Talk:CareConfidential

Help to improve this article

Hi Roscelese

This seems like a good idea to me.

I would say that describing CareConfidential as an anti-abortion charity is not a neutral point of view.

This is because the articles referenced in the article are from 2011 (or before) when the charity was under CARE or in the process of becoming independent from CARE. There is no information since their independence to suggest that they are anti-abortion. In fact quite the opposite.

Also the articles published about CareConfidential being anti-abortion and giving false information are related to specific independent centres and not CareConfidential as a separate organisation.

The aim in my post was simply to try and distinguish and CareConfidential from independent centres and bring the article up to date whilst still keeping a unbiased view - as I didn't remove any of the negative articles.

What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domino90 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Foonarres here. The above post seems to continue a conversation, but I can't see where that conversation begins? At any rate, I disagree with the comments above for the following reasons:

- Articles about CareConfidential from 2011 or earlier are still relevant. CareConfidential is the same organisation with the same website, the same pamphlets and the same training materiels. The fact that CareConfidential became independent of CARE seems to be largely a legal formality - it's the same organisation.

- The "independent centers" use the CareConfidential name and receive support from CareConfidential (for example, in the form of pamphlets, training materiels, and the provision of training courses for counsellors) so articles about these centers most definitely are relevant to this article.

- The existing references / articles show clearly that CareConfidential opposes abortion, and that CareConfidential has been accused on multiple occasions of giving out incorrect medical information.

Foonarres (talk) 21:48, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Foonarres - I left a note on Domino's user talk page after we had disagreed about editing the article, suggesting that we discuss potential changes here. That's the explanation.

Domino, I'm sensitive to your arguments, but I think you need to produce more sources if you would like to make claims like 'the activities of CareConfidential and its affiliated centres are separate' or 'CareConfidential is no longer what it was, since the split from CARE'. Basically, as far as Wikipedia works, it is possible that those things are true, but right now, we don't have evidence of it and must rely on the sources that we have. For instance, do you have anything from CareConfidential central that decries directive counseling at an affiliated centre and says that CareConfidential's intent is to help a client with all options? A statement about the split that says they used to be anti-abortion and no longer are? These are hypothetical, but you get the idea. Right now, the information we have indicates that both the website and the affiliated centres are anti-abortion. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:51, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that the articles from 2011 are definitely still relevant - especially for people looking to seek help from a pregnancy crisis centre. And when things like this come to light it can help to encourage some change.

Yes, it looks as though centres can buy resources from CareConfidential on an online shop. I also found one of these as a pdf on their website. One thing that is significant here: they are dated 2012 and have an Information Standard logo on them. Which states: 'This organisation has been certified as a producer of reliable health and social care information.' The logo appears on certain pages on their website too.

The Information Standard is 'an independent certification scheme that is commissioned by NHS England and run by Capita on their behalf.' www.theinformationstandard.org. The Information Standard states: 'Any organisation achieving The Information Standard has undergone a rigorous assessment to check that the information they produce is clear, accurate, balanced, evidence-based and up-to-date'.

It would appear that on their shop CareConfidential recently changed their pamphlets and training materials since 2011 - whether the centres are using the newer materials seems up to them.

The leaflet I looked at 'Pregnancy Choices' show both options: Becoming a parent or having an abortion - there seems to be the same amount (and balanced) information relating to both decisions. http://www.careconfidential.com/Documents/Leaflets/Pregnancy-Choices-v1.pdf

I have also looked over the newsletters on their website: http://www.careconfidential.com/Newsletters/Default.aspx They would suggest changes and also a new CEO since independence from CARE.

Their 'About Us' section states: 'We recognise and respect the dignity and choice of individuals.'- surely respecting the choice of individuals implies respecting whether or not that woman wanted an abortion?

Roscelese, I didn't want to remove any articles and delete any information that I didn't like I just wanted to update the article with the information standard information.

I agree that newspaper reports online point towards them being against abortion but nothing literally states that 'CareConfidential are anti-abortion' - apart from this wikipedia article. And that's what I object to. As I don't believe a newspaper report is even a credible source to use to make the statement that 'CareConfidential are an anti-abortion charity.' Surely obvious changes to their health resources are proof enough more than a newspaper report about an independent centre from two years ago? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domino90 (talk • contribs) 10:36, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

CareConfidential no longer has a network of affiliated centres and the Central London Women’s Centre are nothing to do with them.

This entry has been updated since 2013 to say that CareConfidential no longer has a network of affiliated centres or what has been referred to as 'Pregnancy Crisis Centres'.

This has been copied from their website:

"Please use our Telephone Helpline or Online Advisor service for the support you need. CareConfidential no longer has a network of affiliated centres but can signpost you appropriately to services in your area."

There is also some false information that has been written at the bottom of this article, I would like to discuss removing this?

"Independent Pregnancy Crisis Centres have come under criticism in another investigation by The Daily Telegraph when some counsellors were filmed undercover claiming abortions would increase chances of breast cancer and could predispose women to becoming child sexual abusers."

If you read the article that has been referenced here you can see that the client visited the 'Central London Women’s Centre' who have never been affiliated with CareConfidential and have nothing to do with them.

I think it's helpful that the entry written here is accurate so people who need actually need help can find it easily and not be mislead by false information.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domino90 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

That's true, I didn't notice when someone else added it that it wasn't about a CareConfidential centre. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on CareConfidential. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150211194155/http://www.careconfidential.com:80/Centres.aspx to http://www.careconfidential.com/Centres.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214082910/http://www.careconfidential.com/Newsletters/TheNewCareConfidential.aspx to http://www.careconfidential.com/Newsletters/TheNewCareConfidential.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 15 November 2016 (UTC)