England puts CCTVs in the homes of lousy parents
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted Aug 4th 2009 6:52PM
posted Aug 4th 2009 6:52PM
We love England, especially the way they use all these adorable names for things: "lorry," for truck, or "loo" for bathroom, or "sin bin" for an Orwellian program whereby "problem families" (currently numbering 2,000, but someday as many as 20,000) are placed under 24/7 CCTV surveillance in their own homes. Chris Grayling, something called the "Shadow Home Secretary," puts it thusly: "This Government has been in power for more than a decade during which time anti-social behavior, family breakdown and problems like alcohol abuse and truancy have just got worse and worse." Meaning, of course, that cameras must be moved from the streets of England into people's homes, where they'll be used to make sure that kids go to school, go to bed at a decent hour, and eat proper meals. If only they'd had programs like this when we were kids -- maybe things would have turned out differently.
As a pediatrician I say GOOD! but it'll never happen in the US as we're more concerned with the rights of bad parents than the lives of kids.
You know what they say… not everyone can get a driver's license, but any idiot can go and have a kid.
Pregnancy licenses are a more viable solution than this
what?
you must be kidding, where and when was any good RCT data published on this that would lead you to lend such a medical position. is there even retrospective evidence, or is it all just your personal experience?
what do you consider a bad parent?
because if the parent is "Bad" we take the kids away; but what would justify putting camera's in their house but leaving the kids with "bad" parents?
Since some pediatricians have been caught abusing kids would the next step be to put a camera in every doctors office? Please don't argue privacy since your position is to advocate complete lack of it. Even if you think that's appropriate (which in my opinion further exposes your radical perspective) where do you draw your line in the sand? Cameras at school? Church? Everywhere eventually? It's odd that people like yourself, that scream government needs to be in every inch of our lives, are the first to say we shouldn't invade a country that rapes and murders children as a practice.
I am in no way defending abusive parents, they are filth. That said, take the kids, rehab the parents, whatever. Putting a camera in a citizens home full time is nothing short of stunning.
I think it's safe to say...
"There is no England anymore"
As a pederass I say BAD!
I want to know where you practice medicine so I can steer clear of you and your practice. You clearly have poor judgement and I can only imagine the crumby care my children would get from a whack-job, such as yourself.
@ITRec "the first to say we shouldn't invade a country that rapes and murders children as a practice."
You were saying some good stuff then out pops this little number. Pray tell which country is that?
I've read a 2002 Child Sexual Exploitation report on the USA. It turns out that it is common practice near US army bases (in the USA itself) for families to sell sexual access to their children to the local soldiers for money and gifts. Trafficking of children is also very popular in America with lots of solid documentation on children kept in cages, let out for factory work, prostitution and used as house gimps. Another well loved American strategy is tricking teenagers to come over, stealing their passports, drugging then filming them having sex with dogs, then telling them they will show their parents and forcing them into prostitution, using the dog as a punishment if they don't make enough money. The report is probably at your local library if you are in the USA.
Yeah, like I would want that mob invading and liberating the poor and oppressed.. Seems like they know exactly what to do with the poor and oppressed, rape and oppress them.
Obviously this is not all Americans, AS IT IS NOT "THE PRACTICE" IN ANY OTHER FREAKING COUNTRY YOU (@&#^$(&#@*^
Apologies to the forum for the graphic content
@DT
People like YOU that invision massive government intrustion and control of personal lives are far more of a problem than some idiots raising kids that should have never been parents. The far better solution is better education and services in the areas of family planning, contraception, etc.
Not to mention I think it is time we created a economic incentive to have fewer children. Instead of a tax credit, you should get a tax penalty for each child. And government subsidized (voluntary of course) contraception and sterilizations should be encouraged.
@ Cy Starkman, where did you read this? Where is the reference or the report you refer to? Unless you show us some credible information then who's to say you're not some US Military hating person out there. What you say there is some of the dumbest shit I've read in Engadget comments in quite some time, if not ever!
Cy, I can't tell if you're trolling or just European.
As for being European, Asian or whatever...
It doesn't matter what I am, cause all countries have people wanting to mess with other people, it isn't so much an "attack the USA" comment, rather a take down on the attitude from ITRec that there is some right to invade other "countries" because they have "practices", yeah well which country...
Where's the requests for evidence and reports pointing to ITRec's alleged country of rapists and the brainless nationalism postulated within the comment.
Troll.... LOL
no u
Why not simply offer people cash for tubal ligations and vasectomies?
I think this sorta plan would appeal to the Zeropop folks. They could do it privately - no gov needed.
@Cy
That is very eye opening. I knew there was child trafficking in the US, but it didnt know to what extent.
On a side note, LOL at the authors last names. Estes and Weiner. One "T" shy of the best writing duo ever :-P. Yes I know I am acting like I am 10
"We love England, especially the way they use all these adorable names for things"
Yes, it's called the English language...
You're a numbskull.
CCTV is harmless. Its not Big Brother. Its just the government looking out for us!
Big Brother is when the government snoops on your e-mail and phonecalls...
I hope the sarcasm is thick enough for you, engadget readership. :)
I'm not sure whether to cheer or shudder in disgust.
Either way, this'll be a fun fight to watch.
The disgust one.
Ha Ha! Just great! Now people will think twice about having kids they can't take care of!
You're kidding, right? When people f*ck they actually think about consequences? Since when?
I don't think the opinion of a 13 year old counts this issue is beyond your comprehension.
broli has never really f*cked. I lose my mother f*cking mind playa!
The neds this will apply to are so fertile they get pregnant from rubbing against each other in chip-shops. Better just to sterilise the lot of them - maybe put contraceptives in the buckfast and white-lightening?
Ed Balls himself has said this isn't true. http://twitter.com/edballsmp/status/3124025586
I too get all my reputable news from people named Balls.
Ed Balls himself says so, so it must be true. Although one should consider that Gordon Brown's "government" are not exactly known for telling the truth, are they.
These days, I'm taking such statements as seriously as Walter Ulbrichts's - then leader of East Germany - statement on June 1961.
Which statement you mean?
"Nobody intends to build a wall."
That Ed Balls sure looks like Alec Baldwin in the tiny pic.
I can not take twitter as authoritative, even if there is evidence it was the actual person in question, is there? Does his party's site have a link to that twitter? Because an account having the name of someone is no proof at all obviously, but even if there is confirmation that the person you think it is is the one on twitter you still can't take anything said on it as authoritative, they can always twist things, say that they meant it in a certain context and such trickery, I've seen politicians on TV say something then less than 30 seconds later deny they said it and when confronted with that everybody heard it and it's on tape to still argue it was misunderstood and should be taken in some context and trickery like that.
They are a slippery lot.
I agree, this is total bollocks.
One Nation Under CCTV.
You just don't care when you live with it :p
CCTV does nothing to reduce crime rates who so ever, CCTV is hardly every used to solve crime, and CCTV is rarely used in court. The British government's own recently published long term study on CCTV showed it to be completely ineffective, with the exception of reducing thefts from vehicles in car parks.
CCTV costs a fortune, but it makes some (rather stupid) elements of the population think that it keeps them safe.
One nation under a witty slogan painted on a wall.
I'm hearing this story is BS. Do you guys have any more sources than just the Daily Express article?
I really hope it's BS. I really can't imagine something like this really happening, but if it did I wouldn't be surprised if it was the UK.
It appears to be at least a little sensational and at worst completely inaccurate as far as I can see.
I also don't know why they can't provide some kind of referencing to the original sources on this?
Maybe it's because on reading them the reporting would seem totally out of keeping with the tone of the original announcement - http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/pns/DisplayPN.cgi?pn_id=2009_0138 - or the details of what is involved in family intervention projects - http://www.respect.gov.uk/members/article.aspx?id=8678
I posed the same question to the Twitter world, send opinions to @ncollard (shameless plug)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5888162/Worst-families-in-Britain-will-be-put-in-sin-bins.html
What the hell would the shadow home secretary have ti say about this? Jesus engadget, heard of google?
Anyone hear Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture playing?
What is this, V for Vendetta?
Anyone hear the clock striking 13?
What is this, 1984?
If only it were a cold, bright day in April.
April 1st, to be exact.
Not true.
A Shadow Home Secretary in US terms: think a Senate committee leader, with policy-making roles as well, but from the minority party, put there by his own party to poke holes in the home secretary's plans. The Home Office is roughly analogous to the Department of State in the US. A shame that on this one, they agree on the Orwellian approach- when I say "Senate committee leader", it misses the aspect that the Home Secretary can basically do what he likes, since dissent is basically impossible in the UK system.
I'm not sure your analogy is correct. If the Home Secretary were analogous to the US Department of State that would make it responsible for Britain's relations with foreign governments. And the US equivalent of your Home Secretary would be Hillary Clinton.
The British Home Office is more akin to the US Justice Department, and the equivalent head would be the Attorney General.
the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw is the head of the Justice Ministry so the Home Office is more like whoever deals with domestic affairs in the US.
The word 'shadow' in the UK denotes that the person is part of the opposition monitoring what his counterpart with the actual power is doing, if they had it in the US mccain might be the 'shadow president' right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_minister
According to Wikipedia, the UK Home Office is most similar to the US Department of Homeland Security, with some of the responsibilities of the Justice Department.
I also suspect that many of the things the Home Office deals with are dealt with at the state rather than federal level in the US.
The moral of the story is that no matter how hard the government tries, it cannot truly control its people.
On a different note, Jeremy Clarkson (of Top Gear) recently said that he used to feel like going to the US was "like going to prison, but with more food". Now he feels the exact opposite because of all the CCTV, speed and red light cameras in the UK.
Screw that. I'm staying in the good ole USA.
Funny story about those red light cameras our town tried to put up. Me and some friends kept using them for target practice for our rifles. The town finally abandoned the idea.
Well the US has gotten more prison like too, like all western nations, perhaps he just notices it more in the UK.
@Mark
You must live in a small town. When I walk down the mall with a rifle, people loose their shit.
Wow, this is deeply ironic. A government that can't even manage it's own expenses (has a large amount of debt), lower it's crime rate, or stabilize it's own currency is somehow going to help raise people's children. It's a crazy world.
Who is John Galt?
The only ironic thing is what you just said if you're a US resident. Obama spending billions on healthcare reform that can wait until after the recession is no way to stabilise a deficit. The Dollar is sinking against the Pound and the Euro again and our crime rate is way better than the US per capita, I much prefer my lower chances of getting shot in the UK.
getting shot is the last of my worries with a government camera up my ass everywhere i go
Plus no one thinks of who is actually going to *watch* what's coming through the cameras. Plus, who watches the watchers? Terrible idea, but honestly, coming from the UK, it didn't surprise me.
At any rate I hope it's a hoax, for the sake of the British people. But even if it is a hoax, I wouldn't be surprised in the least to seriously see something like this happen in the near future.
UK sounds more and more fascist every day
You have to mention that that is not good nowadays, simply saying it will be viewed as a compliment :|
Move on, citizen. No need for free thought.
P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act?
So when is this coming on? And what channel?
I'm guessing TLC. Jon and Kate left a big gap in their lineup.
this story is false !!! c'mon engadget vet your sources before releasing articles.
Wow and you thought reality TV was at a low. I feel more sorry for the people who have to watch them then the people being watched...
Wow, another article where England and the UK are used interchangeably, because of course Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland don't exist.
Thick as fuck yanks!
Yanks are the eastern part of the US, you brits always get that wrong and act like it's everybody.
Dude what in the article are you referencing, I see no interchangeable uses of UK and England.
Why don't you shut the hell up you suppressed bastard. If you care so much you would have hanged the bastards that put the first CCTV. How about you wake up from the nice dream.
Note to the British: Nobody outside the bloody U.K. cares about your little fiefdoms. Yeah so the Scots hate the English, that's quite amusing, but you need to wake up and realize that the world is a much bigger place than your tiny island.
I am not generally a proponent of ignorance, but in this case I'll make an exception. Because nationalism is stupid, but sub-nationalism is even more stupid.
The Scottish and English hate each other? Hmm.. I've been to Scotland many times and never once had a problem with anyone, and I know many Scottish people.. Sure enough *some* English hate Scottish and vice-versa.. But certainly not the whole of the UK.
Engadget, I sure as hell hope this article was sarcastic. If not, shame on you for such slipshod reporting. A newspaper self-titled "The Greatest Newspaper In The World" wasn't enough to make you question its legitimacy?
Draw your own conclusions:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5888162/Worst-families-in-Britain-will-be-put-in-sin-bins.html
Wikipedia on that paper:
The Telegraph has the ninth largest daily UK newspaper circulation[3] and is the country's "other paper of record"
In January 2009, the Telegraph was the highest selling British 'quality' paper, with a certified average daily circulation of 842,912. This compared with a circulation of 617,483 for The Times, 358,844 for The Guardian, and 215,504 for The Independent.[5] According to a MORI survey conducted in 2005, 64% of Telegraph readers intended to support the Conservative Party in the coming elections.[6]
@ Wwhat
Shame I was referring to the Daily Express, and not to the Telegraph.
Speaking of reading comprehension, have you noticed that not once in the Telegraph article have they mentioned CCTV surveillance? Or that every "news article" found online referring specifically to CCTV cameras has cited the Daily Express as their source? Hell, even The Sun (brits out there will know how sensationalist they are) didn't even mention CCTVs, and that's saying something. [link:http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2550483/Ministers-want-to-put-nightmare-families-into-sin-bins.html]
Hm.
Thanks for clearing that up. Reminder to self: Engadget is still a blog, not a newspaper. Thank God I thought GB had finally gone off the deep end.
Urm, I don't understand this post. Where's the plan to introduce cctv into UK homes? Who's plan is it? Who are supposed to be having cctv in their homes precisely? What have I missed? Has a law been passed allowing this or was it someone Mr. Flatley met in the toilet who mentioned it first?
I'm not dismissing the claim, just I don't know where it's coming from.
You do know that 'shadow home secretary' is a person in the opposition (Tory) party in the UK? -ie. not part of the government.
I hope this one's true. If they could use a P.A. to issue suggestions to the families—"Brush your teeth. Go to school. Get a job.—why, it would be just like Sims, wouldn't it?
Make him eat the rotten tri-tip and then bathe outside!
WHEN WE WERE KIDS WE HAD PARENTS(USUALLY2) WHO DID LOOK AFTER US FULLY AS DID OUR TEACHERS. THEY CARED.
Yeah well they failed to raise you enough to not shout in polite company.
This is polite company?
Yes, according to US internet standards it is.
Gotta make sure those kids do well on their homework too, they could be writing /anything/ on that paper.
I... tried to see five!
I did additional research on the program and it doesn't seem to be aimed at abusive parents, but rather at families who have children involved in drugs, crime, and other "irredeemable" misbehavior and the parents either just can't deal with or they have their own problems. And it would be only done after more conventional support mechanisms have failed. I see it as an attempt at a final solution to turn the kids around before they get too old and move out and into the street/prison and an alternative to just taking them away and sending them into the foster system which can often be worse than the initial situation.
I can see where some parents at wits end might voluntarily do this, (though the expense is absurd), but I hope this doesn't get forced on people. It definitely wouldn't fly in America.
We can't even get a goddamn health plan going, how do you expect the US to do ANYTHING with so many radicals on each side?
Matt, I supposed we could just scrap the current plan, adopt Canada's plan and fix what's wrong with it. Not a snowball's chance in hell that would work though.
For the same trillion+ money we would probably get the most bang for the buck by having the government use the same money do the study on what's effective and what's not, wait for a bunch of hospitals to go under for not being paid for useless procedures, then buy the distressed private hospitals. Good private hospitals shouldn't have any problem with this. We could then put the doctors on salaries for reliable costs and by removing fee-for-service the total cost would likely plummet due to reduction in useless procedures and medicine.
The next best thing would be to return to what we used to do and ban medical advertisements and do things strictly through doctors instead of drug companies marketing the latest and greatest $500 pill that performs 0.0001% better than a $3 pill and the elderly pushing the doctors for the pill they saw on TV.
Did you say final solution?
yup, as in there are no more solutions to try if this fails.... or did you think I was talking about killing all seriously misbehaving teens? Now, I know that many parents wish that were an option from time to time, but not quite my intention :p
Holy Big Brother!!!
This is more like big momma!
while not all together the worst idea ever, it's pretty unethical and inefficient. the uk is gonna bankroll people to watch DAYS AND DAYS of footage? shitting me?
The truth is that cctv is not going into the homes of all these people! This story was originaly run by a tabloid and most of the other news papers have not mentioned anything about CCTV.
Simply that they will be kept under supervision and its only for the familys with a history of either spousal/child abuse or children that have been violent, however the alternative would be asbo's prison or even worse doing nothing.
Big Brother is taking power. If you haven't read 1984 by George Orwell, read it!
You'll see why 1984, won't be like 1984.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8
As if those speed cameras weren't bad enough. Now you will get a ticket every time you hit your kid:@
I support this. It's a distant, yet next best thing to pregnancy licenses. Every child has the right to a decent parent(s), but not every adult has the right to raise a child. Have you seen the intro to Idiocracy? That stuff is real.
In highschool, I had friends with deplorable living situations. Child services never helped the teens, choosing to believe the adults over the teenager everytime. One of my friends was beat by her adopted parents and called me to pick her up. I picked her up and she called child services. She told her contact she never going back to those people and she wanted to get into protective custody, (or whatever it was called.) The person instructed us to return home and that police would be waiting for her to take her. Child services was completely full of crap. The police tried to arrest me for kidnapping her, because the parents said I picked her up more than 24 hours earlier and was holding her against her will, and told her she had to stay with those bastards. She was beaten two more times before Child services took her out of that home. Children should be able to get away criminal parents with little more than a psychiatric evaluation. It will cost the government a lot of money, but it will be a worthwhile in our country's future.
Even online someone I thought I knew turned out to be a monster. I know that doesn't surprise anyone at first glance, but seriously. Imagine an online acquaintance you've had for two or three years showing up in the news like this: (Tazboard founder Randall Piercy): http://www.parentsbehavingbadly.com/2006/10/12/dad-imprisons-son-with-cameras-and-locks-denies-theres-anything-wrong-with-that/
C'mon - you've had this hoax up for three hours without an update? Next you'll be saying there's an apple tablet being realised in September.
2+2=5
think about this rationally. first, i reckon this is partly america's fault for the 'values' we tend to exploit and for the pervasiveness of the internet which enables this proliferation of 'increasingly extreme' behavior over time.
second, what are the cameras REALLY for? will there really be a human being monitoring them live? semi-regularly? will recordings be reviewed or scanned by machine for 'red flags?' and if they are willing to pay for the cameras, are they really willing to pay to have authorities respond promptly every time an offense occurs in a home? if not, parents will learn the cameras are only a periodic nuisance; the crown will be too merciful with these people (once that type of person learns there is attention without punishment, the door is open to worsened abuses).
this will be a disaster, a money-pit, whatever. if they just did all homes and monitored randomly -- and responded promptly and harshly -- they could actually compel behavior changes. but then the public would feel the full weight of this and more people wolud be outraged.
maybe they should be already.