An exploration of the UK unpaid carer's world

Persecutor - Victim: towards a model relating to the fraught carer

A hidden page under construction - updated 29 August 2015 and 31 Jan 2017

The page, as with the next page here is provisional.  Events have overtaken page development. 



This page was started in 2013 when the author was in fraught state with an org within carer provision.  The notes at the foot of the page portray somewhat superficial searches to set the scene when they were here.  Nothing on this page should be regarded as research.  


This page is a satellite of a set of pages which demonstrate that the author is in conflict with a further org within carer provision.  


The author's initial thoughts were based on an imagined model of crime - perpetrator - P  versus  victim - V.  Soon, the word persecutor entered the equation.  Sometimes, that word and perpetrator  are interchangeable.  In maths, the = sign says it all.  In the author's equation, P is much greater (size) than V.   There will be a variety of representations of the simple maths formula   P  V.  


Will this page deal with P ≪ V?  If it achieves proof of P < V, that will be something to declare but not in the cricket sense.


Do models exist?  Remains to seen.  The author is more keen at this stage on describing the conflict as he sees it.


One of the pages within the conflict is a public page featuring three parties in triangular relationship - caree, practitioner and carer.  The org at the centre of the conflict refused to acknowledge the page described and communicated its reasons via a third party.  The reader does not need to see the page yet.


The components of a second triangle are practitioner-organisation versus the author.  There is a third party but it is not a major actor in the drama so far.


That is the first proof of P  V.  Carer Vs can bombard provider Ps until Vs are blue in the face.  It had taken that to make P agree to a meeting.     


We look at the Karpman drama triangle.  No connection to the triangle in f/1 but there is hoped to be a connectivity later.  


The Drama Triangle was originally conceived in 1968 by Stephen Karpman, M.D. as a way to graphically display a type of destructive interaction that can occur between people in conflict. The Karpman Drama Triangle models the connection between personal responsibility and power in conflicts, and the destructive and shifting roles people play. 

It needs to emphasised from the start that subsequent analysis focuses on the destructive aspects rather than shifting aspects of the larger body within the triangle.  


Triangulation is the “process whereby a two-party relationship that is experiencing tension will naturally involve a third parties sic to reduce tension”.  Simply put, when someone finds themselves in conflict with another person, they will reach out to a third person. The resulting triangle is more comfortable as it can hold much more tension because the tension is being shifted around three people instead of two.



It is proposed to demonstrate that  there are too many carers who do not engage with third party professional support.


It is hoped that there are no cases where the  third person or second org does not join P against V.

iPhrases such as   " few in management question what goes on " will need to be supported but much later.


Provisional analysis

Here is provisional analysis and depiction beginning with:

1   perhaps, an attack.

                      P               V

v                                               perpetrator                                    victim                               


                 P 1.1            has little or no regard                            V 1.1   too many feel they have little power

                                     for the victim during                              V 1.2   too many unfamiliar with legal processes

                                     or after the attack and                           V 1.3   too many ignorant of possibility of engaging an                                              has no regard for law                                         advocate 



                 P 1.2            has all the power during the                 V 1.4   too many do not know how to gain the                                                              initial  interaction                                                 upper hand at later stages 


                                                                                                    V 1 .5  or to obtain help in this respect



                P 1.3             is seen by some as having                      V 1.6   too many unaware of rights in the situation

                                     more rights than the victim


                     P               V 

                                                  the provider                           the fraught carer    

                                                  the professional                        

     P 2 .1  often seen as gatekeeper to the resources                   V 2.1  the obvious V word is vexed

     P 2.2   the prominent figure within the interaction             V 2.2  the carer feels invisible on top of being                          P 2.3   is seen by some as indifferent to V outcomes            V 2 .3  vulnerable




                      P               V 

P 3.1                                                                                                 V 3. 1

there is a subclass of semi-professionals                                         the carer, however, assumes such people are 

even hemi-semi professionals engaged to                                       expert and often accepts outcomes without 

carry out the gatekeeper role                                                              question   -  in too many cases

within a box-ticking regimen who are  

generally operatives but some carry the power  

or at least act so



                     P               V 

P 4.1                                                                                             V 4.1

few in management question what goes on                                Too many carers do not have the opps to discuss                                                                                                                                their problems with other carers

P 4 .2

sometimes, when challenged, new outcomes arise

P >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>V

                                                                  Spacer bar. Maths in hyperbole?  Certainly not!

P 2 .1  often seen as gatekeeper to the resources  - 4b here                                               

pagetop here     for pasting  Persecutor- victim page here 

Virtually random notes and refs to be looked at in more detail later - > 29 Aug 2015 + several months - years


The fraught carer is battling with carer provision and carer legislation to no avail.  The persecutor is within carer provision.  The latter will be defined.


We interrogate criminology and look for a persecutor- victim model.  Item C is inadequate and alone so far.


We examine the concept of „"victim-perpetrators‟: individuals who are both victims and perpetrators of violent crime to see what parallels appertain.  source - Introduction here         Commission etc here


Victim participation within the justice system is looked at here.  We will later look at parallels.


A neglected aspect of the Australian criminal justice system has been the impact of crime on victims here.   We will later look at parallels.


Victims of crime - academic models here


pagetop here     for pasting  Persecutor- Victim page here 

                                               Persecutor - Victim: The Triangle  here