Monday, 9 January 2017


As for the CSA Inquiry etc - all BOLLOX. The majority of the child abuse that went on in the 60s/70s/80s, was carried out by employees of local authorities who had care and control of vulnerable children.  That is, orphans and those rescued or seized from 'dysfunctional' families.    

In the orphanages, the religious institutions, approved schools and the childrens' homes,  abuse was common day to day practice.  By their very nature these care homes were designed to attract the very worst of human behaviour. Can you imagine the paedophiles, the sadists and the psychopaths salivating as they read the job description?  'you will often have sole day to day and pastoral care of 12 children of different ages who have no parents or anyone who will believe a word they say'.  Every industry attracts psychopaths, but sadly, the care industry more than most.     

But here's a thing, and here's why the CSA Inquiry is bollox.  Of all the abuse that was inflicted on children in care, the Government, the MSM, all the do gooders and even the public (because they are being steered that way), have focussed on the titillating SEXUAL abuse.  And let me be honest here, those of us who were being battered and forced to scrub floors through the night, envied that tiny few who were being groomed and showered with privileges. 

Abuse was rife during those decades because all the cogs were in place to support it.  Every society, even the richest, has vulnerable citizens to take care of - and they will usually opt for the cheapest and most inhumane method as long as it looks as though they are doing their duty.  Which is where the Church steps in.  Not only did they relieve the local councils of their burden, they vowed to rehabilitate the offspring of the undeserving poor and turn out obedient citizens with a healthy respect for authority. 

The Child SEXUAL Abuse will never focus on the real abuse that was going on, because those floodgates would turn into a tsumani.  Basically, it is saying, it is OK to whip children, lock them in cupboards, make them wear rags and degrade them, but for fuck's sake don't embrace them.  It should all be laughable, because it is the deviant far right, trying to out deviant the even further far right. 

So far the armies of 'investigators' are only interested in targets who's names will attract tabloid headlines.  If the dirty old git who stuck his hand up your kilt, hasn't had at least a one man show, forget it.  And we're not interested in the bus driver who said you had nice tits when you were 12 either.  However, if the perp has any connection to a political party whatsoever, even leafletting, pull up a chair.  

For the survivors who have come forward, there is nothing in it for them but a continuation of their trauma and pain.  There won't be any payouts, there won't be any 'justice'.  At the moment, they are being used as willing pawns in a very sick game, the only healing they will get, will be in using that 'sixth sense' to help protect others.

Zero children are being protected by this ongoing money pit,  and God knows there are enough kids desperately in need right now.  Nothing will be learned because the investigators are ignoring the bleeding obvious.  The authorities, all of them, placed the care of their most vulnerable children into the hands of psychopaths,  Some of whom were sexually attracted to children, but most were bog standard sadists. 

The only lesson to be learned from the entire sorry saga, is that carers, not just of children, but also of the elderly and the disabled should be psychology screened during the interview process and the means to do this already exist. Anyone who has ever worked in the care industry will have encountered
co-workers (happily a minority), who's attitude towards their clients was less than humane. Unhappily for me, and I am sure many, my constant challenging of 'rules' and whistleblowing, cut short my own, much loved, employment as a  support worker.  I tried to do as a co-worker, good friend, and very wise woman advised, which was, not make waves, because ultimately the clients wouldn't have us anymore.  We sort of felt that our being good, would make up for the bad, and I'm sure a lot of carers out there will recognise that sentiment. 

In the above instance, the system beat me.  They broke me, quite literally, made me question my own sanity.  I survived because I turned to the internet and read everything I could on 'bullying in the workplace'.  Without any hesitation, I thank those brave enough to tell their stories, and the analysts and psychologists for explaining it.  At some point I will give an account of the experience, tis a struggle though, the memory still has the power to traumatise me!  Mostly guilt, because I felt as though I had abandoned those dear, sweet people I cared so much about.

But I digress.  Seeking out those aged, and probably infirm, abusers is pointless.  They were taking advantage of the system that existed at that time.  Hopefully, throughout the rest of their miserable lives, they were never able to hold such positions of power again.

The CSA Inquiry, are not making headlines such as 'Fred the Milkman, age 89 once exposed his John Thomas to a schoolgirl', because apart from a few old biddies saying 'Ooer, 'ave you read about old Fred, what was he like, ha ha', nobody could care less.  Some might say that's because Fred the Milkman didn't work in childcare.  But isn't it also possible, and far more likely, that the victims were also abused by people who didn't work in childcare, who weren't once famous, or who never held political office?  Are those memories less traumatic, equally traumatic, more traumatic, or inconsequential?


  1. Hi Ros
    Blimey girl...deep breathhhhhhh
    I know what you mean. But I think it's been said already - ' sex sells' . I'm not sure it's the 'tittilation' as the need to enjoy a 'scandal' and have something highly charged to make our conversations more interesting . I see violence and sexual assault as more or less the same thing. Both are assaults . It's just that one is immediate and fast, one is a slow burner . Both leave ruined victims . The system is geared against the victims, and that is tantamount to it being geared in favour of the perpetrators. When i say geared against the victims, class plays a part in it. The victims in institutions are generally placed there from the 'lower' end. There's an implied 'the establishment has rescued the child, we've done our bit' about it. The same establishment has , as part of it's war against the plebs, priced those victims out. Legal aid is hard to get. In abuse cases , trying to make a case sound viable is an exercise in pushing treacle up a hill. Even if a case can be made, you'll be hard pressed to find a solicitor as the 'win' is hardly worth their work. So, even though the victim's abuse may be over, the establishments choice to marginalise them actually deepens the initial trauma and reinforces their feeling of vulnerability and worthlessness. Most reported cases of initial abuse, before the victims are even placed in care, are carried out by people known to the victim( i believe the figures were 80% if you believe statistics) . These are the cases where legal representation is nigh on impossible to find. These mount up. Then, when the MSM start talking about 'historical cases of abuse' from way back when, people are programmed to say 'why didn't they come forward back then..they're just cashing in'. They don't know the bigger picture. Some are cashing in, I'm sure. But the majority have been told it's not worth pursuing or just dropped the case. I think when they become aware of how widespread the problem is, they feel less isolated and feel that they can finally speak up without being called names .

    The CSA has made itself a laughing stock. How many big names stood down -3? 4?5? more ? It seems the potato is far too hot for some. It's a great irony that they're showing a need to run and hide when you consider the theme ; ie- that the establishment's behaviour and inaction is why the horrific catalogue of crime is making the news in the first place , and they're making even more headlines now by confirming it .

    Never lose sight of the MSM being a branch of the government. It's propaganda. it's used for their purpose, be it to lie, to hide the truth, or to promote their agenda. All outlets for them-newspapers, TV.and the internet etc shape how we think if we believe what we read.Most do believe the official line. So, feed them old milkmen, celebs of yesteryear and they're happy. It makes the media look responsible and it keeps their bosses out of the headlights glare. Question everything, and hunt for the logical answer.

    1. Those appointed to head the CSI Inquiry soon realise, within days no doubt, that the real purpose of the Inquiry is a witch hunt along the lines of the Court of King Henry VIII. It is an opportunity to take out enemies and smear opponents.

      Yes, I am being harsh on the survivors, but for God's sake someone needs to be. They are being used because they are vulnerable and are blinded by the trauma they suffered years ago. Mostly because they are surrounded by advisors who want them to relive it over and over again.

      I literally have zero respect for the bleeding hearts who speak out on their behalf. If they genuinely cared about children in need, they would rushing to the aid of kids in poverty and refugee camps, rather than children who are now in their 60's.

  2. It's similar to the Leverson Enquiry which got hijacked by Z Listers who one minute use the media to promote themselves and then complain about privacy when it prints something unfavourable about them. I volunteer as a mentor for people with mental health issues, again not helped by so called celebrities claiming to have bipolar to excuse their bad behaviour. This is where I disagree about psychological testing for people working with children or vulnerable adults. I myself hold an Enhanced DBS certificate and I'm also Security Cleared. Both of these processes are strict in screening information about me. The issue of psychological testing will only highlight what someone might or might not do in certain situations or environments. It's in my opinion only a paper exercise and not a substitute for real life. Being ex army I have seen how people react and people have seen me react to situations and again for me it was a learning process. With regards to physical abuse, the law is the victims sword but also justice is blind. I wouldn't have it any other way as mentioned in a previous blog vigilantism will rule.

    1. I agree with your comparison to Leverson, it only attracts interested parties. And by that I mean people with self serving interests.

      I'm not sure I agree about celebrities, so called or otherwise lol, claiming to have bipolar. As a sufferer myself, though I tend to use the old fashioned expression, 'manic depressive'. Those of us familiar with the old 'black dog' rarely wish to glamorize it. I have always found other peoples' stories and experiences immensely helpful.

      Bipolar imo, is just a label. We all suffer from depression and sometimes it passes that middle line and crosses over into 'manic'. For me, I would rather have it than not. When I am happy and having fun, it feels far more intense, I see joy in just about everything, and I can amuse myself with my own wit. It kind of makes up for the crashing lows.

      You are probably more familiar with psychological screening than I John. I imagine it would be very difficult to draw up a test that would cover every hypothetical situation. And many questions may violate privacy and human rights.

      If I were in a sinking ship situation, I would want you at my side John! Disaster movies were my favourite genre in the 70's and I was smitten by the heroes who led the dishevelled survivors from upside down ships, burning buildings and airplanes without any engines. [one exception, Charlton Heston!]

      I also have a love of tales of survival. My dear old dad always bought me an annual subscription to Reader's Digest, and many of the stories I read have stayed with me even to this day. I am in awe at those 'who can keep their heads, while all around you are losing theirs', I always fear I would be the one the other passengers would be queuing up to slap.

      I wept buckets when I read about 'the big guy' on the Herald of Free Enterprise, who turned himself into a human ladder so other passengers could be saved. I wonder when he set out that he if he knew he would save so many lives.

      I guess we don't really know what we are capable of until we are put to the test. I am sure many parents out there will have memories of amazing physical feats they have performed to get their accident prone tots to adulthood. Where it has been a case of act first, think later.

      I still like to think there must be a way of weeding the psychopaths out of the care industry. Unfortunately, there is a culture within the care industry, that leans overwhelming in favour of, if you want to keep your job, keep your trap shut.

      There must be some sort of solution John, everyone of us, including our families, may at some time find ourselves in the hands of carers who do check the water temperature before switching on the shower, or leave us gasping for a drink because they have got paperwork to do. It makes no sense that the uncaring should work in the caring professions, but they do.

      I should add, that the majority of my co-workers at that time, were absolute angels, who went above and beyond their duty to care for those vulnerable people. But they are caught in a trap. Do they stay and continue to provide 'good' care for the clients, or do they protest and face disciplinary and trumped up charges against themselves?

  3. Hi Ros, I agree with you on the mental health issue, the stats are 1 in 4 suffer from some form of mental health. On the care side from speaking to former carers, the main issue is a lack of qualified carers coming through the system, also some companies don't want to hire qualified staff as they would have to pay more. Example a lady that I met on my volunteering travels worked as a care worker for a London Borough, all the staff were vetted, fully trained in manual handling and care skills. This lady in particular was there for 24 years and others in the team around the same length in time. The local council privatised the care service and after 6 months all the original staff were gone and were replaced by cheap unqualified agency staff. The company involved apparently was the only one to put in a bid for the contract, it also has a notorious reputation in the USA.

  4. Ros, strange how you AND John100 say Leverson. Do you mean Leveson?

    1. @15:03

      What makes one ask a question simply for the sake of asking?

  5. Hi, Rosalinda, Ziggy, John and others
    I’m reading with great interest what you Rosalinda have to say with reference to institutional care of children, and what kind of people such institutions might attract, as well as I read Ziggy’s and John’s contributions as well.

    I just have an insignificant question of personal interest to you John and it’s about the American child care company you refer to. Does it by any chance happen to be ”Children of America, Inc.” based in Delray Beach, Florida” ?. I’m interested, because I happen to be a small shareholder in that company, and I don’t wish to be indirectly involved in something that harms children.

    1. Hi Bjorn,
      The lady in question was working with elderly residents in London. Sorry I should have mentioned that in my post and I believe the company was Allied Healthcare. There was no concerns of abuse but just a lot of concerns about working conditions, staffing levels, untrained agency staff and the level of care the service users were receiving.

  6. "Investigating the extent to which institutions have failed to protect children from sexual abuse.

    This Inquiry will investigate whether public bodies and other non-state institutions in England and Wales have taken seriously their responsibility to protect children from sexual abuse, and make meaningful recommendations for change in the future"

    I don't see anything wrong with that aim.

  7. Wow! So Rosalind adds yet another string to her bow..... That of professional carer & yet again th e Internet came to her rescue during getting her hour if need.
    This blog is becoming a complete work of fiction.

  8. Ros - I see you have tweeted:

    "Cristobell Author ‏@RosalindaHu Jan 9

    @lisanandy WHY THE CSA INQUIRY IS BOLLOX from an ignored survivor."

    It's a strange way to describe yourself?

    1. The Inquiry are only interested in those abused by famous people.

    2. @ Ros 11.53

      For information:

      "Next steps for the investigations:

      The Inquiry has invited applications for Core Participant status, and has held one or more preliminary hearings, in relation to the following seven investigations:

      Accountability and Reparations investigation
      The Roman Catholic Church
      Children outside the UK
      The late Lord Janner of Braunstone QC
      The Anglican Church
      Lambeth Council
      Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale

      Details of any further preliminary hearings in relation to these investigations will be announced in due course."