Whistleblowing as a Trainee
| DOI | 10.1177/026455059304000104 |
| Published date | 01 March 1993 |
| Date | 01 March 1993 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
22
Whistleblowing
as
a
Trainee
Jan
Holland
describes
a
disquieting
incident
whilst
on
practice
placement.
How
do
you
react
to
a
colleague
whose
practice
is
negligent,
uncommitted
or
exposes
individuals
and
the
organisation
to
risk?
Do
you
risk
being
a
trouble-maker,
do
you
protect
or
simply
feel
helpless
frustration?
robation
officers
and
social
workers,
more
than
any
other
pro-
fessionals,
are
aware
that
amongst
every
body of
individuals
-
from
newspaper
proprietors,
police-
men
and
politicians
to
those
on
Income
Support -
there
are
those
who
do
not
adhere
to
the
same
stan-
dards
of
performance
or
behaviour
as
their
peers.
In
a
sense,
our
profes-
sionalism
can
be
gauged
by
the
hones-
ty
with
which
problems
caused
by
poor
or
dangerous
probation
or
social
work
practice
are
confronted
and
cor-
rected.
This
article
outlines
a
situation
where
failings
in
a
colleague’s
practice
brought
a
number
of
dilemmas
into
sharp
focus.
These
dilemmas
limit
the
opportunities
of
maingrade
probation
officers
and,
more
particularly,
those
of
trainees
to
challenge
failings
and
achieve
improvements
in
the
work
of
the
teams
of
which
they
are
part.
The
events
described
occurred
during
the
writer’s
final
placement,
in
a
community
probation
team,
while
on
a
CQSW
course.
The
names
of
the
peo-
ple
concerned,
including
my
own,
have
also
been
changed
and
the
dates
given
have
been
adjusted
for
obvious
reasons,
but
no
substantial
alteration
has
been
made
to
the
central
’facts’.
Chain of
events
At
about
5.Q0
pm
on
a
Thursday
in
ear-
ly
December,
a
telephone
call
was
received
at
the
office
from
the
duty
of-
ficer
of
the
local
Social
Services
Child
Care
team.
The
call
was
referred
to
the
staadent3
who
was
regarded
as
compe-
tent
to
act
as
duty
afficer,
provided
that
another
qualified
member
of
staff
was
available
should
a
situation
arise
with
which
the
student
felt
unable
to
deal.
Social
Services
were
seeking
confirma-
tion
of
the
address
of
a
John
Smith
whom
they
knew
to
be
on
Probation
and
who
was
the
father
of
a
three
week
old
baby.
The
baby’s
mother
had
con-
tacted
Social
Services
because,
she
alleged,
the
father
(who
was
now
separated
from
the
mother)
had
taken
the
baby
without
her
permission.
The
mother
had
no
idea
where
the
baby
might
be
and
was,
naturally
enough,
extremely
concerned
for
her
child’s
safety.
She had
sought
the
assistance
of
Social
Services,
of
whom
she
was
a
ser-
vice
user,
rather
than
that
of
the
Police.
The
student
consulted
the
office
index
system
and
discovered
that
John
Smith
was
indeed
on
a
one
year
pro-
bation
order
which
still
had
six
months
to
run.
On
referring
to John
Smith’s
file,
it
became
apparent
that
there
was
no
record
of
any
contact
in
the
last
four
months
between
him
and
his
probation
To continue reading
Request your trial