Vignettes of Custodianship Vignette: She Overrode the System In a council housing office, a staff member reviewed a case flagged as “low priority.” The applicant was a single parent with two children, recently evicted and staying in temporary accommodation. The system had scored the case below the threshold for urgent intervention. She read the notes. She saw the gaps. She overrode the system.
“I know what the algorithm says,” she told her manager, “but I’ve seen this before. If we wait, it’ll escalate.”
She logged the override manually, citing discretion and safeguarding. The family was rehoused within a week. The author records this moment as an act of custodianship. A staff member present, accountable and willing to answer. The system operated and she intervened.
Vignette: He Refused to Flag the Street In a community policing unit, an officer reviewed the predictive patrol map. One street was flagged repeatedly—based on historical data and recent incidents. He knew the area and he knew the families and he could see the pattern was misleading. The Officer refused to flag the street. “I’m not sending more patrols there,” he said. “It’s not about risk. It’s about community relationship.” (Some may argue, a double edged sword or common sense?)
automated recommendations. In healthcare, some clinicians insist on manual review before triage is finalised. In education, teachers advocate for contextual appeals, resisting the flattening of merit into metrics. These practices are fragile, often informal and sometimes discouraged. But they mark a threshold. They show that presence is still possible.
Custodianship also requires structural support. Institutions must design systems that allow for discretion, dialogue and review. Every automated process must include a human loop, a point where someone can intervene, explain and be held to account. This is not a matter of convenience. It is a matter of civic integrity.
The author closes this opening section with a reflection: presence is not a luxury, it is the foundation of civic life. Without custodianship, systems become unanswerable. Without presence, decisions become unlivable. The ethics of presence is not abstract, it is the daily practice of care, judgment and responsibility. It is what makes the record speak.
There are examples whereby custodianship has been seen in action; moments where staff resist procedural displacement and reclaim judgement or is this focus or 'common sense from those that see from 'outside the box'? How many people are able or willing to think outside the box and what are the consequences for doing so?
