Notes - Case Studies and Concepts Flashcards
Post Office Scandal - Background Info
- Horizon software developed by Fujitsu in mid 90s, adopted by PO to move from paper-based branch accounting system
- From late 1990s to 2015 hundreds of SPMs prosecuted for alleged fraud as Horizon said shortfalls in their tills
- As of March 2024, PO had spent £390 million on legal fees defending Horizon, over double what’s been paid to SPM in compensation
- PO is private but entire shareholding owned by UK Govt Investments Ltd. (HM Treasury)
Post Office Scandal - Critical Reflection
- PO failed to reflect on previous assumptions and knowledge, never reflecting that Horizon could be at fault despite it being flagged by some SPMs in early 2000s, Horizon then used as evidence base for prosecutions
- Head of Coms recently heard claiming SPMs were thieves
- Paula Vennells, PO Chief Exec during the period, hasn’t been held to account or accepted responsibility, over her 7 year tenure took over £5 million, but poor compensation scheme offered to SPMs
- Could link in time management, data and evidence
Post Office Scandal - Engagement with Evidence
- Clear evidence that PO ignored and failed to engage with, focus on lack of action at time, where para 1 reflection focus on lack of action after
- PO commissioned external investigation by Second Sight which found evidence of Horizon causing short fallings, but PO just terminated Second Sights contract and withheld the evidence from court as undermined their evidence
- Govt and MPs largely kept in dark until around 10 years ago, stopping investigations and had no evidence
- Could link in data analysis and deductive as had theory it was SPM but failed to engage with evidence to prove it
Post Office Scandal - Causation and Correlation
- Causational evidence necessary to overturn convictions, but this was withheld by PO, e.g. in 2006 Fujitsu employee said in court no Horizon faults, which he wasn’t qualified to do
- This meant SPM, journalists and their lawyers could only use correlative, they used this to force Bates case where the PO didn’t withhold evidence so could use causational
- Example correlative data is that Horizon implemented in mid 90s, and it was from late 90s till 2015 that SPMs were prosecuted, very few before Horizon was implemented
- Could link in research questions and time management
Hillsborough - Background Info
- 15/04/1989 FA Cup semi final between Liverpool and Notts Forest at Hillsborough, Sheff Wed
- Liverpool fans access and bottleneck at Leppings Lane entrance, 10,000 people through 7 turnstiles
- 96 people died
Hillsborough - Agency vs Structure
- A: Duckenfield failed to prepare and revise plans, his decision to open gate and that he could see the situation happening and didn’t act
- S: SYP replacing experienced match commander last minute, FA using Hillsborough despite similar incident nearly happening in 1981
- Structure greater cause as put Duckenfield in that situation, but he contributed by handling in poorly
- Officers who changed their statements had little agency as had to fit in and obey commands or consequences etc.
- A demonstrated after with heckling of Burnhams speech at Hillsborough, and then him pressing for justice in Parliament
- Could link in engagement with evidence and critical analysis
Hillsborough - Inductive and Deductive
- SYP used inductive, saw events and straight away created generalisation that fans misbehaving and drunk was cause, creating a theory that the police stuck to
- This resulted in poor treatment of families, on night being more investigative than identification, accusing and blaming victims, shows negative of inductive that it can draw incorrect conclusions if based on limited knowledge - Police changing statements to prove incorrect theory
- Could link in data analysis, critical analysis and engagement with evidence
Hillsborough - Time management
- Disaster occurred in 1989, Hillsborough Independent Panel presented findings in 2012, in 2017 charges brought against some SYP officers for gross negligence manslaughter, these charges also brought against Duckenfield but was cleared of them in 2019
- Duckenfield did admit 26 years later sole focus on misbehavior not safety and his actions were responsible for deaths
- Most events, good or bad for victims and their families happening 20-30 years after event, many have died or been affected mentally for a long time before seeing successes
- Could link in critical reflection, took too long for any accepting of responsibility, still limited
Ockenden Review - Background Info
- Concerns over child and mother deaths at Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust since early 2000s
- Review found that 201 babies and 13 mothers had died when they shouldn’t have and 94 babies suffered preventable brain damage
Ockenden Review - Agency vs Structure
- S: culture in trust that natural births better, deaths weren’t properly investigated
- A: poor treatment by staff, many examples like in 2007 baby died after forceps delivery where baby sustained multiple skull fractures
- Many cases of staff lying to families, and blaming mothers for babies deaths, individual actions vs culture, I suggest culture as much higher levels than other trusts show structural causes must be present through culture, staff didn’t want to speak out for fear of loss of jobs, told not to speak to report
- Could link in feedback as individuals and trust received complaints but little action
Ockenden Review - Inductive and Deductive
- Deductive approach as theory that natural births better throughout the trust, meaning doctors often took too long to take action
- Between 2010 and 2018, the trust did 15-22% caesarean, national average was 25-30%
- This theory was based on outdated ideas, didn’t correctly test hypothesis to disprove it due to low sample size
- Could link in evidence and referencing as failed to notice and/or change the low caesarean numbers
Ockenden Review - Critical Reflection
- Despite data existing that they were outlier in caesarean and many complaints, there was failure to reflect and take action internally
- Not until Ockenden Review recommended and forced changes that necessary action occurred, these included changes to staffing to deal with underfunding and under provision of experienced staff, and shift in narrative
- Families knew something was wrong but didn’t listen
- NHS managers and clinicians failed to engage with mistakes made
- Partly caused by frequent staff turnover, between 2000 to 2020 10 CEOs, leads to loss of organisational memory
- Could link in feedback and critical analysis as if listened to feedback could reflect and analyse mistakes and trends
Macpherson Inquiry - Background Info
- Stephen Lawrence murdered on 22nd April 1993, age 18, in Eltham SE London, attacked by racist youths
- 6 attackers according to witnesses, 5 investigated, in 2012 2 were convicted
Macpherson Inquiry - Critical Analysis
- New Labour analysed events and created double jeopardy abolish law being changed that means can be charged even if found not guilty previously in 2003
- Inquiry offered analysis on Mets actions, claims, corruption, showcasing to them and public the Mets incompetence, for example how took till 2012 for 2 suspects to be convicted
- Could link in research question and referencing
Macpherson Inquiry - Inductive and Deductive
- Met used inductive, observed black crime and generalised that black people commit more crime created a distinction based solely on race, using prejudice and misconceived assumptions to create racist theory
- This is still apart of the Met today, in 2024 black searched at 3.7x higher rate than white
- Could link in data analysis and engagement with evidence
Macpherson Inquiry - Critical Reflection
- Inquiry made police nationally reflect, through conclusions over nation wide disparities in stop and search and under reporting of racist incidents, and failings training in racism awareness and relations
- Lack of reflection during mandatory training, response was negative, seen as waste of time, senior officers tried to get officers out of it, trainers met with abuse over stop and search disparities
- Could link in data analysis
Infected Blood Inquiry - Background Info
- 1970s new treatment for people with bleeding disorders like hemophilia, new treatment, Factor 8, meant didn’t have to go to hospital for blood transfusions with plasma
- But Factor 8 created by pooling of tens of thousands of peoples blood, concentrating it to extract clotting factor, but increased risk of transferring diseases like hepatitis
- Treloar’s college told best place for children with hemophilia, 72 of those children infected and now dead
Infected Blood Inquiry - Agency vs Structure
- S: Govt decision to use US higher risk blood as demand rose despite knowing risks, decision in first place to use Factor 8 despite risks, decisions not to tell patients of risks was more S than A as widespread not individuals
- A: Drs at Middlesex hospital conducting trials on children without permission or informing parents to test if they would get HIV or hepatitis, referring to them as ‘virgin hemophiliacs’
- S was main cause, worsened by A as some individuals made consequences worse, but root cause was S
- Could link in causation and correlation
Infected Blood Inquiry - Deductive and Inductive
- Drs using deductive tests at Treloar’s College & Middlesex Hospital, testing preventative capabilities of factors of Factor 8, to prove/disprove the theory that it works
- Overall ignore of results that suggested Factor 8 was bad, families not informed of such results and ensured it was best treatment
- Tech to nullify disease in blood in 1980/90s like heat treated or synthetic products but to late, deductive research had already been ignored and infected many
- Could link in data analysis/engagement with available evidence as little was done
Infected Blood Inquiry - Critical Reflection
- Former Health Minister, Ken Clarke, and PM, Gordon Brown, have not taken responsibility, been flippant and disregarded evidence, Clarke suggested had little agency to change things in NHS despite being health minister
- Better reflection and acceptance by other countries, France former PM and 2 ministers charged with manslaughter in 1999, PM later acquitted, Japan 1995 compensation scheme of $420,000 for each victims
- Could link in engagement with evidence
Iraq War - Background Info
- March 20th 2003 the US and allies invaded Iraq
- First time since WW2 that UK involved in opposed invasion and full-scale occupation of sovereign state
- US had warned use of force if Saddam didn’t comply with UN, 9/11 made US more keen on force but UK wouldn’t unless went through UN, Resolution 1441 wasn’t believed compliance, 17 March all other means exhausted and gave Saddam 48 hours to leave Iraq
- Almost 4,500 US army died, 15,000 civilians killed by Islamic State and 2,000-10,000 by coalition airstrikes
Iraq War - Causation and Correlation
-CA: Special relationship caused UK to join invasion, felt needed to back them after 9/11
- WMD were another driving causational force
- CO: Claims invasion only correlated with oil resources, Oz PM Howard said oil had nothing, Blair said little to do with invasion, focused on peace and freedom
- Many believe US MNCs wanted access to vast oil for profit and economic boost
- CA: 9/11 was possible cause, shifted position on war on terror and peoples attitudes towards Middle East
- CO: US use military power to control other states, neo-colonialism (links to oil)
- CO: Private military contractors and shape of defense industries that very focused on military action, but this and above factor correlate as were not driving forces in decision but things that benefited/ happened as well, didn’t go to war just to give out military contracts
- Could link in inductive, observing driving factors to try and create overall theory of cause
Iraq War - Engagement with Evidence
- Flawed WMD evidence, UNSC Resolution 1441 said had them but UN said needed more time to find them, this was ignored and moved around, eventually WMD existed 20 years ago but not found at time, flawed evidence
- 66% of US were in favour of action just before invasion, in 2003 66% believed Hussein was involved in 9/11, showing falsehoods, this was causational force
- Could link in data analysis, very intertwined
Iraq War - Agency vs Structure
- S: Blair had little A due to special relationship and pressure from US based on falsehoods on WMD and 9/11
- A: Blair did demonstrate A when ensured action first went through UN
- A: people demonstrated A at largest ever UK protest anti invasion, going against structure, but this was ignored/overpowered by S factors like special relationship and US being mainly pro action A, 66%
- Could link in feedback, critical reflection