Shoesmith, that Appeal (and a dead child)!

Sharon Shoesmith put up a robust interview over her successful appeal over her sacking as Director of Haringey's Children's Services following the 'baby P' death. The reason for the appeal going in her favour was asbout procedure rather than substance. Despite what she might say and think, this decision against a 'procedurally unfair' dismissal merely says that what should have been done was done the wrong way and for that we are now talking silly money in terms of compensation for the woman because of it (isn't that insult to injury).

What was sad in her radio interview was that she kept repeating the phrase that 'children do die' and seemed to think that she had become the scapegoat. Perhaps she should look at the situation of Colonel Jorge Mendonca who faced a court martial because of what happened in Iraq. Those he commanded were party to excesses and errors and he, as the Boss, was held ultimately responsible (although he was found not guilty of the charges against him and only one of those charged was eventually found guilty).

What she (and those line managers involved in the case) should have done was the 'right' thing and resigned. What Ed Balls should have done was let the proper processes be run out and the woman's part in the whole sad and sorry state be the proper reason, after proper process, for her proper dismissal. Regardless of the appeal Shoesmith's responsibility is not diminished, negated or excused.

It is wrong for people to treat Shoesmith as a pariah or issue death threats and make her the sole focus for contempt as the scapegoat for this tragedy, but so too is it wrong for the woman, or others, to regard herself as without blame either for at the end of the day it happened in her department and on her watch!

What we have before us is a weak and media driven local authority and government (with Balls as the figurehead in this instance) responding to the clamouring calls of a bloodlust public, driven by the 'news' establishment.

What we have is the fact that a young boy lost his life in a situation that was preventable and that today there are still many vulnerable youngsters in the same situation who are another tragedy waiting to happen. Especially as the pressures on social workers increase due to workload and cuts!

And then there's the 'substantial' compensation award that some are expecting - we live in a world gone mad, that's for sure!

I leave you with a comment from Ms Shoesmith made at the time of the incident:

"None of the agencies involved murdered this child. This child was killed by members of his own family. I certainly won't be resigning."

Sadly, she was, as I understand it, as shameful then as she is now in that regarding Peter's death she says that she doesn't blame herself! Seems to me she's in a minority and thanks to Ball's interfering she comes out of it potentially well rewarded too!

Pax