Skip to content | Skip to navigation

Failure to Care Debate Exclusive - Channel 4’s not so Public Debate

20th May 2009 | in Social Care

Channel 4 12th May saw a variety in attendence for the failure to care public debate which was organised as part of Channel 4’s season based on the care system. Complaints are already coming through at the horror the Channel 4 public debate was not so public on producing the video available on their website, which has completely cut out the public’s questions and edited the panels response to look good in the public domain giving an unfair representation of that debate. It is unreasonable to invite the public that consists of careleavers, adopted parents, children in care, organisation owners and more to a public debate that should be giving them a voice and then cuts them out. The question is, how different are Channel 4 to the very care system they are supposed to be highlighting that strips children in care of their voice?

To view Channel 4’s not so public debate please click Failure to Care Debate

If you took part in Channel 4’s failure to care public debate and put questions forward can you please contact us immediatly on admin@no2abuse.com

There will be our own exclusive article on this not so public debate coming shortly

We are also going to do our own public debate including professionals and look forward to hearing from anyone interested in contacting us if you wish to take part in the public debate.

The No2abuse failure to care rebuttle public debate will take place in Westminster’s committee rooms and has already been agreed. We have one MP who will be sat on the panel.

Our very own Natasha Phillips will be chairing the debate.

We will keep you informed of this event and anyone wishing to attend needs to contact us admin@no2abuse.com

Places will be limited so book your places now

 

Comments

  • On 20th May 2009 at 10:48 AM Jane Webb said...

    I attended this debate and bought up the fact social services were snatch happy.The fact they were removing hildren from domestic violence victims and careleavers for no reason. I asked them to define emotional abuse which is the common reasonwhy children are taken needlessly i am appalled that none of these real facts that are happening to so many innocent parents have not been showed. I think the title failure to care is very apt as neither channel four or the panel care about the lives of real people and the suffering endure by children and parents in these situations who then go on to be abused by the care system itself.
    SHAME ON YOU CHANNEL 4

  • On 20th May 2009 at 11:11 AM Lazy Min x said...

    I agree all sides should have been represented equally as that is the whole point of a public debabte surely?  Count me in on any future debate organised.

  • On 20th May 2009 at 11:39 AM bethan collins said...

    You all went there to try n be heard , yet again they av failed all parents ... Public ?? Aint it funny ow they investigating faliure 2 care , etc.. yet they did not show the publics responses apart from wat made them ok, The true voices are the public , THE PARENTS !!  THE MEMBERS N MO OV THIS AND OTHER SUPPORT GROUPS WHO AV BEEN LET DWN - AND TREATED INHUMANE BY THE GOVERNMENT .. It baffles me as they stop at no level , omg ......

  • On 20th May 2009 at 11:51 AM Hayley Donovan said...

    I would like to be included in any public debate planned for the future x

  • On 20th May 2009 at 01:08 PM elizabeth morrison said...

    I would olso like to be included for any debates planned for the future

  • On 20th May 2009 at 05:02 PM Alison Stevens said...

    You can add Trevor Jones, and myself from PAIN,for this debate.
    Kind regards Alison Stevens Parents Against Injustice.

  • On 21st May 2009 at 08:43 AM Rebecca said...

    Hello - I am writing from Channel 4 and was involved in organising the debate last week.  I wanted to answer some of your concerns about why we didn’t film the audience.

    We don’t film the audience at these debates because audience members have not given their consent to be filmed.  The panel obviously have agreed to be filmed which is why the clips only feature them.

    Those who attended may remember that the cameras were focused on the stage - not the audience - so we don’t have any recorded footage of questions asked from the floor.

    Many people were talking about very private personal issues and might not want that to be broadcast and we wanted to protect the privacy of people in the audience.

    I do understand however, that some of you obviously did want to be filmed and I realise this must be frustrating.  In trying to ensure the privacy of some people, we’ve obviously disappointed others who wanted their statements to be broadcast.

    In future we will make sure there is an opportunity at the end of our debates for audience members to come forward and be interviewed / give their response.  We’re sorry that those of you who did want to be filmed this time didn’t get a chance.

  • On 21st May 2009 at 11:56 AM Jane Webb said...

    rebecca that may all be well and good but why have you not made public the questions that were put to the panel all of them.Surely you could do a witten version underneath the clips. Channel 4 have been very selective about what they have published i noticed kinship was bought up which was by a member who i know, you covered that, you did not however cover anything to do with children that are taken needlessly which baroness morgan responded to, you did not cover the children removed from domestic violence victims and care leavers ,you did not cover that the panel had no answer when asked to define emotional abuse, you did not cover the comments that social services were snatch happy, you did not cover the drugging of girls at kendall house and the birth defects caused as a result of that or dcsf failure to take action, you did not cover that children are thrown into adult psychatric institutions when there is nowhere else for them to go ,you also did not cover the solicitor who said there should be accountability. The very least you could do is put a full account on the site in writing for people to comment on if you dont want channel 4 to be seen as biased also im sure you can ask guests who attended via email if they wish to remain anonymous or not .Its an absolute disgrace and an insult to children in care, careleavers and parents that have suffereed a misjustice.

    www.mothers-for-justice.net

    www.familyjusticegroupsunited.webs.com

    www

  • On 21st May 2009 at 12:09 PM Admin said...

    Im sorry Rebecca but thats not accurate. People dont attend debates so its one sided.

    Dictionary

    DEBATE -

    1. a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints

    2. a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers

    You marketed the event as a debate and put it on your site without informing anyone we were to all be discluded which not only misled everyone but in fact is not a debate at all as it does not give a two way fair representation.

    It is also absurd to suggest you were in some way respecting the audiences privacy which is not a reasonable assesement because you in fact did not seek at any stage any consent although you sought consent from the panel.


    We did ask several times prior to the show and it was all a bit wishy washy on their response.

    Can you also tell me why a film maker in attendence only realised you recorded the panel when it went on your site so how do you suggest jo public is to know? They simply wouldnt know about camera positioning.

    You now have my official consent to put my VOICE on your website with the before and after from the panel. As you clearly recorded the sound I have no problem with my voice being used and the back of peoples heads of those who were in the audience in front of those cameras. I look forward to seeing it included on your website shortly.

    I Teresa Cooper give Channel 4 full consent to use my VOICE that was recorded on the 12 May 2009 at the not so public failure to care debate

    I look forward to hearing from you Rebecca

    Teresa Cooper

  • On 21st May 2009 at 12:31 PM Jane Webb said...

    I Jane Webb also give channel 4 full consent to use my VOICE that was recorded on 12th may 2009 at the not so public failure to care debate

  • On 22nd May 2009 at 01:30 AM Jane Webb said...

    Fassit - Request by Demus Productions



    Hi I am a documentary maker that is looking to do some work for channel 4 about babies being taken into care directly after birth. There have been a number of well-documented cases in England but I was wondering if you had any people in Scotland (where the law is different) who would be willing to have talk to me about it. We are wanting to look at whether social workers are operating legally when they do this or whether they are abusing the system without reproach.

    Thank you.

    Ruth Davidson
    Demus Productions
    63 Gardner Street
    Glasgow
    G11 5BZ

    Contact email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) 
    Tel: 07814676601

    End

    Fassit - Families and Social Services Information Team

Add a comment





Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Channel 4’s Failure to Care Public Debate - Response by No2Abuse

Previous entry: Kent Police Talk Tosh at Failures to Investigate Girls Drugged in Chemical Cosh