“Chipping at an Iceberg with a Fork”

I am taking the points given form the comments form my last post, which lead to the discussion on certain aspects. I will admit that I tried to cover a broad rang of topics, while trying to express my reaction to a fifteen minute radio interview. With that, I concede that each point is a topic within its own right and I really just glossed over them. I thank the thoughtful comments, By Kate and Devil’s advocate, for pointing out that my passions on the agreement at hand, could be clouding my representation of the situation.

To that end I will address one topic which I quoted in my title. Subsequent conversations, on what I had written, exposed a though by Kate, who works in the field of child welfare. She said, “It’s like chipping away at an iceberg with a fork” (in reference to her experiences in welfare). I have seen first hand, the mental and physical drain on people who undertake this noble work. I think, to that end, that I am justified in saying that if that is the case then you have to start chipping and keep chipping at some point. I was not suggesting that banning alcoholic adverting or mediation is a cure, other, it is a point worthy of consideration. I am under no illusions that the topic has a “quick fix” but , if I may refer to Father Riley, find that if an impassioned plea is given to someone that has worked in this field for so long, isn’t it something worthy of consideration? Isn’t experience worth more than hypothesizing? I will agree that that is a separate topic within itself.

Back to the situation at hand, I feel that there are similarities between a welfare worker and a mechanic. If a mechanic is presented with a vehicle, they will toil to do the best they can to repair a car with the resources available to them. When the car leaves their care, no matter what advice is given to the owner, some will return with the same afflictions due to the way the car is treated by the owner. The mechanic is then repairing the same faults that could have been averted if their advice was adhered to; it then becomes a frustrating and repetitive process for the owner and the mechanic. If equated to child welfare, once a worker has done what they can, with the resources available to them, who is responsible for any subsequent improvement? I was once told, “The best administrator for your own affairs is you!” If I can use that in relation to my slimily, If the owner of a vehicle doesn’t take responsibility for it, how good can a mechanic actually be? In the same way, if the guardians of a child, if they have any, don’t take due care, what help can a welfare worker give? If the “client” is older and don’t take responsibility for their own actions, the same applies. “Action and consequence” is again another topic.

I cannot give any solutions to the welfare question as I do not work in the field. I can only offer my opinion and, hopefully, productive and healthy debate on the issue.