6 Year old boy thrown 5 floors from Tate Modern Museum in London by 17 year old boy

bigmike20vt said:
I dont think it is fair to expect a company to have to prepare for someone picking up a child and throwing them out of a building / off a balcony.
IF that was a thing then basically such things as open air balconys would cease to exist, and everything would be in cages - not something i would like to see......
IF a balcony fails then someone is at fault, if a wall is not high enough and someone slips over someone is at fault.... IF a person picks somoene up and throws them over a ledge or out of a window.... that person is at fault.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
bigmike20vt said:
I dont think it is fair to expect a company to have to prepare for someone picking up a child and throwing them out of a building / off a balcony.
IF that was a thing then basically such things as open air balconys would cease to exist, and everything would be in cages - not something i would like to see......
IF a balcony fails then someone is at fault, if a wall is not high enough and someone slips over someone is at fault.... IF a person picks somoene up and throws them over a ledge or out of a window.... that person is at fault.
Click to expand...

Are we already at that stage of a thread where something like this needs to be explained? :p
 
Building solutions for stupid people only creates better stupid people.

Also would eugenics actually work? Surely you'd get to a point where there wouldn't be enough diversity? if that's the right word, almost like inbreeding.
 
Freakbro said:
Are we already at that stage of a thread where something like this needs to be explained? :p
Click to expand...
sadly it seems so considering the post i was quoting with that reply :(

but remember this is a world where when you buy a coffee it says "warning contents hot" and a packet of peanuts has a warning that it contains nuts or a burgerlar can sue a homeowner if they get injured whilst carrying out a robbery so..................... basically nothing would surprise me any more.

(for the record, i would not blame the parents of the toddler if they did lash out... they must be reeling right now and I would not blame them for lashing out at anyone whilst they try to make some sort of rationality for what happened - esp if we assume the 17year olds defence will be that he wasn't responsible because he is ill ..... it does not mean I would agree with them however if they did)
 
AhhBisto said:
Building solutions for stupid people only creates better stupid people.

Also would eugenics actually work? Surely you'd get to a point where there wouldn't be enough diversity? if that's the right word, almost like inbreeding.
Click to expand...

Breeding negative qualities out tends to work well. Breeding in specific qualities however doesn't. Just look at those dogs that are bred to exaggerate stubby limbs or stunted snouts and can barely walk or breathe.
 
VincentHanna said:
Carers get paid an absolute pittance to do one of the hardest jobs going. At one end of the spectrum Dealing with old people with dementia, crapping themselves and generally being in a confused stage and at the other end of the spectrum, strong teenagers who have extreme mental health issues.

If they were purposefully incompetent then fair enough, but it's a bit early to demonise them for this.

If this 17 year old was kept in a secure unit and escaped, then questions need to be asked.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant whether they get crap pay or not in regards to this. They were paid to do a job, whether two people were to keep hold of him or he was to be in a secure unit and escaped, someone somewhere has screwed up. Throwing money at it, which is what others are suggesting, does not solve that problem. Human error is human error. You either get smarter humans, which reduces error, or design humans out of the equation.

This sounds like the risk that this individual presents was recognised, hence measures were put in to place correctly. So again throwing more money at the system, as suggested, wouldn't solve this problem.

As for my other point - schizophrenia is known to be at least partially genetic...
 
Dis86 said:
Irrelevant whether they get crap pay or not in regards to this. They were paid to do a job, whether two people were to keep hold of him or he was to be in a secure unit and escaped, someone somewhere has screwed up. Throwing money at it, which is what others are suggesting, does not solve that problem. Human error is human error. You either get smarter humans, which reduces error, or design humans out of the equation.

This sounds like the risk that this individual presents was recognised, hence measures were put in to place correctly. So again throwing more money at the system, as suggested, wouldn't solve this problem.

As for my other point - schizophrenia is known to be at least partially genetic...
Click to expand...

Well more money tends to get you smarter and more motivated humans.
 
If anyone is liable then it is presumably the organisation responsible for the 17yr old kid. Sounds like those carers might need to be sacked, how can he just dissapear when he’s supposed to be monitored by two of them and why take the risk of letting him be near kids anyway. Someone has made a bad judgement call, doesn’t sound like this schizo should be let out again even with carers.
 
dowie said:
If anyone is liable then it is presumably the organisation responsible for the 17yr old kid. Sounds like those carers might need to be sacked, how can he just dissapear when he’s supposed to be monitored by two of them and why take the risk of letting him be near kids anyway. Someone has made a bad judgement call, doesn’t sound like this schizo should be let out again even with carers.
Click to expand...

It's more a failing of the entire mental health system. There isn't a child out there who has 24/7 monitoring whilst in community based care. That's only if they are detained in actual facilities. The 2-1 care suggests it was a live in and assisted carer type situation for somebody who was unable to remain safe and function at basic societal level. They aren't guards.

Years ago they would have been detained in asylum's. That was deemed as barbaric hence the move to care in the community. The costs involved in 2-1 care are astronomical and shouldered by the local authority. Over the years I've lost count of the amount of murders and serious assaults I've seen that involved schizophrenics who just decided to stop taking their meds for no reason.
 
Last edited:
Thecaferacer said:
It's more a failing of the entire mental health system. There isn't a child out there who has 24/7 monitoring whilst in community based care. That's only if they are detained in actual facilities. The 2-1 care suggests it was a live in and assisted carer type situation for somebody who was unable to remain safe and function at basic societal level. They aren't guards.

Years ago they would have been detained in asylum's. That was deemed as barbaric hence the move to care in the community. The costs involved in 2-1 care are astronomical and shouldered by the local authority. Over the years I've lost count of the amount of murders and serious assaults I've seen that involved schizophrenics who just decided to stop taking their meds for no reason.
Click to expand...

This^ my missus is in community mental health and theres simply not the resources or money to cover everyone that needs help. Even when people are accepted into programes the waiting times can be very long. Mental health needs more funding than it currently gets but then what doesn't.
 
LOAM said:
This^ my missus is in community mental health and theres simply not the resources or money to cover everyone that needs help.
Click to expand...

The Tories have been underfunding the mental health, community services and police for ages now, it is totally and utterly appaling. The worse thing is it is costing more money than they are saving. There has been a spike in violent crime (london knifing for example) and a spike in people who are homeless. It beggers belief.

They brought in a war on the sick disabled, again costing more money than saved AND costing lives.

And here we are now with a SECOND unelected tory PM.

You couldnt make this stuff up, its crazy.


Edit: and universal credit has been targeted by scamsters (look it up) costing 100's of millions.

 
Dis86 said:
Irrelevant whether they get crap pay or not in regards to this. They were paid to do a job, whether two people were to keep hold of him or he was to be in a secure unit and escaped, someone somewhere has screwed up. Throwing money at it, which is what others are suggesting, does not solve that problem. Human error is human error. You either get smarter humans, which reduces error, or design humans out of the equation.

This sounds like the risk that this individual presents was recognised, hence measures were put in to place correctly. So again throwing more money at the system, as suggested, wouldn't solve this problem.

As for my other point - schizophrenia is known to be at least partially genetic...
Click to expand...

So your argument is that we need people who are less prone to mistakes or who are more prepared to risk serious physical harm to restrain someone in their charge due to the legislation in place.

At the same time you think low pay has no bearing on the ability to recruit a more suitable person?
 
Thecaferacer said:
It's more a failing of the entire mental health system. There isn't a child out there who has 24/7 monitoring whilst in community based care. That's only if they are detained in actual facilities. The 2-1 care suggests it was a live in and assisted carer type situation for somebody who was unable to remain safe and function at basic societal level. They aren't guards.

Years ago they would have been detained in asylum's. That was deemed as barbaric hence the move to care in the community. The costs involved in 2-1 care are astronomical and shouldered by the local authority. Over the years I've lost count of the amount of murders and serious assaults I've seen that involved schizophrenics who just decided to stop taking their meds for no reason.
Click to expand...

They might not be guards but surely they (or rather the organisation they work for) is still potentially liable here. If he’s escaped the facility or two people looking after him when outside given they know he’s violent and a danger then that, even with limited info, does seem to indicate some negligence regardless of any overall issues with funding or the mental heath system in general.

If he was in the community and there wasn’t sufficient funding to adequately monitor him and others like him etc... then sure perhaps more blame on the government too. However it sounds like this guy was a clear danger and already supposed to be watched closely.
 
wesimmo said:
So your argument is that we need people who are less prone to mistakes or who are more prepared to risk serious physical harm to restrain someone in their charge due to the legislation in place.

At the same time you think low pay has no bearing on the ability to recruit a more suitable person?
Click to expand...

My argument is people have taken the job, know what is in the description and haven't done it. Paying them more money wouldn't have made a difference.
 
Dis86 said:
My argument is people have taken the job, know what is in the description and haven't done it. Paying them more money wouldn't have made a difference.
Click to expand...

What if someone else was paid more because they had a higher skill set for the job? This is obviously what wesimmo means.
 
Last edited:
Dis86 said:
My argument is people have taken the job, know what is in the description and haven't done it. Paying them more money wouldn't have made a difference.
Click to expand...

At the level of pay you're talking about, people want jobs, they'll pretend to themselves or their employer that they are capable just to have a job.

It's not like there's a queue of people out the door with special forces experience and a qualification in mental health to take these jobs at barely above minimum wage
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom