Just imagine for a few minutes that you are an investigator that has been assigned to a case where it is alleged that a mother is not providing her son with food. The reporter is a school counselor, and upon interviewing her, you find that her information came from a comment made by a concerned parent and neighbor of the child.
Since this is a neighbor and you are legally bound to make sure the mother of the boy doesn't know of the neighbor's involvement, you park down the road, slip through the woods, and walk into the back of the subdivision to the neighbor's home. You then interview the concerned parent/neighbor and find that the young boy (henceforth known as Hank) comes over after school every day to play with her son (henceforth known as Will) and are told by the neighbor that Hank always asks for a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to eat every day he is there.
Now, armed with some relevant information, you go over to the home of Hank and his mother. You introduce yourself and start trying to gently inform her of the concerns noted in your report (oh, you are legally bound not to give the identity of the reporting person or other people with information). You have to sort of dance around the topic because you can't just say, Hank is asking a neighbor for food each day.
Hank's mom proceeds to show you the kitchen and pantry. It looks like a small version of Wal-mart. There is more food than is in your own home, and it is of a higher quality. As an investigator of these types of things (and happening to have a degree in nutrition), you note that the foods are age appropriate and nutritious. You take the time to complement the mother on how well she is doing to provide nutritious food to her some. As you are carefully trying to withdraw yourself from what could easily become a negative situation (fortunately, this mom is very understanding), you note one thing missing in the food chain that is virtually essential for young children. You calmly note to the mother about the absence of peanut butter.
Mom proceeds to explain to you that her son is supposedly allergic to peanut butter. She's wondering if that is true though because she doesn't every buy peanut butter, he knows not to eat it, but he is still having symptoms of an allergic reaction that has his physician totally puzzled. The physician is planning to run some more tests to find out if there is something else Hank might be allergic to along with peanut butter.
You, the investigator, are standing there trying to figure out how in the world to deal with something like this. You know that Hank has been fudging on his dietary restrictions by asking a neighbor for peanut butter. You know that it is likely Hank is going to be exposed to unnecessary and expensive tests because of his activities. You cannot legally tell the mother of Hank what you know. You cannot legally tell the doctor treating Hank what you know.
So....off you drive to park down the road and sneak back to neighbor's house. You try to explain your findings to the neighbor. She is very upset that she has been doing harm to the child without knowing it. Of course, you want her to report any concerns of abuse or neglect she may have in the future, so you try to explain things in a way that encourages her to continue that behavior. You also suggest that in situations where the person lives so close to you (only one house separates them), that possibly just starting a random conversation with Hank's mom might help. (The only way you can help Hank and his mother is to get other people to talk because you can't say anything.)
Unfortunately, the neighbor knows Hank but has never met or talked to Hank's mom. It seems nobody talks to each other in this subdivision despite the fact that the children play together, visit each other homes, and go to school together. By the time you leave, you've worked it out so that the neighbor calls the school counselor back. You then contact the School Counselor and work to try to get her to contact Hank's mom so she can let her know what has been going on without breaking any confidentiality about the actual source of information. She did so and Hank did not have to go have extra medical tests run and issues of allergies were resolved.
This scenario may sound kind of silly but it did happen. I, of course, cannot discuss who, when, or where, but I was the investigator on the case.
None of this needed to happen. If people had just talked to each other...exchanged information without placing blame/accusing, the taxpayers would have been saved a good deal of money, and my expertise could have been used in more critical situations. The saddest part of the whole situation is that these people lived so close to each other and did not know or talk to one another. The fact that there were only 28 homes in the whole subdivision made this even worse.
Community is about taking the time to know and care for your neighbors. Help each other out. Talk and listen.
This is also a good example for elected officials. One person's interpretation of events/version of the truth can be distorted. Take the time to do the research, find out what the problem really is before jumping in to do something you might regret later. My mother always said "There are 3 sides to every story: Yours, Mine, and the Truth. Be smart and find out the Truth before you do anything."