- Feedback
- View
greenstiles":4a25lqoj said:Sorry you don't like my opinions guys. I have had support behind the scenes who agree with , but sadly are cautious about coming on here for a bun fight or being baited.
As for using the internet term 'troll' for someone who hasn't aimed any personal insults like some remarks made to me at 1st have been, i find that a very blunt tactic.
I have given my honest opinions and tried to learn some thing along the way.
I have even had a bit of self doubt at times, but thanks to the people who have posted up their bad experiences with SW and a couple of people who have expressed support behind the scenes, I know i am not alone with such opinions.
I only reason i used the mechanics analogy was to prove how silly it was to compare what we were talking about to non relevant professions.
I am happy in my opinions and that is what they are. No I am not trying to cause trouble either, so you can stop that one please.
I will bow out now finally as I just feel that from this point i am going to be baited and made out to not have the right to expess myself.
Thanks for everyones input.
The reasons why people would report negative experiences , given the nature of the task has been clearly explained to you,
The point made that SW can not be flaky or have demons has also been made and you have conveniently ignored this, you have been asked for the evidence from your study of psychology to support this postition yet can not provide any.
when you observed SWs avoiding making a snap surface assessment of the facts or evidence in a case study, you interpret this as them embellishing the information, and not making as assessment based on teaching, training, theory, research and extensive practice experience.
If people have contacted you "behind the scenes" social stigma and the nature of the task again explains why they do not post here.
When you see SWs discussing and deciding on the best way to proceed given the tangle of legislation, theory research, policy ,process etc you see this as confusion (we are not confused by this).
you make a point about accountability, the examples here both provide evidence that they were offered the right to complain and have the situation investigated. I have provided others factual information to prove that no profession is held as accountable as SW, by itself and the media and society and the government, yet it exists within a domain where there is no such thing as a black and white, yes no, right or wrong type decision, just shades of grey and damned if you do damned if you dont.
To my mind you have not been able to make one single valid point or substantiate it.
you have also decided to completely misconstrue a person who was actually supportive to a degree of your position and more eloquantly able to discuss,substantiate and argue that postition, and bizarrely persist in doing so, which shows how entrenched your mentality leaves you. There is no piont in begining a discussion if your mind is closed and you are unprepared to have your opinion altered, even when your opinion has been based on what you read in the sun and a bloke in the pub said so type thing.
you are right on the need at this point to disgracefully bow out and run away though.
