NHS computers used for porn

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

An anaesthetist admits he downloaded hardcore pornography on a hospital's computers.

More...

 

I have noticed that there has been an increasing amount of this kind of activity taking place among NHS health workers - see HPC hearings - which is rather disturbing.
What surprises me is that employers don't seem able to "block" certain sites to prevent it. I also wonder how NHS workers have so much time on their hands?
Just a thought.
regards
Dido

 

Hi Dido,

Use of NHS system computers is not necessarily during paid work time. Often those accessing the web may be doing so during lunch breaks. Our dept. had no facility for staff breaks other than the office used by the clinicians to access both pt. records or the computers.

Those with a password have access to the web but they are usually informed that the powers up above could access a history of individuals searches & their password would identify the individual.

Along with my NHS emails I could also access my personal email address & use search engines (which is how I could access Pod Arena while at work).

Valuable use of my time & NHS resources? As far as I am aware, other than the cost of electricity, it was not frowned upon during my breaks or indeed if I accessed a site for information eg. diabetes updates etc.

I have never searched porn on the net (or anywhere else for that matter) & I am fairly sure that those who do so leave themselves open to further investigation.

It wouldn't (in my opinion) be a valuable use of time either at work or at home.

However, whatever floats ya boat I spose! :sinking:

Must admit though, I feel pretty sure if everyones www access history was investigated it would make rather interesting reading. :wacko:

 

Hi Twirly,
Thanks for your reply.
However, it doesn't really answer my original question, as to why employers don't just "block" unsuitable sites. From friends working in other professions I understand that all college libraries, public libraries and a certain national transport network all have these sort of controls in place on their staff computers.
One HPC hearing I read said that the employee concerned was alleged to be spending 2 hours a night accessing unsuitable sites - hence my remark about time management.
It's not the porno bit that bothers me, I don't really care if its that or too much time on e-bay, it's the misuse of employers time that I as a tax-payer have to pay for.
I think we would all agree that what people do on their own computers is their own business.
regards
Dido
PS I have a feeling that this topic has been discussed previously on another thread about HPC hearings?

 

Hi Dido,

I see what you mean RE: tax payers money being wasted.

Personally I have no idea how access to certain sites/information could be prevented.

The only one I am aware that our local NHS dept. were unable to access were (chat rooms) I believe they had prevented access by preventing downloads from Java. Although I am only guessing. (Am no Bill Gates)

If an attempt was made to access a restricted site the PC would require an access code which mere minions weren't provided with.

They'll likely set up a board of directors to look into it

 

netizens

In a previous life as an 'academic' (that still slays me), I read forensic sexology and spent many months on the web looking for related information which included sites on fetishism and foot/shoe sex material. My colleagues on the program were also similarly engaged seeking out sites on a very diverse range of interests from preditory paedophilia to lust murder and every other variation in between. All in the interests of academe. The class included researcher, teachers, psychologists, sex workers, sex educators and counsellors, law enforcement peeps (FBI) and a QC. I am sure I speak for them all when I say the amount of pornography (obscene material) freely available on the web is far less than most people believe. Plenty fleshy bits (which some folks find offensive) but actual hard core porn, there is very little. There are networks dedicated to hard core porn but gaining access to these systems is not easy as the networks are in constant fear of being exposed. Often what may appear to be a site dedicated to pornography is a sting site, set up by the law enforcement agencies to track potential preditors looking for serious porn.

I had permission from my employer to access materials related to my studies which is just as well since surfing websites sometimes results in images being unwittingly downloaded to your hard drive. After the six months I dedicated researching foot frollicks I have never been so bored in all my life. Mind you, I would say that, now would'nt I.

:wacko:

Because most of the fleshy images freely available on the web are not classified as obscene material, (therfore not pornography), most employers and registration authorities are unclear how best to proceed in these cases.

toeslayer

 

Hi Twirly,

Happy New Year!

Back to the thread..... on the UK Pod forum we've had at least two instances of members doing a Google search on a seemingly innocuous word, only to be faced with sexually explicit material.

Come to think of it, it was several instances, but only one member

Robert??

Anyway, I liked this bit - "The panel is considering whether downloading pornography on hospital computers was unprofessional, inappropriate and liable to bring the medical profession into disrepute."

 

I think blocking must vary between trusts. With in the trust I work we have a very strictly monitored system with even seemingly innocuous terms and searches being blocked.

Google images is even blocked which proves slightly problematic when trying to "borrow" images for presentations and advice sheets etc.

 

Another take on this story from the BBC:
Porn doctor's practise 'impaired'

Full story

 

Have to laugh at this: "impaired his fitness to practise by looking". How exactly does it do that?

 

Bill,

Perhaps looking made him 'walk funny'

Out of interest (must get a life) I checked our 'puters history....................

Pod Arena
Pod Arena
Pod Arena
UK Forum
Pod Arena
UK Forum
......
.....
....

Not good. I'm gonna Google the word kinky n see what I come up with....

 

Obvious - makes you go blind doesn't it???
regards
Dido

 

Just goes to show that there is 'nowt so queer as folk' and underlines that no matter how many letters some people have after their name they are still as thick as too short planks!

How can anyone in this day and age be so stupid as to do that on a NHS computer?

 

kitos

'still as thick as too short planks!.......How can anyone in this day and age be so stupid as to do that on a NHS computer?

In the normal course of events I would agree if the person was in full control of their faculties, accessing sensitive material on an employers computer system would not be the way to go.

However this chap may have a compulsion which he cannot control. His behaviour might become antisocial in which case it prevents him from being able to conduct himself in "an appropriate way," in public eg exhibitionism or masturbation. This behaviour is common to many paraphilics and there is set diagnostic criteria which defines the condition. One of which is the behaviour needs to be present for some time. A one off occurrence would be seen as an aberration whereas repeated and consistent occurrences would establish a pattern.

Intelligence or lack of is not a factor and many famous paraphilics are very clever indeed, but this does not stop them from their compulsive behaviours, which they cannot control. Whilst it is natural to become judgemental there is just insufficient information about this case to make any valued judgements.

I do know of at least one case where a paedophile (very respected person) used his employer’s computers for this purpose of storing hard porn images in the hard drive. The only time this became evident to the employer was after a random review of the computer system which revealed hard candy.

Funny world we live in, but never dull.

toeslayer

 

Hi All

So that applies to Cameron and his Colleagues then ??

They were Looking

The managers that found the stuff on the Hard drive were "Looking".

The HPC and investigating panel were "Looking"

The Police were "Looking"

The Judge and Jury were " Looking"

Uncle Tom Cobbly and ALL were "Looking"

So how can one persons "Looking" be any different to the rest ??

Absolute RUBBISH !! The crime must be in the act not the mind.

This is yet another load of nonsensical garbage by the PC holier than thou brigade:butcher:

Just my thoughts

cheers
Derek

 

Interesting one.... wonder whether the "offence" was viewing the pornography or accessing restricted sites on an employers computer. Has to be the latter as pornography - or more likely - sexually explicit images - is not illegal, indeed it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if some (if not most) of the crusties that sit on the disciplinary panel hearings have their own colourful collection of R18 DVDs.

Would be an interesting poll to have on Arena, Craig, - "Do you watch sexually explicit material either on your own or with your partner?" Yes, No or Not Sure? Should be interesting.... igs:

 

Hi toeslayer,
If what you say is correct and paraphilis is a recognised mental health problem, then suffers would surely be classed as "ill"? Then logically, should they not be offered treatment instead of censure?
Or is there no treatment available?
regards
Dido

 

Hi Mark

Perhaps they could be persuaded to make them public and then we could all see what we shouldnt be looking at, then we would know not to look ?

Cheers Fella

Derek

 

Hi Mark,
Good point :good: which brings me back to my original question, why don't employers just put blocks on specific sites or words?
However, it could be argued that this chap only made the mistake of breaking the 11th Commandment ie; "Thou shalt not be found out".
regards
Dido
PS What's an R18DVD?

 

Hi Dido

I 'm not a computer expert but I think from a functional point of view to put limits like you suggest makes everything take twice as long ( try setting your parental control to maximum security and see) looking for alternatives.

Over 18 years old to get one ( Adult viewing) and I think that makes you a Don't Know in Marks Poll !! )

Cheers

Derek

 

DDT, Dido et al

References to’ makes you blind.’ refers to Judo-Christian fundamentalism which considers the seeing of sin, is a sin in its self. There is a passsage in the Old Testament where reference is made 'ripping the the eyes out."

Having seen a sin and not do anything about it is another sin, and the basis of a witness. Once you bare witness to good or bad as a believer you are obliged to broadcast the information. This is seen in the evangelical nature of the Apostles.

From 4th century AD depiction of naked flesh in occidental religions who upheld Eve as a temptress, was a sin and therefore the presence of explicit materials became a major contribution to corrupting soulsin the eyes of the devouted. This presented a moral dilemma which has no clear legal support. Hence the many campaigns against pornography which have time after time fallen flat.

As Mark makes the point ‘indeed it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if some (if not most) of the crusties that sit on the disciplinary panel hearings have their own colourful collection of R18 DVDs.’

Privileged classes have always enjoyed free access to erotica with some of the most provocative images in classical painting ever being commissioned by the Church for private collections. The problem arises only when these images are made freely available to the proletariat. This occurred with the introduction of photography and the swell against ‘what the butler saw’ or the ‘old French Postcards’ had as much to do with the art world becoming threatening by new technology, as it did with those whi defend public morality. At its simplest erotic describes an impression whereas photography was a clear reflection and therefore we get back to the circular argument of seeing an intimate act as a sin.

Dido

>If what you say is correct and paraphilis is a recognised mental health problem, then suffers would surely be classed as "ill"? Then logically, should they not be offered treatment instead of censure?
Or is there no treatment available?

In the same way men infrequently go to their doctor to complain about getting an erection every time they see a pair of bare feet for example . The issue is secret means’ business’. Once the behaviours are established however and falls into a recognised criteria then the person would be diagnosed with a psychological disorder. Counselling and therapy combined with pharmaceutical managements can help.

:morning:
toeslayer

 

Hi Toeslayer,
Thanks for your most informarive post. :good:
I have always wondered where that Old Wives Tale about "making you blind" comes from.
Interesting to note that the concept of "sin" is a Judeo/Christian concept which does not seem to exist in other primitive or pagan religions.
From what I have read about the Romans and Ancient Greeks I understand that the upper classes were into all sorts of "stuff" - don't want to be too specific here
I wonder if this post will be deleted as we seem to have wandered away from podiatry somewhat?
regards
Dido