Risk

Before I write anything else, I am going to start with a song:

What happened?

I have never heard of "Sublime" or the song before, but had to find something that had that title. As it happens, it is so quirky that I am glad I found it. Why "what happened"? I hear you say.

(sorry, this could become a whole post of asides. I do realise that I cannot hear you, any more than television presenters will see you later, but I hope you will indulge me in the occasional slip into idiom).

This blog usually jogs along at a rate of about 5 page views a day. That does not sound much, but believe it or not the total page views since I started are now nudging the 2000 mark. Yesterday, only one person took a look at one of the pages. Today, so far, there have been 43 page views! Not only that, but nearly all are from the UK and it has been a really pleasant sunny day outside; surely reading this is not better than enjoying the sunshine?

Sorry, that sounded a bit ungrateful. Please don't get me wrong, I am very grateful that you take the time to read my scribblings and offer my heartfelt thanks for your sacrifice, but today???????

Anyway, that is not why I am writing this evening................... as I recall, I promised to write something about risk.

The subject of risk is one that I could bore on for hours. Its relationship with choice, expectation, the press and public spending is something that I am a passionate about, but to expand fully would probably take a small book. To save your sanity, here are some abbreviated thoughts that might strike a chord with you. Before you go any further, I should warn you that this is not as light hearted as usual so you might want to skip this post.

If you are still reading, it is at your own risk............................

You might have noticed that in the last year (it is a year, almost to the day, since this odyssey started) risk has raised its head every now and then. Every time I have tried to take a calculated risk with which I was comfortable, some apparently well meaning professional has tried to explain why I cannot take it. Mostly I have managed to prevail, but not every time.

This experience is not unique to me. The other day, my father tried to buy some over the counter medication for himself and my mother. He asked for two packets of a well known painkiller only to be told that he could only have one. I have met the same problem when buying something as simple as aspirin at a supermarket. Why on earth would this happen?

The really simple answer is that if you take industrial quantities of over the counter medications you might do yourself some harm. Seriously, there is a view that if people can only buy one of something at a time they are less likely to kill themselves through taking it. No matter that you could walk around the corner to another pharmacy to buy some more, then on to another...................... The result is that both my parents and I make sure that we keep a plentiful supply by overstocking (one at a time of course!).

In the incredible (look up the definition!) world of NHS Hospitals, I have variously been told that I cannot leave because it might be risky (twice), that I might be in pain if they do not sedate me into insensibility (twice, and both wrong!) and that I might suffer from an infection if I do not have a certain drug administered. Admittedly I was forced into the last one through a combination of threat to withdraw treatment and sheer bloody rudeness, but I got away with the others.............no thanks to the clinical staff.

To find an explanation for people constantly trying to take away any vestige of risk taking and choice, the anecdote  below might help.It is from a local authority rather than the NHS, but that does not really matter.

Many years ago I was part of a group looking at the "Corporate Risk Assessment"  for a local authority. I was a comparative minion at the time, standing in for my boss who was on holiday. Much discussion was had about what the biggest risk  the social services department faced and eventually the conversation settled on children's services. What follows will probably shock you if you have not worked in the UK public services; it will come as no surprise to anyone who has. It is a very condensed version of the reasoning that followed from someone suggesting that the death of a child was the biggest risk.

Death of a child?
Not the biggest risk; children die every day for a variety of reasons

Death of a child through abuse, neglect etc not known to us?
Terrible, but not the worst that could happen

Death of a child known to us because "we" failed to do something, or got something wrong?
Seriously bad, but not the top  of the list.

Unless you have scrolled down and read the next bit, I would imagine that you are wondering what on earth could be worse? At this point, let's play a little game.......take a minute and see if you can think what might be worse that a local authority failing in its duty to protect a vulnerable child? If you are up for it, I would be really interested to know what you are thinking at the moment; would you be prepared to hit the "comment" button and share it?

OK, the worst thing that could happen in a social services department according to a group of very senior people is............

The death of a child known to us because "we" failed to do something or got something wrong, and the press found out about it 

That conversation made such an impression on me that I can still remember it almost word for word all these years later. On the face of it, it is truly horrifying. It does, however, give some insight into why public services are so risk averse. They are terrified of the harm to their reputation if there might be any hint that they took risks that did not pay off. Not because of the life of the individual at the other end, but because of the harm to their reputation if the press can make that out they failed. It extends into the professions; in fact it is now all pervasive.

Now you know why my father could only buy one packet of pills and why WMS was so upset at me trying to take what she perceived as a risk that she was prepared to refuse to provide treatment. In the latter case, the short term risk of her being blamed for me getting and infection outweighed the long term risk of death from cancer; the chances are that she would not have been around by the time I died.

Not the usual upbeat ending I am afraid, but I hope you found it thought provoking.

As compensation for getting this far, here is the live version of a classic from one of the all time greats. Sorry the quality is a bit patchy, but it is a BBC recording...............

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBqd-5W4taQ