WAG Another USAG screw up

[GymDad9.9]

I've actually seen this go both ways a bit.

A very good friend of mine's then 1st grade son went to school with a tall tale about how he got a black eye - in short, he blamed dad, in what I'd consider a blatantly obvious made-up story... "I beat my daddy at baseball so he got mad at me and then my daddy beat me and then locked me in the shed with hundreds of spiders for two days"... When he'd been at school the day previous. Social services showed up, interviewed all, stripped both kids down to fully examine for other signs of abuse. They deemed it that abuse was unlikely, though they were monitored with a few random drop in checks/exams over a few months.

OTOH, my when cousin's DD was just a few days old, she became lethargic and started seizing. They called 911, she was taken to the local children's hospital. Long story short, baby had a severe brain bleed and hospital staff suspected parents of shaken baby syndrome. The only family member allowed any access to the baby or any information was one who is an attorney. It took them five days to clear my cousin and his wife and allow them to see their baby (who'd been unresponsive and on life support with a poor prognosis... I can't imagine). They had finally reviewed baby's records and discovered the parents really were naturalists and had refused to allow the vitamin K shot to be administered at baby's birth. Now... I have my own thoughts on the vit k and the fact that they again refused it for both subsequent babies... but that's another story.

Anyway, I do genuinely believe that they are generally doing their best with the resources and information that they have. But I do have two friends who have left social work due to the workload and feeling like they just can't do their jobs well enough, and knowing that was devastating to them.

Your instances are understandable given there was physical evidence to at least consider suspicion. In my situation an individual 3,000 miles away who had never seen the child accused the parents of starving a child based on a description by another person taken completely out of context.

 

[l.c.o]

Your instances are understandable given there was physical evidence to at least consider suspicion. In my situation an individual 3,000 miles away who had never seen the child accused the parents of starving a child based on a description by another person taken completely out of context.

But my point is the social workers were likely obligated to treat it seriously, and if the child indeed DID appear underweight, that could also constitute physical evidence to support the claim (regardless of who made the claim and from where), which they'd need to investigate.

I wasn't so much discussing the mandatory reporting rules, but rather how they were handled by social services. Like with my friend's son - it was a run of the mill black eye that that teacher saw, questioned, then reported. Not to support whomever reported your niece, as it sounds like maybe there was some idiocy or bad intentions or love for drama there... but if she HAD been quietly being starved and at risk, I'd hope a report of concern would be taken seriously, regardless of where it came from.

I think the point some make here is too often reports aren't taken seriously, or are too often easily dismissed.

It's a delicate balance, and I am sure it was terrifying to your family. I'm sure it was scary and hard on your niece. But so many kids fall through the cracks and too many things either never get reported or don't get treated seriously by investigators - so it's hard to completely disparage any real investigation, even when a report is inaccurate. I imagine she was eventually released to her family (I don't remember)? If so, it says the system worked for her... provided she's really not being starved.

I am in no way, shape, or form suggesting that I think your niece was actually being starved/underfed/etc, but rather pointing out that not everyone treats these investigations with the gravitas they deserve, and that I'm sure there are many kids who ARE being abused but slip through after unvestigation clears the abusers.

Unfortunately, the system does not work for everyone.

 

[Faith]

Case in point: Dr Nassar was doing a similar technique that I am certified in. It is an acceptable practice when :1) patient receives informed consent 2) patient is given a thorough explanation of procedure along with contraindications, etc 3) patient if under 18 has an adult present and it has been explained to adult and child and is still required in a rare case. 4) examination gloves and proper medical cleanliness and safety techniques are followed.

"

Just picking up on this as I read earlier today that Nassar is claiming "vaginal penetration" is a valid osteopathic technique.

Is this what you refer to?

I am struggling to think of a situation where this "treatment" would ever be a good idea in adults, never mind children and teenagers, unless it's for a medical issue and that would require an OB/GYN, not an osteopath.

 

[sewgood]

Just picking up on this as I read earlier today that Nassar is claiming "vaginal penetration" is a valid osteopathic technique.

Is this what you refer to?

I am struggling to think of a situation where this "treatment" would ever be a good idea in adults, never mind children and teenagers, unless it's for a medical issue and that would require an OB/GYN, not an osteopath.

Well, OB/GYNs can be DOs instead of MDs, so those aren't mutually exclusive. I could see this technique being used in the case of an injury from childbirth or other pelvic floor type injury. Not gymnastics injuries, though. And if it was used, you would use gloves and lubricant and have a same sex chaperone in the room, so yeah... not really the same thing.

 

[GymDad9.9]

Just picking up on this as I read earlier today that Nassar is claiming "vaginal penetration" is a valid osteopathic technique.

Is this what you refer to?

I am struggling to think of a situation where this "treatment" would ever be a good idea in adults, never mind children and teenagers, unless it's for a medical issue and that would require an OB/GYN, not an osteopath.

I hope prosecutors have a field day with that remark when Nassar is under cross-examination.

 

[BachFlyer]

Update - Michigan Attorney General is taking on the case: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...w-probing-gymnastics-doc-larry-nassar-n661101

 

[raenndrops]

Update - Michigan Attorney General is taking on the case: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...w-probing-gymnastics-doc-larry-nassar-n661101

Hopefully justice comes swiftly now.

 

[notthatmom]

Did they really have to use the word "probing"?

I mean seriously

 

[BachFlyer]

Did they really have to use the word "probing"?

I mean seriously

OMG right with ya! Do they even have editors anymore??

 

[GymDad9.9]

OMG right with ya! Do they even have editors anymore??

Yeah, pretty poor choice of word despite the fact that in most legal cases it is a perfectly good word to use