I know that the semantics is really not important here and I hope people will agree with me. In a channel 4 newscast this evening I heard the terrible news that a social worker had been murdered in Fulwood, Preston. My heart goes to his family. From the newscast it was difficult to know whether it was a social worker or a social care worker, as the newsreader usded both words as if they were interchangeable to mean the same.
As anyone who has lived in the UK for a while would know, when a professional is implicated in the harm (potential harm) or death of a service, whether intentionally, directly or indirectly, that is bound to be the end of his or her career. In addition to this, there would follow a number of bureaucratic responses that would break the back of any normal organisation, but not social services, of course.
It is equally not unimaginable that when, as in this case, a professional has been killed by a service user, similar response could follow. But if past experience is anything to go by, I am sure that professional practice will again come under scrutiny. Very few attention would be paid to the circumstances, the conditions at work which would, despite all risk assessment and management trainings, lead a worker to visit a service user alone. There seems to be a conflict between social work's determination not to label service users as dangerous and the human intuition to spot danger.
I'll reserve further comments until more is learned about this tragic case. Does anyone know any more about this case than what was in the news this evening?