who can we complain too?

Flyboy152

paddyrg wrote: »

Why, for goodness sake? They were trying to make sure a child wasn't being abused at home.

And in the meantime accused everybody who was there. That's really the way to go about it, isn't it. Make all the parents think they are being treated like criminals.

Flyboy152

mynameisdave wrote: »

Thats my point.

OP is complaining and, as I read, wanting to sue the practice for not establishing who the parent was.

It seems they have taken it as an attack on them rather than a proactive step to stop any abuse that may be going on.

I fully support the receptionist.

Where has the OP mentioned suing the practice?

Flyboy152

mynameisdave wrote: »

Thats fine, but suggesting taking legal action? OTT

You don't have much experience with the SS do you?

Flyboy152

VfM4meplse wrote: »

You are not going to get an apology and nor do you deserve one. The NHS and local authority have heightened child protection awareness following recent failures, the clear message post Victoria Climbie, Baby P etc is if in doubt, report it.

Why exactly was the child allowed to play up if the mother was in the vicinity? Perhaps some parenting instruction is in order.

:wall: :wall:

Flyboy152

mynameisdave wrote: »

No, its ridiculous to suggest taking legal action against a health worker for taking a measure to protect children.

You still don't understand, do you. The legal action would not to punish the receptionist, but to prevent any further action from social service and to have their record removed from their files as a family of interest as well as to ensure that this receptionist doesn't make the same mistake again.

It would be inconvenient, but not unexpected if I was in the vicinity of the house at the time it got burgled.

Nonsense, if a policeman dragged you out in the middle of the night, along with all of your neighbours, because you might be a burglar, with nothing more than a guess, you would be happy? Come on, you really don't expect people to belive that, do you?

She could have found out better, yes. But to take legal action is ridiculous.

It is no more ridiculous than a surgery receptionist accusing everyone in the waiting room, at the same time.

[Deleted User]

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You still don't understand, do you. The legal action would not to punish the receptionist, but to prevent any further action from social service and to have their record removed from their files as a family of interest as well as to ensure that this receptionist doesn't make the same mistake again.


.

at least one person understands where were coming from then, this is exactly what we want :T

Flyboy152

arcon5 wrote: »

What would be over the top is if I tried listing every one of the million

Dealing with this particular person there and then will just antagonise the woman. Okay she could have found out who this woman was by speaking to the doctor/nurse after -- if she had time to be looking out for her.

By by giving the details of everybody in the surgery in order to trace this woman was in no way out of order. If inconveniencing a few people is what it takes to protect a child then so be it.

If it was something that important, as it clearly was, she should have tried better to identify them. Or at least be able eliminate the other people in the waiting room.

mynameisdave

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Why?
.............

Because it doesnt help anybody if people are afraid to report potential issues of child abuse knowing they could be sued if they do so.

I have no problem with them taking issue with the surgery, perhaps suggesting better ways for the matter to be handled in future.

Taking legal action is a massive overreaction and I would hate to see such trivial matters going to court.

mynameisdave

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Where has the OP mentioned suing the practice?

I want to complain, can I take legal action. Going to court to get the receptionist to say sorry? You reckon that's what the OP meant?

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You don't have much experience with the SS do you?

Irrelavent. The issue is not SS, its the receptionist and her action to report a possible issue of child abuse/neglect

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You still don't understand, do you. The legal action would not to punish the receptionist, but to prevent any further action from social service and to have their record removed from their files as a family of interest as well as to ensure that this receptionist doesn't make the same mistake again.

OK, I conceed. Despite all the 'we' and I in the OP's post they were obviously being altruistic for the benefit of the whole of the society.

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Nonsense, if a policeman dragged you out in the middle of the night, along with all of your neighbours, because you might be a burglar, with nothing more than a guess, you would be happy? Come on, you really don't expect people to belive that, do you?

I see why people get cheesed off debating with you. You've clearly read my posts as you've uoted me and addressed individual points.

Why do you find it so hard to believe that someone would understand why the police would arrest them if they were seen in the location of a robbery?

Its not a guess. They have not been arrested. They have been sent to investigate. Why is that so unreasonable.

Flyboy152 wrote: »

It is no more ridiculous than a surgery receptionist accusing everyone in the waiting room, at the same time.

She never accused everyone in the waiting room though, did she. She said these are the people in the waiting room at the time. Much like the police will investigate everyone with a red vauxhall astra if it is known to have been used in a crime. Not accusing everyone, investigating.

Flyboy152

mynameisdave wrote: »

I want to complain, can I take legal action. Going to court to get the receptionist to say sorry? You reckon that's what the OP meant?

Yes, the OP was asking if she could take legal action to protect herself from further intrusion by social services and the surgery.

Irrelavent. The issue is not SS, its the receptionist and her action to report a possible issue of child abuse/neglect

Is so very relevant. Social services now have this family well and truly in their sights and are now a "family of interest." Again, you would realise this, if you had any dealings with them at all.

OK, I conceed. Despite all the 'we' and I in the OP's post they were obviously being altruistic for the benefit of the whole of the society.

Why so flippant?

I see why people get cheesed off debating with you. You've clearly read my posts as you've uoted me and addressed individual points.

Why do you find it so hard to believe that someone would understand why the police would arrest them if they were seen in the location of a robbery?

But I am not the only who feels you are just saying that for the sake of an argument.

Its not a guess. They have not been arrested. They have been sent to investigate. Why is that so unreasonable.

Of course it was a guess. If the receptionist had any true worries, she should have investigated it more. It wouldn't have taken a minute to go to the doctor and ask, but even quicker to look at the doctor's appointment list for the day.

She never accused everyone in the waiting room though, did she. She said these are the people in the waiting room at the time. Much like the police will investigate everyone with a red vauxhall astra if it is known to have been used in a crime. Not accusing everyone, investigating.

Yes she did, by suggesting tat it was anyone one f them who was there, she is accusing all of them. It wouldn't have taken a genious to worlk out who the family were.