wonder if all this Human Rights/Political Correctness etc is tying the hands of the agencies

Although in this case the abuse started in the seventies so no excuse really

 

[DTeacher]

Just heard it on the news................... Fookin Astonishing and disgracefull

But everything is ok now cause they have said sorry ....................Again

Having said that makes you wonder if all this Human Rights/Political Correctness etc is tying the hands of the agencies

Although in this case the abuse started in the seventies so no excuse really

I would like to say 'Unbelievable!' but sadly, I can't.

Sexual abuse within families is more prevalent than we would like to believe and the 'excuses' churned out on a regular basis by the agencies are beginning to wear a little thin. I don't believe the 'human rights' aspect you allude to is a factor, because of the human rights of the VICTIMS.

No, I think it is a complex issue and I have further thoughts on the subject matter but am interested to see what others on here think first.

 

[Seasideblue]

As you state sexual abuse in families is more prevalent than what we would like to think
I have recently read a book on this subject ,a female friend gave it to me and told me to read it as it is not the type of book i would normally read. I cannot for the life of me remember the title but it was harrowing to say the least.

With regards the HRAct I certainly was not trying to excuse any of the agencies but just making a comment on how it seems to be creeping into everything to do with local authorities and these agencies As an example each time you make a simple thing like a planning application (something i do a lot of) it always states that the HRAct has been taken into account.So if they consider it in such instances then possibly other matters also.

I also have other ides but will wait to see other posters opinions first

 

[one stop]

& the football connection is??????????

 

[DTeacher]

& the football connection is??????????

It is in 'Off Topic'

Do you know what that means?

 

[Seasideblue]

& the football connection is??????????

Were off topic!!!!

 

[Lucky Toma]

I really dont think human rights or political correctness are in any way to blame for this atrocity of justice.

Its the entire social care system in this country that is an utter shambles and needs dismantling and starting again. Layer after layer of beaurocracy should be disgarded and social workers should be allowed to do their jobs.

The statistics are astonishing. The sheer amount of form-filling social workers have to do each and every day in comparison to actually dealing with people and problems and, crucially, having the power to intervene.

Individuals are scared to make mistakes (oh the irony in this instance) and it encourages a climate of covering your back.

How many more instances will it take before the government actually follow through on their promise to pare down on needless beaurocracy in the care system, NHS, and the public sector?! And you can guarentee Cameron will be pledging to do so too. But it never gets done.

 

[Revol]

"Sheffield and Lincolnshire"

Figures.

 

[Newlunar]

Just heard it on the news................... Fookin Astonishing and disgracefull

But everything is ok now cause they have said sorry ....................Again

Having said that makes you wonder if all this Human Rights/Political Correctness etc is tying the hands of the agencies

Although in this case the abuse started in the seventies so no excuse really

I would like to say 'Unbelievable!' but sadly, I can't.

Sexual abuse within families is more prevalent than we would like to believe and the 'excuses' churned out on a regular basis by the agencies are beginning to wear a little thin. I don't believe the 'human rights' aspect you allude to is a factor, because of the human rights of the VICTIMS.

No, I think it is a complex issue and I have further thoughts on the subject matter but am interested to see what others on here think first.

The human rights act does not apply to victims of crime and I'll tell you for why.
The human rights act was concocted by Tony Blair at the behest of his wife Cherie Blair AKA Booth as I'm no doubt you are aware, is a prominent lawyer specialising in Human rights law. It was a spectacular piece of abuse of office.
From the country that scripted the Magna Carta and stood virtually alone against totalitarianism in the early forties, there was no reason to introduce the HR Act. If anyone thinks different I'm all ears.

So the point I'm making is that the purpose of the Human rights act is to protect the citizens from interference from the state not to protect citizens from becoming victims. This is why the state now cannot protect it's citizens because the dietary requirements of an imprisoned sex offender is his/her Human right, whilst the mental well being of his/her victim is an unfortunate by-product of his/her behaviour.