Case study 3 Mary is a resident in a refuge for women and children. Her husband
ID: 128764 • Letter: C
Question
Case study 3
Mary is a resident in a refuge for women and children. Her husband has threatened her life and the life of her son and she has been granted a violence restraining order. Her 10-year-old son, Frederick, is very angry about being separated from his father.
Frederick approaches Beryl, a new part time refuge worker. He confides in her how much he misses his father and how desperately he wants to see him, or even just talk to him. He persuades Beryl to let him use the phone in the office to contact his father. Beryl agrees as long as she remains in the office with him. Frederick blurts out the address of the refuge before Beryl can stop him. She realises she will be in trouble from her supervisor, so she doesn’t say anything to her.
Later that night Jason’s father arrives at the refuge and attempts to break in. When Jason’s father is questioned by the police, he tells them that Beryl let Frederick call him and tell him the address. Beryl faces a severe reprimand from her supervisor
Describe one way that Beryl breached organisational procedures after the incident occurred.
When Frederick approached Beryl to ask to use the phone, what was the potential breach that Beryl should have identified?
Because Beryl did not identify the potential breach, what actual breaches occurred?
Explanation / Answer
By not informing the supervisor prior about the incident.
Potential of leakage of information and security issues associated with both Mary and Fredrick
Victim address is leaked , contacting with accused is putting the victim life at the risk.