If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
The PCOs and The Drowning Boy
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Am I the only one who thinks that the Police's defence against the actions of their officers in this incident, is completely lame?
I sincelerly hope that the two PCOs in this case think about that little boy every day for the rest of their lives because they did nothing to help him, even if it would have been futile anyway.
To suggest that their actions were correct because "they weren't trained", is insulting to pretty much every human being who values a child's life. Worst is the insult to the parents of this little boy. It's worth noting that he had gone into the water himself to try and save his little sister.
Funnily enough, his level of training didn't seem to matter to him.
I sincelerly hope that the two PCOs in this case think about that little boy every day for the rest of their lives because they did nothing to help him, even if it would have been futile anyway.
To suggest that their actions were correct because "they weren't trained", is insulting to pretty much every human being who values a child's life. Worst is the insult to the parents of this little boy. It's worth noting that he had gone into the water himself to try and save his little sister.
Funnily enough, his level of training didn't seem to matter to him.
0
Comments
For starters one of the PCSOS went off to the main road to meet the emergency services as it was a place that was off the road and out of the way!
But yeah one of them at least should been straight in there, its fucking disgusting to just stand there.
Poor brave little kid saving his sister, its appauling.
If I turned up there I'd have been straight in looking for him whether I could find him or not!
But it shows that you tried to do something instead of just standing there watching and waiting. That's the point.
I accept that it can be hard to find someone once they're under water, it's even harder if you're on the bank.
I think there's nobody more than public sector workers who get criticised more. If a patient dies, it's the doctors and nurses fault. If someone isn't saved from a fire, its the firefighters fault. Etc.
What we should bear in mind is that they're still human beings and are every bit as flawed as the rest of us. Knowing some of the lakes round where I live, they are massive, and if there was no visible sign of someone it would be as futile as a needle in a haystack.
My dad was in the navy and told me if someone went overboard you didn't do the hollywood jump in after them, you always remain on dry land yourself - instead you throw something to them. If they're unconcious, tether someone and let them go.
It's tragic but I think it's wrong to place the blame on the PCSOs. I think some people just want a symbolic show of them trying to do something, despite the futility (I don't know if it was futile or not though?) - but the services aren't there to be symbols but to help protect / serve etc. I feel terrible for the family of the kid, but also feel pretty bad for the PCSOs because they're going to have to live with it, and people are always going to jump to their own conclusions, that they 'couldn't be bothered' to try.
Open verdict on the PCSOs, we can't judge them either way because we don't have the facts. Of course the father is going to dive in, what father wouldn't?
It makes it a hell of a lot more likely than staying on the side. The chances of you feeling something in the water that might be a person are increased infinitely by actually being in the water.
ROSPA: "You should do everything possible to avoid having to enter the water because experience shows that often the would-be rescuer becomes a casualty. If you have to make a rescue attempt, think of your own safety first and never put yourself in danger. If the rescue is too dangerous, wait until the emergency services arrive. Remember this order: shout, reach, throw, wade."
Are they emergency services though? I consider PCOs to be to the police what an NA is to a nurse.
Which then goes to the second part of my question 'What use are they?'
They're there to give us the impression that we are safer.
I don't think they're a good use of money tbh, and see many problems with them including how easily they are mistaken for real police officers as well as the confusion over what their role and responsibilities are.
It about the fact that they were human beings... and yes Tweetie, the same would go for anyone who didn't try to help. But no-one else is using the excuse that they "weren't trained".
Surely this is more about morals instead of what they're to do adn what not to do? And if there was no paramedics and rescue crews, then the police don't have much choice.
It is relevant that they were PCOs though. I wouldn't neccessarily expect a civilian to jump into the water to save a drowning child (though I may hope they'd do so), but I do expect a member of the uniformed services to do so (OK perhaps not if it's a force 9 gale, but generally I do)
Ah, you see the uniform as changing the relationship.
I see a child drowning and people standing by. What annoys me is the defence put forward by the police - indicating that training is a barrier to saving a child in those circumstances.