‘Put CCTV in addicts’ homes to protect children’
 |
| PROTECTION: Radical measures are needed to protect children living with alcoholic or drug-addicted parents |
A controversial plan for CCTV to be used to protect children in the homes of chaotic drug-abusing parents has been proposed by one of Scotland's most eminent drugs experts.
Professor Neil McKeganey, head of the centre for Drug Misuse Research at Glasgow University, believes radical measures are required to protect the estimated 160,000 children in Scotland living with an alcoholic or drug-addicted parent.
He believes the sheer scale of the problem, which was previously estimated as being far lower, makes it impossible for social workers to guarantee children's safety.
Recent figures suggest more than 50,000 children are estimated to have a parent with a drug problem and around 80,000 to 100,000 have a parent with an alcohol problem.
Social workers and children's charities last night agreed with the need for debate and further action to protect these children but disagreed with the proposal.
Mr McKeganey is known for his extensive research and controversial views. In 2004, he suggested female drug addicts should be paid to take long-term contraception to stop them having children.
"What price should we put on our privacy?" said Mr McKeganey. "The question is whether we are prepared to say the principle of the privacy of family life is more important than that of child protection. If we accept that privacy is the most important principle then there will be many more tragic cases.
"I am aware that this will be controversial but believe the debate needs to be had. We have become used to the proliferation of CCTV cameras within public spaces. We have also become used to the idea that those cameras are an effective tool in crime prevention. What we have not considered though is their possible use in private spaces."
Recent child abuse cases have highlighted the urgent need to tackle the problem.
Last year, in the wake of an 11-year-old girl collapsing in a Glasgow primary school suffering heroin withdrawal, Jack McConnell, the then first minister, announced the children of drug addicts would be more likely to be put into care.
In another case in December 2005, two-year-old Derek Doran died in East Lothian after drinking methadone in his parents' home.
Mr McKeganey added: "The response to this suggestion will be to say that it is the unacceptable extension of big brother' and a violation of individuals human rights. But the Human Rights Act was never intended to be a get out' clause for those committing crimes or harming vulnerable children."
Michelle Miller, the Association of Directors of Social Work spokeswoman on children and families, said: "This is an enormous problem and social workers by themselves are not going to fix it. It is a much wider issue than that and we need to have a detailed debate. This proposal, however, would be completely impractical."
Anne Houston, chief executive of Children 1st, disagreed with Mr McKeganey's suggestion. "The money would be better spent in increasing the resources needed to identify and support children affected by drugs and alcohol misuse."
Meanwhile, an investigation has revealed that young drug addicts in Aberdeen city without dependants are low on the priority list and may have to wait up to two years for help.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Archie, Argyll on 12:38am Fri 24 Aug 07
Buy 4 Dozen crates of mick jagger and get a free web cam?
Buy 4 Dozen crates of mick jagger and get a free web cam?
Posted by: Mrs Macavity on 12:44am Fri 24 Aug 07
[italic]"Meanwhile, an investigation has revealed that young drug addicts in Aberdeen city without dependants are low on the priority list and may have to wait up to two years for help."[/italic]
What's your point? Somebody has to be low on a priority list if a priority list exists. That's why we have priorities.
"Meanwhile, an investigation has revealed that young drug addicts in Aberdeen city without dependants are low on the priority list and may have to wait up to two years for help."
What's your point? Somebody has to be low on a priority list if a priority list exists. That's why we have priorities.
Posted by: Archie, Argyll on 12:50am Fri 24 Aug 07
This guy Neil McKeganey appears to be a tad on the extremely naive side. With the emphasis on EXTREME.
I agree it is a problem and I would say Michelle Miller and Anne Houston appear to have a bit more savvy in their views.
This guy Neil McKeganey appears to be a tad on the extremely naive side. With the emphasis on EXTREME.
I agree it is a problem and I would say Michelle Miller and Anne Houston appear to have a bit more savvy in their views.
Posted by: MsJ, Glasgow on 1:16am Fri 24 Aug 07
" PROTECTION: Radical measures are needed to protect children living with alcoholic or drug-addicted parents
A controversial plan for CCTV to be used to protect children in the homes of chaotic drug-abusing parents has been proposed by one of Scotland's most eminent drugs experts."
My question is, why would children BE in the home of a "chaotic drug-abusing parent" in the first place? They shouldn't be there, full stop!
" PROTECTION: Radical measures are needed to protect children living with alcoholic or drug-addicted parents
A controversial plan for CCTV to be used to protect children in the homes of chaotic drug-abusing parents has been proposed by one of Scotland's most eminent drugs experts."
My question is, why would children BE in the home of a "chaotic drug-abusing parent" in the first place? They shouldn't be there, full stop!
Posted by: ddd, ddd on 6:46am Fri 24 Aug 07
McKeganey is an extremist right wing born again christian attention seeker. He is more interested in research grants and publicity than he is in the welfare of scotland's children. why is he not highlighting the need for children's social work departments to be appropriately funded. why is he not advocating the use of a propportion of the huge alcohol tax revenues to fund currently threadbare alcohol services. egotist and danaerous man no-one takes him seriously other than the journalists who treat him as some kind of guru
McKeganey is an extremist right wing born again christian attention seeker. He is more interested in research grants and publicity than he is in the welfare of scotland's children. why is he not highlighting the need for children's social work departments to be appropriately funded. why is he not advocating the use of a propportion of the huge alcohol tax revenues to fund currently threadbare alcohol services. egotist and danaerous man no-one takes him seriously other than the journalists who treat him as some kind of guru
Posted by: al, Stirling on 6:59am Fri 24 Aug 07
RE ddd's comment. Is that right about McKeganey? I never knew that.
Any more info?
RE ddd's comment. Is that right about McKeganey? I never knew that.
Any more info?
Posted by: sudokuGM, Glasgow on 7:14am Fri 24 Aug 07
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!
4837349 SMITH! STAND UP AND MOVE AWAY FROM THE CHILDREN!
YOU ARE THE JUNKY!
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!
4837349 SMITH! STAND UP AND MOVE AWAY FROM THE CHILDREN!
YOU ARE THE JUNKY!
Posted by: Seumas, tain on 7:57am Fri 24 Aug 07
Avery interesting concept but, what is going to prevent the druggies from flogging the cameras or spraying the lens with spraypaint? Is this a really serious suggestion feom a professor?
Avery interesting concept but, what is going to prevent the druggies from flogging the cameras or spraying the lens with spraypaint? Is this a really serious suggestion feom a professor?
Posted by: neil, Glasgow on 7:57am Fri 24 Aug 07
headline seeking, self publicist gets yet more of the media and thus publics attention. time for glsgow uni to bring this guy back in line, better still, the uni would be best served by getting rid of him altogether! meanwhile the media and public need to be a lot more savvy and just ignore this pompous ****
headline seeking, self publicist gets yet more of the media and thus publics attention. time for glsgow uni to bring this guy back in line, better still, the uni would be best served by getting rid of him altogether! meanwhile the media and public need to be a lot more savvy and just ignore this pompous ****
Posted by: Vera Smart on 8:01am Fri 24 Aug 07
Oh, dear. A publicity stunt too far this time for Dr. McKeganey ?
I hope this loony-bins, headline-grabbing nonsense hangs round his neck like an albatross. It really is desperate bollix of the highest order. As such it is beneath any [italic]serious[/italic] academic worth their salt.
Oh, dear. A publicity stunt too far this time for Dr. McKeganey ?
I hope this loony-bins, headline-grabbing nonsense hangs round his neck like an albatross. It really is desperate bollix of the highest order. As such it is beneath any
serious academic worth their salt.
Posted by: Iain on 8:06am Fri 24 Aug 07
This could start a very dangerouse precedent and use of it will grow if it goes ahead.
Next it will be addicts without children
Then people on bail or serving a community sentence
Then benefit claimants
And eventually the rest of us
This could start a very dangerouse precedent and use of it will grow if it goes ahead.
Next it will be addicts without children
Then people on bail or serving a community sentence
Then benefit claimants
And eventually the rest of us
Posted by: Seumas on 8:07am Fri 24 Aug 07
Could they not put them into some sort of hostel accommodation and give their homes over to people who are willing and able to work.
My sympathies are with the children, and this solution would provide the means for an authoritative assessment to be made regarding any decision concerning the ultimate future of the children.
Junkies must cost us an absolute fortune.
Could they not put them into some sort of hostel accommodation and give their homes over to people who are willing and able to work.
My sympathies are with the children, and this solution would provide the means for an authoritative assessment to be made regarding any decision concerning the ultimate future of the children.
Junkies must cost us an absolute fortune.
Posted by: Jamie Pringle, Glasgow on 8:15am Fri 24 Aug 07
McKeganey is yet again shown to be a shameless publicity seeking academic. What an embarrassment. I do not understand why the Herald gives him so much space.
McKeganey is yet again shown to be a shameless publicity seeking academic. What an embarrassment. I do not understand why the Herald gives him so much space.
Posted by: Vera Smart on 8:31am Fri 24 Aug 07
[quote][bold]Iain[/bold] wrote:
This could start a very dangerouse precedent and use of it will grow if it goes ahead. Next it will be addicts without children Then people on bail or serving a community sentence Then benefit claimants And eventually the rest of us[/quote] Too right! I for one am not willing to see anyone's rights and liberties infringed just so that McKeganey can climb-up the slippy pole a wee bit further.
Here's an idea: put cameras in [bold]his[/bold] house, for a year, make the video available on the internet, and then see if he thinks it is such a wonderful idea.
Iain wrote:
This could start a very dangerouse precedent and use of it will grow if it goes ahead. Next it will be addicts without children Then people on bail or serving a community sentence Then benefit claimants And eventually the rest of us
Too right! I for one am not willing to see anyone's rights and liberties infringed just so that McKeganey can climb-up the slippy pole a wee bit further.
Here's an idea: put cameras in
his house, for a year, make the video available on the internet, and then see if he thinks it is such a wonderful idea.
Posted by: Sailor Ted on 8:38am Fri 24 Aug 07
My goodness, Professor McKeganey has upset some people, hasn't he!
Good on you, Neil. If the social workers are squirming, that can't be bad. Mr ddd, neil, Vera Smart and others want the guy excluded from being quoted in the press, and they want him sacked. They haven't explained how that will help the children of junkie parents. Perhaps burning Professor McKeganey in a wicker man might help. Well, we won't know until we try it, eh?
Go on, you antimckeganisti - tell us how you will rescue the weans of druggy mums and dads.
I bet your own solutions will involve employing more and more social workers, and possibly paying their bosses even more dosh. It will probably involve removing kids and putting them into homes which don't presently exist and will have to be acquired one way or another, and staffed. And we know how well Scots kids do in care homes, don'r we.
My goodness, Professor McKeganey has upset some people, hasn't he!
Good on you, Neil. If the social workers are squirming, that can't be bad. Mr ddd, neil, Vera Smart and others want the guy excluded from being quoted in the press, and they want him sacked. They haven't explained how that will help the children of junkie parents. Perhaps burning Professor McKeganey in a wicker man might help. Well, we won't know until we try it, eh?
Go on, you antimckeganisti - tell us how you will rescue the weans of druggy mums and dads.
I bet your own solutions will involve employing more and more social workers, and possibly paying their bosses even more dosh. It will probably involve removing kids and putting them into homes which don't presently exist and will have to be acquired one way or another, and staffed. And we know how well Scots kids do in care homes, don'r we.
Posted by: Sailor Ted on 8:40am Fri 24 Aug 07
Vera, I am extremely willing to see the rights of junkie parents infringed in the interests of protecting their kids.
Vera, I am extremely willing to see the rights of junkie parents infringed in the interests of protecting their kids.
Posted by: Graeme, Paisley on 8:41am Fri 24 Aug 07
Take the kids into care where they'll be looked after, and sterilise the parents before moving them to a semi-secure unit in the middle of nowhere. The homes they occupied could then be handed over to more decent families.
Might sound drastic but it would virtually wipe out the city's drug problem in a generation.
Take the kids into care where they'll be looked after, and sterilise the parents before moving them to a semi-secure unit in the middle of nowhere. The homes they occupied could then be handed over to more decent families.
Might sound drastic but it would virtually wipe out the city's drug problem in a generation.
Posted by: Rab Jones, Pollok on 8:59am Fri 24 Aug 07
its bad enough paying for tax dodgers, but junkie tax dodgers!
Forget about wasting monet on CCTV. Get the kids to foster parents, and let the addicts inject themselves to death.
its bad enough paying for tax dodgers, but junkie tax dodgers!
Forget about wasting monet on CCTV. Get the kids to foster parents, and let the addicts inject themselves to death.
Posted by: Sailor Ted on 9:00am Fri 24 Aug 07
[italic]"Take the kids into care where they'll be looked after".
[/italic]
No they won't. They never are. Even a junkie parent is a better parent than being taken into care.
"Take the kids into care where they'll be looked after".
No they won't. They never are. Even a junkie parent is a better parent than being taken into care.
Posted by: Sailor Ted on 9:03am Fri 24 Aug 07
[italic]"Get the kids to foster parents..."[/italic]
There aren't enough foster parents now - where would the extra ones come from? And how would foster care be better than their own parents, who the children love?
"Get the kids to foster parents..."
There aren't enough foster parents now - where would the extra ones come from? And how would foster care be better than their own parents, who the children love?
Posted by: steve, larbet on 9:09am Fri 24 Aug 07
why dont we adopt the singapore and other asians countries PROVEN method of keeping drugs under control,hanging and severe long term sentences
why dont we adopt the singapore and other asians countries PROVEN method of keeping drugs under control,hanging and severe long term sentences
Posted by: food lover, west coast on 9:18am Fri 24 Aug 07
Now let me work this out - up to 150,000 children are at risk, so that's maybe 70,000 households with a camera in every room except the toilet (or is that included?)
So that makes around say, 35,000 cameras.
That's a lot of screen watching for someone!
Can I bid for the cabling contract?
Now let me work this out - up to 150,000 children are at risk, so that's maybe 70,000 households with a camera in every room except the toilet (or is that included?)
So that makes around say, 35,000 cameras.
That's a lot of screen watching for someone!
Can I bid for the cabling contract?
Posted by: rightsefred, possil on 9:19am Fri 24 Aug 07
Offer them the trip of a lifetime - an overdose clinic next to the crematorium
Offer them the trip of a lifetime - an overdose clinic next to the crematorium
Posted by: vernon, Callander on 9:22am Fri 24 Aug 07
Well done McKeganey, not many people are brave enough to put themselves on the line for the betterment of others. Please keep up the pressure. If one child is spared abuse you have the victory.
Well done McKeganey, not many people are brave enough to put themselves on the line for the betterment of others. Please keep up the pressure. If one child is spared abuse you have the victory.
Posted by: Martin McDonald, Cumbernauld on 9:23am Fri 24 Aug 07
And so it begins. An attempt to sneak cameras into people's homes under the banner of "protecting children." How could anyone object if it's about protecting children rights n'that?
Aye very good. Luckily, nobody will take this Professor seriously, even if this announcement was meticulously planned by those he may or may not take his orders from. Agent of change? Agent of hilarity more like.
As an aside, who was it that suggested junkies should be denied reproductive rights? I honestly can't remember.
And so it begins. An attempt to sneak cameras into people's homes under the banner of "protecting children." How could anyone object if it's about protecting children rights n'that?
Aye very good. Luckily, nobody will take this Professor seriously, even if this announcement was meticulously planned by those he may or may not take his orders from. Agent of change? Agent of hilarity more like.
As an aside, who was it that suggested junkies should be denied reproductive rights? I honestly can't remember.
Posted by: Neil, Glasgow on 9:28am Fri 24 Aug 07
sailor ted, cockney rhyming slang for NED?
unlike you, the drug abusers of this world show a lot more nous. lets spend millions and put CCTV into the houses of drug abusers. lets drive drug taking out onto the streets and public parks more than it already is, so littering these areas with used needles and have pur children get needlesticks with HIV or Hep C; the so called junkies of this world have found ways and means to access drugs despite police, SDEA and the law/prison, what makes [italic]you[/italic] think that cameras will make a difference? I dont pretend to have the solutions to the problem but equally so, I'm looking forward to reading your fantastic ideas for a solution...
freedom of speech, debate and discussion is most definitely needed to eradicate/control the scurge on society that drugs are BUT this muppet is interested only in seeing his name in the press and these far right, bordering on American neo con tendencies, add nothingto the debate and may in fact do more harm than good. with freedom of speech comes responsibility, its about time that McKeganey acts responsibly and not out of his own interests.
sailor ted, cockney rhyming slang for NED?
unlike you, the drug abusers of this world show a lot more nous. lets spend millions and put CCTV into the houses of drug abusers. lets drive drug taking out onto the streets and public parks more than it already is, so littering these areas with used needles and have pur children get needlesticks with HIV or Hep C; the so called junkies of this world have found ways and means to access drugs despite police, SDEA and the law/prison, what makes
you think that cameras will make a difference? I dont pretend to have the solutions to the problem but equally so, I'm looking forward to reading your fantastic ideas for a solution...
freedom of speech, debate and discussion is most definitely needed to eradicate/control the scurge on society that drugs are BUT this muppet is interested only in seeing his name in the press and these far right, bordering on American neo con tendencies, add nothingto the debate and may in fact do more harm than good. with freedom of speech comes responsibility, its about time that McKeganey acts responsibly and not out of his own interests.
Posted by: Vera Smart on 9:43am Fri 24 Aug 07
[bold]Sailor Ted wrote:[/bold]
[quote]Vera Smart and others want the guy excluded from being quoted in the press, and they want him sacked[/quote]I have said no such thing.
Please desist from printing lies about me and misrepresenting what I actually said.
Sailor Ted wrote:
Vera Smart and others want the guy excluded from being quoted in the press, and they want him sacked
I have said no such thing.
Please desist from printing lies about me and misrepresenting what I actually said.
Posted by: Iain on 9:45am Fri 24 Aug 07
[quote][bold]food lover[/bold] wrote:
Now let me work this out - up to 150,000 children are at risk, so that's maybe 70,000 households with a camera in every room except the toilet (or is that included?) So that makes around say, 35,000 cameras. That's a lot of screen watching for someone! Can I bid for the cabling contract?[/quote] There's no way the executive will fund this especially since it's just been revealed (as if we didn't all know already!) the previous executive's inverstment in tackling ned culture was a total waste of money.
food lover wrote:
Now let me work this out - up to 150,000 children are at risk, so that's maybe 70,000 households with a camera in every room except the toilet (or is that included?) So that makes around say, 35,000 cameras. That's a lot of screen watching for someone! Can I bid for the cabling contract?
There's no way the executive will fund this especially since it's just been revealed (as if we didn't all know already!) the previous executive's inverstment in tackling ned culture was a total waste of money.
Posted by: Guga, Rockall on 9:55am Fri 24 Aug 07
I agree with Graeme of Paisley. The easiest, and most humane way to solve the problem would be to sterilise all the junkies, and take their children into care. Then put all the junkies into compulsory work programmes.
I agree with Graeme of Paisley. The easiest, and most humane way to solve the problem would be to sterilise all the junkies, and take their children into care. Then put all the junkies into compulsory work programmes.
Posted by: Craig on 10:22am Fri 24 Aug 07
What a proposterous idea. How easy would it be to tamper with a cctv camera, let alone tear it off the wall and sell it to buy more skag. Who will police this? An army of social workers? What will they do if they see something terrible happening ?- call the cops who will take 2 hours to get there. The money would be better spent on daily visits by a trained social worker to every child who is deemed at risk. If the visits are denied or there is a problem, the child goes into care. Simple.
What a proposterous idea. How easy would it be to tamper with a cctv camera, let alone tear it off the wall and sell it to buy more skag. Who will police this? An army of social workers? What will they do if they see something terrible happening ?- call the cops who will take 2 hours to get there. The money would be better spent on daily visits by a trained social worker to every child who is deemed at risk. If the visits are denied or there is a problem, the child goes into care. Simple.
Posted by: Vera Smart on 10:26am Fri 24 Aug 07
[quote]Graeme wrote:
Might sound drastic but it would virtually wipe out the city's drug problem in a generation.[/quote] No it wouldn't. This idea proceeds from the false assumption that the junkies will not be replaced by new addicts. Which (IMO) is exactly what would happen assuming there was a ready supply of drugs.
So, all this fantasy-fascist 'solution' would achieve is to displace some junkies and [bold]the problem would remain in our cities[/bold] .
Still, at least this way one gets to punish those citizens one despises and all under the banner of 'the public good'. Brilliant!
NOT.
Graeme wrote:
Might sound drastic but it would virtually wipe out the city's drug problem in a generation.
No it wouldn't. This idea proceeds from the false assumption that the junkies will not be replaced by new addicts. Which (IMO) is exactly what would happen assuming there was a ready supply of drugs.
So, all this fantasy-fascist 'solution' would achieve is to displace some junkies and
the problem would remain in our cities .
Still, at least this way one gets to punish those citizens one despises and all under the banner of 'the public good'. Brilliant!
NOT.
Posted by: The Easy Option on 10:29am Fri 24 Aug 07
Sailor Ted says "Go on, you antimckeganisti - tell us how you will rescue the weans of druggy mums and dads"
JAIL FOR LIFE THE CORRUPT POLICE FORCE EMPLOYEES WHO AID AND ABETT THE W@NKER GANGSTER CRIMINALS WHO DISTRIBUTE DOCTORED CLASS A POISON TO THE VULNERABLE FOR A START.
Sailor Ted says "Go on, you antimckeganisti - tell us how you will rescue the weans of druggy mums and dads"
JAIL FOR LIFE THE CORRUPT POLICE FORCE EMPLOYEES WHO AID AND ABETT THE W@NKER GANGSTER CRIMINALS WHO DISTRIBUTE DOCTORED CLASS A POISON TO THE VULNERABLE FOR A START.
Posted by: Vera Smart on 10:30am Fri 24 Aug 07
It's illuminating to see the sort of supporters the good professor's proposals are attracting.
It must be embarrassing for him.
It's illuminating to see the sort of supporters the good professor's proposals are attracting.
It must be embarrassing for him.
Posted by: Neil, Glasgow on 10:36am Fri 24 Aug 07
[quote][bold]Vera Smart[/bold] wrote:
It's illuminating to see the sort of supporters the good professor's proposals are attracting. It must be embarrassing for him.[/quote] doubt it vera
would put money on it that he is loving this forum and the fact that there are likeminded individuals who share his far right, outdated views and opinions. all this has done is feed his ego and craving for media and public attention.
embarrassed, nae chance!
Vera Smart wrote:
It's illuminating to see the sort of supporters the good professor's proposals are attracting. It must be embarrassing for him.
doubt it vera
would put money on it that he is loving this forum and the fact that there are likeminded individuals who share his far right, outdated views and opinions. all this has done is feed his ego and craving for media and public attention.
embarrassed, nae chance!
Posted by: Rab Jones, Pollok on 10:45am Fri 24 Aug 07
And where will the cameras be???
Not in the toilet or the bedrooms where "private" matter occur, because that would against human rights. So just the living room then.
So here's the scene:
Junior is getting on his junkie parents nerves. They ask him to go upstairs in the bedroom to look at "something". They then beat junior, and threaten him to act "normal" when they return to the living room where the camera is.Not going to work is it?
Its like the prisoners, they know all the tricks, and blind spots where the cameras can't pick up. Andthat's where they do their dealings/stabbings/t
hreats, away from peering eyes and then return on the wing floor acting as if nothing happened.
I've seen it.
And where will the cameras be???
Not in the toilet or the bedrooms where "private" matter occur, because that would against human rights. So just the living room then.
So here's the scene:
Junior is getting on his junkie parents nerves. They ask him to go upstairs in the bedroom to look at "something". They then beat junior, and threaten him to act "normal" when they return to the living room where the camera is.Not going to work is it?
Its like the prisoners, they know all the tricks, and blind spots where the cameras can't pick up. Andthat's where they do their dealings/stabbings/t
hreats, away from peering eyes and then return on the wing floor acting as if nothing happened.
I've seen it.
Posted by: Jamie Pringle on 11:37am Fri 24 Aug 07
With his lovely orange face, and withering shock of platinum white hair perched on his elongated cranium, tefal head McKeganey has a knack of unthinkingly importing non-workable ideas from the USA - he'll regurgitate any old stuff in order to look radical or tough or anything. His priorities are all wrong, I'd hate to guess what type of car he drives or the type of dog he has.<snigger>
With his lovely orange face, and withering shock of platinum white hair perched on his elongated cranium, tefal head McKeganey has a knack of unthinkingly importing non-workable ideas from the USA - he'll regurgitate any old stuff in order to look radical or tough or anything. His priorities are all wrong, I'd hate to guess what type of car he drives or the type of dog he has.<snigger>
Posted by: Peter Dawson, Edinburgh on 11:42am Fri 24 Aug 07
It is worth remembering the role that academics and intellectuals played in preparing the path for fascists in 1930s Germany.
It was academics who made the case that it was OK to sterilise mentally retarded people for the good of society; that it was OK to terminate handicapped people for the good of society; that it was OK to treat jewish people differently for the good of society.
Professor Neil McKeganey is part of the same tradition as the nazi pathfinders.
It is worth remembering the role that academics and intellectuals played in preparing the path for fascists in 1930s Germany.
It was academics who made the case that it was OK to sterilise mentally retarded people for the good of society; that it was OK to terminate handicapped people for the good of society; that it was OK to treat jewish people differently for the good of society.
Professor Neil McKeganey is part of the same tradition as the nazi pathfinders.
Posted by: Whatalotoftosh, cumbernauld on 12:03pm Fri 24 Aug 07
What a lot of tosh, Firstly not all Junkies beat their kids or in fact use in front of their kids. There are not enough foster or any other child care places as it is is anyone here volunteering. Just because someone is a drug addict does not make them a bad parent, A majority of child abuse takes place in middle class families and goes undetected for years. Slating social workers is also unfair as social workers can only remove the child on a temporary basis and this decision is not always their soul decision but the decision of the team. Most cases for permanent removal goes through the childrens hearing system where the social worker will make that recommendation but not the decision.
As for McKeganey The human rights laws were set up to protect everyones human rights including junkies and is there for a reason. Laws are what makes societies function if a law is being used as a get out clause then the law will need to be changed we cannot just decide who is entitled to be protected by the law and who is not protected based on anything especislly an addiction, what next smokers, coffee addicts and those poor chocoholics or we could target religious judgemental zealots now I am sure the later would receive support
What a lot of tosh, Firstly not all Junkies beat their kids or in fact use in front of their kids. There are not enough foster or any other child care places as it is is anyone here volunteering. Just because someone is a drug addict does not make them a bad parent, A majority of child abuse takes place in middle class families and goes undetected for years. Slating social workers is also unfair as social workers can only remove the child on a temporary basis and this decision is not always their soul decision but the decision of the team. Most cases for permanent removal goes through the childrens hearing system where the social worker will make that recommendation but not the decision.
As for McKeganey The human rights laws were set up to protect everyones human rights including junkies and is there for a reason. Laws are what makes societies function if a law is being used as a get out clause then the law will need to be changed we cannot just decide who is entitled to be protected by the law and who is not protected based on anything especislly an addiction, what next smokers, coffee addicts and those poor chocoholics or we could target religious judgemental zealots now I am sure the later would receive support
Posted by: barra, barra on 12:18pm Fri 24 Aug 07
It is a scandal that this opportunist receives so much publicity.
It is a scandal that his department receives so much tax payers money
It is a scandal that a man lacking in the intelligence and gravitas required to be a professor only receives the title after allegedly threatening to take his grant rich department away from Glasgow Uni. I challenge anyone to read his publications and explain to me how he is worthy of the title “Professor”.
We get the press we deserve and by the look of things we get the tabloid professors we deserve also. A middle class English student who got lucky in the 80’s when funds were thrown at HIV research in Scotland and who has plagued us with his extreme views on Scotland's poor ever since.
It is a scandal that this opportunist receives so much publicity.
It is a scandal that his department receives so much tax payers money
It is a scandal that a man lacking in the intelligence and gravitas required to be a professor only receives the title after allegedly threatening to take his grant rich department away from Glasgow Uni. I challenge anyone to read his publications and explain to me how he is worthy of the title “Professor”.
We get the press we deserve and by the look of things we get the tabloid professors we deserve also. A middle class English student who got lucky in the 80’s when funds were thrown at HIV research in Scotland and who has plagued us with his extreme views on Scotland's poor ever since.
Posted by: non addict on 12:23pm Fri 24 Aug 07
What's the weather like on Professor McKegany's planet?
What's the weather like on Professor McKegany's planet?
Posted by: doc, Glasgow on 12:34pm Fri 24 Aug 07
George
Firstly, I totally agree, 100% with the first part of your post above regards the esteemed professor.
But this nonsense about Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University, whatever the perceived wrong doings and I dont know what they have done/not done BUT surely its time to move on and drop this? Take the moral high ground and act better than they have ever done with you and move on with your life.
The "Campaign..." tag only serves to detract from your spot on comments about McKeganey.
:)
George
Firstly, I totally agree, 100% with the first part of your post above regards the esteemed professor.
But this nonsense about Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University, whatever the perceived wrong doings and I dont know what they have done/not done BUT surely its time to move on and drop this? Take the moral high ground and act better than they have ever done with you and move on with your life.
The "Campaign..." tag only serves to detract from your spot on comments about McKeganey.
:)
Posted by: heavy, Glasgow on 12:43pm Fri 24 Aug 07
The rise of Big Brother using the extremes of drug addicts and perverts to justify massive CCTV expansion.
Maybe we should be putting CCTV into the homes of the supporters of SPY cameras.
LJPR LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS
http://www.ljpr.info
CIVIL TRIAL BY JURY ANYTHING ELSE IS TYRANNY
The rise of Big Brother using the extremes of drug addicts and perverts to justify massive CCTV expansion.
Maybe we should be putting CCTV into the homes of the supporters of SPY cameras.
LJPR LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS
http://www.ljpr.info
CIVIL TRIAL BY JURY ANYTHING ELSE IS TYRANNY
Posted by: Archie, Argyll on 12:46pm Fri 24 Aug 07
Shut Down Glasgow University If it's (as seems the case) run by perverts and pseudo-nazis and fascist F-wits.
Noo therrs a "radical" solution for you.
And I am serious by the way
Its full of plonkers trying to be clever.
Shut Down Glasgow University If it's (as seems the case) run by perverts and pseudo-nazis and fascist F-wits.
Noo therrs a "radical" solution for you.
And I am serious by the way
Its full of plonkers trying to be clever.
Posted by: Kari, ayrshire on 1:11pm Fri 24 Aug 07
RE: Seumas, Tain
"Avery interesting concept but, what is going to prevent the druggies from flogging the cameras or spraying the lens with spraypaint? Is this a really serious suggestion feom a professor?
Avery interesting concept but, what is going to prevent the druggies from flogging the cameras or spraying"
Exactly! this McKeganey guy is nuts!!
He has no concept of real life - these children should be removed from situations where their welfare is put at risk, not spied on! What good will that really do to their long term mental & well being...??
All the 'junked up' parents care about is their next hit & if needed would happily punt the equipment down the pub for a £10 bag of whatever crap it is they're injecting into their systems!
No-one should take this guy seriously if thats the kinda nonsense he comes out with !! AND exactly how much does this idiot get paid to come up with such stupid hair-brain ideas..? Money that would be better spent on helping these kids, that's for sure ..!!!
[bold]CCTV AT HOME IT IS NOT IN THE INTEREST OF THE CHILD [/bold]
RE: Seumas, Tain
"Avery interesting concept but, what is going to prevent the druggies from flogging the cameras or spraying the lens with spraypaint? Is this a really serious suggestion feom a professor?
Avery interesting concept but, what is going to prevent the druggies from flogging the cameras or spraying"
Exactly! this McKeganey guy is nuts!!
He has no concept of real life - these children should be removed from situations where their welfare is put at risk, not spied on! What good will that really do to their long term mental & well being...??
All the 'junked up' parents care about is their next hit & if needed would happily punt the equipment down the pub for a £10 bag of whatever crap it is they're injecting into their systems!
No-one should take this guy seriously if thats the kinda nonsense he comes out with !! AND exactly how much does this idiot get paid to come up with such stupid hair-brain ideas..? Money that would be better spent on helping these kids, that's for sure ..!!!
CCTV AT HOME IT IS NOT IN THE INTEREST OF THE CHILD Posted by: jonathon, hillhead, glasgow on 1:17pm Fri 24 Aug 07
i have been informed source that mr mackegany is a Scientologist!
i have been informed source that mr mackegany is a Scientologist!
Posted by: BUT, BEN on 1:55pm Fri 24 Aug 07
THIS IS THE SAME MAN WHO WROTE LAST WEEK THAT 1500 ADDICTS IN ITALY WERE CURED OF THEIR ADDICTION BY MAKING PIZZA...............
.......
THIS IS THE SAME MAN WHO WROTE LAST WEEK THAT 1500 ADDICTS IN ITALY WERE CURED OF THEIR ADDICTION BY MAKING PIZZA...............
.......
Posted by: William, new orleans on 1:58pm Fri 24 Aug 07
Put CCTV in academic's home and office to protect children’.
In fact tag him also.
And give him a sedative implant.
Put CCTV in academic's home and office to protect children’.
In fact tag him also.
And give him a sedative implant.
Posted by: Jaggy on 1:59pm Fri 24 Aug 07
If the children are at risk then remove them.
However, we should resist attempts by the state to further intrude on our private lives.
If the children are at risk then remove them.
However, we should resist attempts by the state to further intrude on our private lives.
Posted by: Andrew, Glasgow on 2:29pm Fri 24 Aug 07
A properly staffed and trained Social Work Department would be a good start. Modern and innovative drug laws coupled with support for addicts. A strong police response to drug dealers and those caught bringing drugs into Scotland. All of these can be argued for and against and rightly should be. The good Professor is right in that a debate is needed but let's not include his bunkum. Shame on the Herald for reporting this as anything other than a right winger spouting inanity.
A properly staffed and trained Social Work Department would be a good start. Modern and innovative drug laws coupled with support for addicts. A strong police response to drug dealers and those caught bringing drugs into Scotland. All of these can be argued for and against and rightly should be. The good Professor is right in that a debate is needed but let's not include his bunkum. Shame on the Herald for reporting this as anything other than a right winger spouting inanity.
Posted by: Jakey, Lanarkshire on 3:19pm Fri 24 Aug 07
Some of the personal comments on here against Professor McKeganey are absolutely atrocious. So you don't agree with his opinion, okay, fine, but to get this personal and nasty???? What are some of you people on???
And tell me this, who else in Scotland has put themselves out there with these kinds of issues??? Eh???? Who else is shouting from the rooftops about the continuous rise in drug and alcohol abuse in Scotland, about the yobs and hoodies on our streets plying themselves with illegal drugs and alcohol, about child neglect??
Eh??? Who?? Yeah, that's right. Nobody. Get real, criticise him for his opinions but at least he's getting a reaction to stuff the government are just ignoring.
Some of the personal comments on here against Professor McKeganey are absolutely atrocious. So you don't agree with his opinion, okay, fine, but to get this personal and nasty???? What are some of you people on???
And tell me this, who else in Scotland has put themselves out there with these kinds of issues??? Eh???? Who else is shouting from the rooftops about the continuous rise in drug and alcohol abuse in Scotland, about the yobs and hoodies on our streets plying themselves with illegal drugs and alcohol, about child neglect??
Eh??? Who?? Yeah, that's right. Nobody. Get real, criticise him for his opinions but at least he's getting a reaction to stuff the government are just ignoring.
Posted by: maxbis, 13 iona ridge hamilton ml3 8pz on 3:36pm Fri 24 Aug 07
It is time that a serious paper like the Herald stopped paying Professor McKeganey for wirting his unbelievable nonesense on solutions to our nation's drugs problems. It is also time that they stopped describing Professor McKegeny as Scotlands Leading Drugs Expert. he is nothing of the kind. He is an academic, a professional researcher, he has never worked at the coal face with individuals troubled with the addictions he researches. In the 15 years that he has been around this area of work I cannot recall one sensible idea coming out of his hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of so called research. If the herald is serious about wanting to open up the debate on finding solutions to our massive drugs problem it is time that they started to publish some properly researched ideas that will support those of us working daily in this field of work. There are many solutions to the drugs problem that have not had the coverage in the press that they deserve. We need ideas on how to stop kids starting to smoke. How to help the public to understand the potentially lethal results that come from mixing alcohol and cocaine together. We need to find ways to educate parents on drugs so that they are not inadvertently causing their children harm by thier ignorance. We need to debate why is it that we are parking addicts on methadone or considering giving them free heroin when the major underlying mental health problems of these addicts is never being addressed. We need to debate what can be done to support families and especially grandparents who are trying to help thier own children trapped in addictions. We need to debate why is it that the police have such a big influence on governments when they are deciding on new drugs policies and why are the police in schools teaching kids about drugs. They re not qualified to do so and can only pass on one message, just say no, which has failed completley to curb drug abuse. If the Herald would just spare some column inches for these and other suggestions instead of the professor's rantings we might just start to make some progress.
It is time that a serious paper like the Herald stopped paying Professor McKeganey for wirting his unbelievable nonesense on solutions to our nation's drugs problems. It is also time that they stopped describing Professor McKegeny as Scotlands Leading Drugs Expert. he is nothing of the kind. He is an academic, a professional researcher, he has never worked at the coal face with individuals troubled with the addictions he researches. In the 15 years that he has been around this area of work I cannot recall one sensible idea coming out of his hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of so called research. If the herald is serious about wanting to open up the debate on finding solutions to our massive drugs problem it is time that they started to publish some properly researched ideas that will support those of us working daily in this field of work. There are many solutions to the drugs problem that have not had the coverage in the press that they deserve. We need ideas on how to stop kids starting to smoke. How to help the public to understand the potentially lethal results that come from mixing alcohol and cocaine together. We need to find ways to educate parents on drugs so that they are not inadvertently causing their children harm by thier ignorance. We need to debate why is it that we are parking addicts on methadone or considering giving them free heroin when the major underlying mental health problems of these addicts is never being addressed. We need to debate what can be done to support families and especially grandparents who are trying to help thier own children trapped in addictions. We need to debate why is it that the police have such a big influence on governments when they are deciding on new drugs policies and why are the police in schools teaching kids about drugs. They re not qualified to do so and can only pass on one message, just say no, which has failed completley to curb drug abuse. If the Herald would just spare some column inches for these and other suggestions instead of the professor's rantings we might just start to make some progress.
Posted by: heavy, Glasgow on 3:39pm Fri 24 Aug 07
Those who demand more and more monitoring using spy cameras are the most secretive and dangerous of all.
McKeganey and his ilk would be the last people to vote for cameras in their own living rooms as they are only interested in voyeurism to satisfy their unhealthy perversions and are part of the child theft network that is rife with state funding.
LJPR LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS
http://www.ljpr.info
CIVIL TRIAL BY JURY ANYTHING ELSE IS TYRANNY
Those who demand more and more monitoring using spy cameras are the most secretive and dangerous of all.
McKeganey and his ilk would be the last people to vote for cameras in their own living rooms as they are only interested in voyeurism to satisfy their unhealthy perversions and are part of the child theft network that is rife with state funding.
LJPR LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS
http://www.ljpr.info
CIVIL TRIAL BY JURY ANYTHING ELSE IS TYRANNY
Posted by: George Laird, Glasgow on 3:54pm Fri 24 Aug 07
[quote][bold]Archie[/bold] wrote:
Shut Down Glasgow University If it's (as seems the case) run by perverts and pseudo-nazis and fascist F-wits. Noo therrs a "radical" solution for you. And I am serious by the way Its full of plonkers trying to be clever.[/quote] Dear Archie
As much as this may appear to be not in keeping with my usual postings regarding the University of Glasgow, there are a considerable number of staff who are decent people and do a considerable amount of good too.
Unfortunately there are also considerable number of complete halfwits who think the sun shines out of their limited ability rear end.
They are blight and stain on the University of Glasgow's character.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Archie wrote:
Shut Down Glasgow University If it's (as seems the case) run by perverts and pseudo-nazis and fascist F-wits. Noo therrs a "radical" solution for you. And I am serious by the way Its full of plonkers trying to be clever.
Dear Archie
As much as this may appear to be not in keeping with my usual postings regarding the University of Glasgow, there are a considerable number of staff who are decent people and do a considerable amount of good too.
Unfortunately there are also considerable number of complete halfwits who think the sun shines out of their limited ability rear end.
They are blight and stain on the University of Glasgow's character.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Posted by: John Connor, Glasgow on 4:03pm Fri 24 Aug 07
McKeganey offers no evidence that CCTV in drug addicts homes will protect children. Instead he ignores the possible detrimental consequencies of such a policy. Why? Because he doesn't care one way or the other.
While Prof McKeganey installs CCTV shouldn't he also take time to sterilise the children of drug addicts, because they are at high risk of becoming junky parents themselves.
McKeganey offers no evidence that CCTV in drug addicts homes will protect children. Instead he ignores the possible detrimental consequencies of such a policy. Why? Because he doesn't care one way or the other.
While Prof McKeganey installs CCTV shouldn't he also take time to sterilise the children of drug addicts, because they are at high risk of becoming junky parents themselves.
Posted by: George Laird, Glasgow on 4:08pm Fri 24 Aug 07
[quote][bold]doc[/bold] wrote:
George Firstly, I totally agree, 100% with the first part of your post above regards the esteemed professor. But this nonsense about Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University, whatever the perceived wrong doings and I dont know what they have done/not done BUT surely its time to move on and drop this? Take the moral high ground and act better than they have ever done with you and move on with your life. The "Campaign..." tag only serves to detract from your spot on comments about McKeganey. :)[/quote] Dear Doc
Thank you for your reply and comments. To briefly address your last points.
“But this nonsense about Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University”.
I am sorry you are not a believer but it’s not nonsense, its very much a matter of justice to me.
“whatever the perceived wrong doings and I dont know what they have done/not done BUT surely its time to move on and drop this?”
There is a considerable story stretching back years which I think may change your mind or not.
The bottom line for the senior staff from Sir Muir Russell et al is simply this.
1/ They give me justice and punish those involved for bullying and fraud.
2/ They kill me and better make a good job of it.
3/ They fit me up and I get locked up in prison.
These clowns aren’t getting any other options.
A line has been crossed and therefore I regard the matter as serious.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
doc wrote:
George Firstly, I totally agree, 100% with the first part of your post above regards the esteemed professor. But this nonsense about Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University, whatever the perceived wrong doings and I dont know what they have done/not done BUT surely its time to move on and drop this? Take the moral high ground and act better than they have ever done with you and move on with your life. The "Campaign..." tag only serves to detract from your spot on comments about McKeganey. :)
Dear Doc
Thank you for your reply and comments. To briefly address your last points.
“But this nonsense about Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University”.
I am sorry you are not a believer but it’s not nonsense, its very much a matter of justice to me.
“whatever the perceived wrong doings and I dont know what they have done/not done BUT surely its time to move on and drop this?”
There is a considerable story stretching back years which I think may change your mind or not.
The bottom line for the senior staff from Sir Muir Russell et al is simply this.
1/ They give me justice and punish those involved for bullying and fraud.
2/ They kill me and better make a good job of it.
3/ They fit me up and I get locked up in prison.
These clowns aren’t getting any other options.
A line has been crossed and therefore I regard the matter as serious.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Posted by: baloney on 4:13pm Fri 24 Aug 07
I have to agree with Jakey - this kind of personal attack is simply pathetic. We have a government which consistently ignores these children, to the extent of blatantly lying about the support agencies involved in their care. Nobody knows enough about these children and their sad lives to be able to state with certainty that the drug problem is getting any better - the hard fact is that it continues to get worse and children die in drug addicts' care. Nobody is picking on the working classes or proposing selective fascist theories, but what they are suggesting is that NOTHING HAS WORKED AT ALL OVER 30 YEARS!!! If people cannot parent effectively then a sound socialist society should parent in their absence. Banging on about human rights for junkies ignores the fact that these children also have human rights and deserve a safe, secure and caring upbringing. read Marina Barnard's book 'Drug Addiction and Families' and when you've stopped weeping over the horror that is the reality for so many children, perhaps you'll also give up on the knee jerk reactions. And while you're at it, stop pretending that alcohol isn't producing the same tragic homes. Just because you're a parent doesn't make a child your property. McKeganey may be a professor, whatever that means, and may well be middle class, but who cares about what sort of car he has or what sort of dog? - the guy has worked in drugs research for 15 years and having some bleeding heart social worker claim he doesn't know what's happening at the coal face is arrant nonsense.
I have to agree with Jakey - this kind of personal attack is simply pathetic. We have a government which consistently ignores these children, to the extent of blatantly lying about the support agencies involved in their care. Nobody knows enough about these children and their sad lives to be able to state with certainty that the drug problem is getting any better - the hard fact is that it continues to get worse and children die in drug addicts' care. Nobody is picking on the working classes or proposing selective fascist theories, but what they are suggesting is that NOTHING HAS WORKED AT ALL OVER 30 YEARS!!! If people cannot parent effectively then a sound socialist society should parent in their absence. Banging on about human rights for junkies ignores the fact that these children also have human rights and deserve a safe, secure and caring upbringing. read Marina Barnard's book 'Drug Addiction and Families' and when you've stopped weeping over the horror that is the reality for so many children, perhaps you'll also give up on the knee jerk reactions. And while you're at it, stop pretending that alcohol isn't producing the same tragic homes. Just because you're a parent doesn't make a child your property. McKeganey may be a professor, whatever that means, and may well be middle class, but who cares about what sort of car he has or what sort of dog? - the guy has worked in drugs research for 15 years and having some bleeding heart social worker claim he doesn't know what's happening at the coal face is arran