Home Politics & Debate
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.
Options

Busy-bodies strike again.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3486780.stm

The quote I liked best was
Most troubling of all were images of child pornography or pseudo child pornography - all at a time when he was a paediatric nurse in charge of a ward of vulnerable children.

given that, later in the article
The police investigated the case, but decided not to prosecute as the material accessed by Mr Truscott, although pornographic, was legal.

The man lost his job for it, and was given a reprimand by the regulators for his actions. But, really, losing a job and having the slur on your record is enough punishment- it's not like he was incompetent at his job, he just showed a bit of stupidity. Not that I'm supporting his position, but still.

I am SICK AND TIRED of all these jobsworths crawling out of the sewer to issue legal proceedings about decisions that have nothing to do with them. Like the curate who did it against the abortion doctor, this has nothing to do with the person issuing the judicial review, so he should keep his nose out of it and his gob shut.

This country would be so much better if jobsworths were rounded up and executed.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    He rightly lost his job but to lose his registration would be a little harsh...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree, looking at porn is all well and good but at work, doesn't matter where your work is, it is highly innappropriate.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    He rightly lost his job but to lose his registration would be a little harsh...

    Yeah, that's basically my point. The regulator thought so too, but then this fucking loser comes out trying to get the decision overturned and get the guy banned from working as a nurse forever. Cos it ahs something to dow ith him :rolleyes:
  • Options
    JadedJaded Posts: 2,682 Boards Guru
    Originally posted by Kermit
    Cos it ahs something to dow ith him :rolleyes:

    Sort it out Kermit!!!:p
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So you disapprove of all 3rd party interference?

    What about the CRE, created to intervene in such ways, or ombudsmen, doing the same thing with much more money + legal clout?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by ladymuck
    So you disapprove of all 3rd party interference?

    What about the CRE, created to intervene in such ways, or ombudsmen, doing the same thing with much more money + legal clout?

    Can't remember an instance when the CRE prevented a person from following a profession, for the rest of their lives.

    Perhaps you can identify an example for me...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by ladymuck
    What about the CRE, created to intervene in such ways, or ombudsmen, doing the same thing with much more money + legal clout?

    There is a difference between being an interfering busybody and being a representative of the regulatory state. If you don't quite grasp it read an excellent book on by Michael Moran.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals....

    is not Mr. Angry of Tunbridge Wells, it is presumably part of the regulatory state.

    The Nursing and Midwifery Council can ignore their recommendations?
Sign In or Register to comment.