Pat Anderson Manager DoCS Cairns North Department Community Services Banshee
Like us on fb
Dear Mr (DoCS Victim),
I refer to your complaints of 12 and 21 September 2011 and the complaint investigation which has been undertaken by the regional office.
The complaint issues that you have raised were:
1. you were not provided with information you previously asked for in relation to a "complaint about (DoCS Victim) regarding 10 December 2010":
2. Ms Pat Andersen (Manager of DoCS Cairns North who refused to remove Luke Borusiewicz from the foster home where he was fatally injured) provided misleading or false evidence to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal on 14 September 2011.
In order to respond to your complaint, Ms Jo Riley (Pat Anderson's sidekick, manhater), Client Relations Officer has completed a review of departmental records and relevant legislation; and consulted with officers from Cairns Child Safety Service Centre and Child Safety After Hours Service Centre.
I have now received the complaint investigation report and am able to provide you with the following information in response.
With regards to the first issue you raised, Ms Riley reviewed five separate aspects:
a. alleged failure to respond to past requests for information about a "complaint about (DoCS Victim) regarding 10 December 2010":.
Departmental records do not evidence that officers from Cairns Child Safety
Service Centre responded to your emails of 4 July 2011 or 18 July 2011.
I regret any concern or inconvenience that this failure to respond may have caused you.
This section of the complaint is substantiated.
b. departmental staff allegedly not advising parents of an investigation and assessment.
Departmental records evidence that a meeting was held with you and Ms (DoCS Victim) on 15 December 2011 to discuss the department's concerns for the children as the result of an incident whereby you had removed the children from the supervision of officers on 10 December 2011.
However, the record of that meeting was found to be of a poor standard and it
did not identify whether you and Ms (DoCS Victim) had been provided with specific information about the investigation and assessment process.
As a result of this complaint investigation, I have directed the Cairns Child Safety Service Centre to provide you with written advice about the investigation and assessment process that was undertaken and the outcome.
This section of the complaint is partially substantiated and a number of
recommendations have been made to ensure that identified deficiencies in record keeping and practice are addressed appropriately.
c. departmental staff allegedly not advising guardians of medical treatment / potential consent issues.
A review of departmental records did not evidence that you and Ms (DoCS Victim) were directly advised by the department about the medical treatment that (DoCS Victim) received on 11 December 2010 or the rationale for that medical treatment.
I am able to advise you that the decision for (DoCS Victim) to be medically examined was made by officers of the Child Safety After Hours Service Centre, under s97 of the Child Protection Act 1999.
As a result of this complaint investigation, I have directed the Cairns Child Safety Service Centre to provide you with written advice about the medical treatment that (DoCS Victim) received on 11 December 2010.
I regret any concern or anxiety that a failure to provide you this information about (DoCS Victim) may have caused you and Ms (DoCS Victim).
This section of the complaint is substantiated and a number of recommendations have been made to address identified deficiencies relevant to record keeping, communication and practice.
d. information requested about ARCs roster on the day the young person returned to the placement.
Under the provisions of the Information Privacy Act 2009, the department cannot disclose to you details about any other person.
I understand that Ms Riley has previously given you verbal advice that if you have any concern about an employee of ARC Disability Services, you should contact the management of that agency.
e. identification of a notifier requested.
A notifier's identity is protected under s186 of the Child Protection Act 1999. On that basis this information cannot be disclosed.
I note that the allegation that misleading or false evidence to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal on 14 September 2011, has been dealt with in consultation with the Ethical Standards Unit and you were posted an outcome letter on 9 November 2011.
The following complaint issue was investigated by the regional office:
2. On 14 September 2011, Ms Pat Andersen had incorrectly stated that the department had previously offered additional sibling contact but you and Ms(DoCS Victim) had refused that offer.
Though this complaint investigation it has been established that Ms Andersen had inadvertently made an inaccurate comment to you and that this error was the result of human error on Ms Andersen's part.
There is no information to suggest that Ms Andersen's intent had been to be deceitful or unjust toward you or Ms (DoCS Victim).
This matter will be dealt with under the department's Code of Conduct. This section of the complaint is substantiated.
I trust that the above information is of assistance to you.
If you are not satisfied that•your complaint has been responded to appropriately, you may certainly seek an internal review from Child Safety Complaints until at 1800 651 341 or complaintsachildsafety.cild.00v.au.
Alternatively, you may choose to discuss your complaint externally with the Office of the Queensland Ombudsman on 3005 7000 or 1800 068 908.
Child Safety Youth and Families
1 5 DEC 2011
Regarding Pat Andersen, Nth Cairns Child safety manager.
If we were to lie in a tribunal or court they call it perjury. When Pat Andersen and her sidekicks lie, they call it as, "Pat Andersen inadvertently made an inaccurate comment to you and this was the result of human error on Ms Andersen's part. The fact is that it was stated as evidence by Pat Andersen to a QCAT tribunal, not directed at us at all. They mysteriously overlooked this fact on the transcript when making the findings.
I am still waiting for written advice about the (so called) medical treatment (DoCS Victim) received on 11 December 2010 and the rational for that treatment. It is now May 2012. The relevant authorities are investigating.......
Recent blog posts
- Freedom of Speech - A threat to Corruption
- The expert who played God - Doctor wrongfully removes children for money
- And Justice for All - Commitment to Change and Unity of resources
- THE REALITY OF DoCS - Mother and Defacto Abuse 15 Month old Baby
- How it feels when a child on your social work team’s caseload dies