Retire Here forget it?
Nov 22nd 2002, 7:13 am
#16
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: Ozone Layer
Posts: 135
>> Eat this Mr Manchester?
Yawn - you'll lose...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report of the inquiry into the Bristol heart babies scandal has made a number of hard-hitting findings.
The report of the Bristol heart babies inquiry team found:
A third of children received "less than adequate care"
Between 30 and 35 more children aged under one died between 1991 and 1995 than would have been expected in a "typical" unit
The mortality rate between 1991 and 1995 was "probably double" the rate for England at that time for children under one
It was probably even higher for children under 30 days
Problems were not confined to the complex Switch and Atrio-Ventricular Septal Defect (AVSD) operations
The kind of cases dealt with at the hospital cannot explain the difference in rates with other units
There was a "failure to progress, rather than necessarily a deterioration in standards" at Bristol
The arrangements for caring for very sick children at the hospital were "not safe"
The systems for delivering children's heart services at Bristol were "not up to task"
There was "real room for doubt" as to whether the hospital should have been designated as a centre for open-heart surgery for under-ones
The unit "overreached" itself and failed to keep up with developments in the specialty happening elsewhere in the late 1980s and early 1990s
A lack of staff and resources, which had been highlighted as a problem for the Bristol was "typical of the NHS as a whole" so does not solely explain what went wrong at the hospital
The hospital had a lack of leadership and teamwork
Healthcare staff were "victims of circumstances" which related to general failings in the NHS rather than individual faults
Children's heart services were undermined by being split between two sites
There was no way of checking on the quality of services or standards of doctors at the hospital
At the hospital, there was a "club culture" with too much power concentrated in too few hands
Vulnerable children were not a priority - at Bristol or across the NHS
The hospital was poorly organised
There was no requirement for doctors to keep their skills and knowledge up to date
Bristol was "awash" with data, but none was available to patients or parents
Systems problems were not confined to Bristol
There was confusion as to who should monitor quality of care nationally
Yawn - you'll lose...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report of the inquiry into the Bristol heart babies scandal has made a number of hard-hitting findings.
The report of the Bristol heart babies inquiry team found:
A third of children received "less than adequate care"
Between 30 and 35 more children aged under one died between 1991 and 1995 than would have been expected in a "typical" unit
The mortality rate between 1991 and 1995 was "probably double" the rate for England at that time for children under one
It was probably even higher for children under 30 days
Problems were not confined to the complex Switch and Atrio-Ventricular Septal Defect (AVSD) operations
The kind of cases dealt with at the hospital cannot explain the difference in rates with other units
There was a "failure to progress, rather than necessarily a deterioration in standards" at Bristol
The arrangements for caring for very sick children at the hospital were "not safe"
The systems for delivering children's heart services at Bristol were "not up to task"
There was "real room for doubt" as to whether the hospital should have been designated as a centre for open-heart surgery for under-ones
The unit "overreached" itself and failed to keep up with developments in the specialty happening elsewhere in the late 1980s and early 1990s
A lack of staff and resources, which had been highlighted as a problem for the Bristol was "typical of the NHS as a whole" so does not solely explain what went wrong at the hospital
The hospital had a lack of leadership and teamwork
Healthcare staff were "victims of circumstances" which related to general failings in the NHS rather than individual faults
Children's heart services were undermined by being split between two sites
There was no way of checking on the quality of services or standards of doctors at the hospital
At the hospital, there was a "club culture" with too much power concentrated in too few hands
Vulnerable children were not a priority - at Bristol or across the NHS
The hospital was poorly organised
There was no requirement for doctors to keep their skills and knowledge up to date
Bristol was "awash" with data, but none was available to patients or parents
Systems problems were not confined to Bristol
There was confusion as to who should monitor quality of care nationally
Nov 23rd 2002, 1:58 pm
#17
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 28
My mother-in-law, while visiting Australia, was hospitalised and treated for a heart/lung condition after seeing a GP. She was told before she left the UK that there would be a 6 month wait for an appointment with a specialist and then a further wait until treatment. What Medicare didn't cover, travel insurance did.
NHS, you are kidding of course!
NHS, you are kidding of course!
Nov 25th 2002, 6:50 am
#18
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
Originally posted by madmancunian
>> Eat this Mr Manchester?
Yawn - you'll lose...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report of the inquiry into the Bristol heart babies scandal has made a number of hard-hitting findings.
The report of the Bristol heart babies inquiry team found:
A third of children received "less than adequate care"
>> Eat this Mr Manchester?
Yawn - you'll lose...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report of the inquiry into the Bristol heart babies scandal has made a number of hard-hitting findings.
The report of the Bristol heart babies inquiry team found:
A third of children received "less than adequate care"
That dates back over 5 years what NEW? Looks like you are second again.
There are currently 1113 people under 50 years of age living in residential aged care facilities in Australia. They suffer from a range of illnesses and injuries including Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis and traumatic brain injury. Most of these people are under 20 years of age.
There are often no alternatives to this type of care for many younger people. While specialist services do exist, they are limited .
The planned restructuring of the health system in the industrial city of Newcastle, north of Sydney, will result in the downgrading of services and treatment to patients in a system that is already struggling to cope with demands.
Patients in Newcastle and the surrounding Hunter region are forced to wait for extended periods to receive treatment, even for life-threatening illnesses, because of insufficient beds and facilities. Equipment is not replaced after it has worn out, positions are left unfilled and staff are dangerously overworked.
Yesterday, the Health Department rejected calls by the Shadow Health Minister, Jillian Skinner, for a judicial inquiry into claims that poor patient care caused at least 10 deaths over the past year at two hospitals in Sydney's south-west.
The claims are the subject of an internal investigation by the Health Department's audit office and have also been referred to the Health Care Complaints Commission.
Ms Skinner says the protection of a court is required because attempts have been made to silence at least one nurse who raised serious claims about hospital management.
"Nurses have been offered hush money so that they wouldn't speak out," she said.
THE WA Radiological Council has ordered X-ray services at five Perth medical centres to close amid fears patients may get excessive radiation from unqualified staff.
The decision, from January, is a result of a policy adopted late last year that only qualified radiographers can use X-ray equipment in the metropolitan area.
This is going to put even more pressure on already over-stretched casualty wards in our major hospitals.
Last edited by pommie bastard; Nov 25th 2002 at 7:08 am.
Nov 25th 2002, 10:12 am
#19
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: Ozone Layer
Posts: 135
>> Looks like you are second again.
What's this - me first, you second - you are speaking like an adolescent again PB. Are you having fun with daddy's computer on you school hols, or is it a case of the 3rd degree laptop burns?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2503291.stm
My post is a serious NHS enquiry - your's is a .... *politician* - and you expect this to be unbiased news??
Something a little up-to-date (and topical) for you. Looks like fun in Leicester!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOSPITAL SECURITY TEAM PLEDGES ZERO TOLERANCE
BY PAUL KANE
10:30 - 25 November 2002
A new security team took a nine-inch blade off a patient in their first few days patrolling Leicester Royal Infirmary.
They today pledged zero tolerance to troublemakers after a huge increase in violence at the hospital.
Each year, an estimated 300 violent or aggressive incidents are reported by staff at the infirmary.
However, in October alone there were 56 cases - more than double the normal monthly average.
A new, 16-strong security team has now been introduced at the infirmary to stamp out trouble and ease public and staff concerns.
The extent of the problems they face was highlighted in their first few days when a nine-inch blade was taken from a patient and officers had to break up a fight involving a gang of 10.
Mark Lawson, site security manager, said: "We are making it very clear that we will be operating a zero tolerance policy.
"We have a highly visible presence within the hospital and are ready to act at any time and I think we are already having a positive effect.
"We do have regular troublemakers who are known to us. They know now that we will be tackling this problem as firmly as possible.
"It speaks volumes when an experienced doctor tells you that, for the first time, he really feels safe at work. Our priority will always be the safety of staff and patients."
The new security arrangements will operate round-the-clock over a five-month trial period with four officers on duty at a time.
If fully adopted, the arrangement will cost the hospitals' trust around £360,000 a year.
Two officers will be dedicated to the accident and emergency unit and will replace police who were stationed there at weekends.
They will also cover the x-ray department and fracture clinic where a nurse was held at knifepoint in September 2000 by a patient.
The other two officers will form a rapid-response team offering support to existing officers patrolling the remaining hospital site.
Rob Pinsent, director of facilities at the trust, said: "As a hospital trust we are dedicated to healthcare, and we will not tolerate anti-social behaviour which is disruptive to this healthcare provision.
"This investment in security enhancements demonstrates this commitment."
The increased security measures have been welcomed by patients and visitors to the infirmary.
Outpatient Simon Betts, 43, said: "I think it is a wise move and definitely welcome it. You can't put a price tag on security."
Julie Callaghan, 58, said: "It's a very good idea. Patients and staff have more than enough to worry about without the added concern of their own safety.
"The world is a much more violent place than it used to be and hospitals are not immune to the same problems as everywhere else."
What's this - me first, you second - you are speaking like an adolescent again PB. Are you having fun with daddy's computer on you school hols, or is it a case of the 3rd degree laptop burns?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2503291.stm
My post is a serious NHS enquiry - your's is a .... *politician* - and you expect this to be unbiased news??
Something a little up-to-date (and topical) for you. Looks like fun in Leicester!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOSPITAL SECURITY TEAM PLEDGES ZERO TOLERANCE
BY PAUL KANE
10:30 - 25 November 2002
A new security team took a nine-inch blade off a patient in their first few days patrolling Leicester Royal Infirmary.
They today pledged zero tolerance to troublemakers after a huge increase in violence at the hospital.
Each year, an estimated 300 violent or aggressive incidents are reported by staff at the infirmary.
However, in October alone there were 56 cases - more than double the normal monthly average.
A new, 16-strong security team has now been introduced at the infirmary to stamp out trouble and ease public and staff concerns.
The extent of the problems they face was highlighted in their first few days when a nine-inch blade was taken from a patient and officers had to break up a fight involving a gang of 10.
Mark Lawson, site security manager, said: "We are making it very clear that we will be operating a zero tolerance policy.
"We have a highly visible presence within the hospital and are ready to act at any time and I think we are already having a positive effect.
"We do have regular troublemakers who are known to us. They know now that we will be tackling this problem as firmly as possible.
"It speaks volumes when an experienced doctor tells you that, for the first time, he really feels safe at work. Our priority will always be the safety of staff and patients."
The new security arrangements will operate round-the-clock over a five-month trial period with four officers on duty at a time.
If fully adopted, the arrangement will cost the hospitals' trust around £360,000 a year.
Two officers will be dedicated to the accident and emergency unit and will replace police who were stationed there at weekends.
They will also cover the x-ray department and fracture clinic where a nurse was held at knifepoint in September 2000 by a patient.
The other two officers will form a rapid-response team offering support to existing officers patrolling the remaining hospital site.
Rob Pinsent, director of facilities at the trust, said: "As a hospital trust we are dedicated to healthcare, and we will not tolerate anti-social behaviour which is disruptive to this healthcare provision.
"This investment in security enhancements demonstrates this commitment."
The increased security measures have been welcomed by patients and visitors to the infirmary.
Outpatient Simon Betts, 43, said: "I think it is a wise move and definitely welcome it. You can't put a price tag on security."
Julie Callaghan, 58, said: "It's a very good idea. Patients and staff have more than enough to worry about without the added concern of their own safety.
"The world is a much more violent place than it used to be and hospitals are not immune to the same problems as everywhere else."
Nov 25th 2002, 9:45 pm
#20
Senior member
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Paris
Posts: 835
Re: retirement
Originally posted by Bluebristolian
Hi Herman,
Sorry to hear that it hasn't worked out for you in OZ. The family thing is the bit that worries me too. We don't have our visas yet so we are not quite at the point of biting the bullet. I'm hoping that we can stick it out if we do go, and perhaps even persuade some family to move over there as well.
The Bluebristolian thing refers to Bristol Blue glass which I'm very fond of, although I suppose it might subconciously also refer to the pissed off type of blue :-)
House prices are still supposed to be zooming up in the UK although I get the feeling they may have slowed down a bit in the Bristol area. I guess you are hoping for a property price crash! I read in the newspaper the other day that they think Bristol could be the new London OH NO. I do wonder what Bristol will be like in 20 years time.
Cheers
Hi Herman,
Sorry to hear that it hasn't worked out for you in OZ. The family thing is the bit that worries me too. We don't have our visas yet so we are not quite at the point of biting the bullet. I'm hoping that we can stick it out if we do go, and perhaps even persuade some family to move over there as well.
The Bluebristolian thing refers to Bristol Blue glass which I'm very fond of, although I suppose it might subconciously also refer to the pissed off type of blue :-)
House prices are still supposed to be zooming up in the UK although I get the feeling they may have slowed down a bit in the Bristol area. I guess you are hoping for a property price crash! I read in the newspaper the other day that they think Bristol could be the new London OH NO. I do wonder what Bristol will be like in 20 years time.
Cheers
For us its not a matter of Australia not working out, as we were asked to come here for 30 months by my firm, and I am paid my UK salary whilst here. We are approaching the end of that contract and have had a fantastic time here. Its been a great success and I have been offered sponsorship to stay but would have to revert to local salary if we chose to do so (which is a 60% pay cut!).
As newly weds planning to start a family next year we want to be near our family so for us the idea of staying beyond my contracted term is not appealing. Further, salaries for professionals here are so low that to buy a 4 bed detached house here in Sydney would require my wife to work full time and our kids would have to be raised in day care. In Bristol professional salaries are so much better relative to house prices, even the current inflated prices, that we can comfortably afford a 4 bedroom house on just my salary and our kids can be raised 'the old fashioned way', which we happen to think is the best way.
I don't believe in saying anything is permanent though and in the future we may consider returning, or we may consider a spell in another country closer to home. Just at this time in our lives its not for us, we want our family around us.
Nov 26th 2002, 2:48 am
#21
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
[QUOTE][SIZE=1]Originally posted by madmancunian
>> Looks like you are second again.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2503291.stm
My post is a serious NHS enquiry - your's is a .... *politician* - and you expect this to be unbiased news??
Something a little up-to-date (and topical) for you. Looks like fun in Leicester!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why just pick on Leicester , most of Australia is just as much fun?This
unbaised on ANF site .
the face of a growing number of violent incidents against nurses in New South Wales, the NSW Nurses' Association (NSWNA, ANF NSW) joined with NSW Health at the end of May to launch a joint zero tolerance publicity campaign.
There is no excuse for abuse involves a series of television advertisments, money for public education, and $500,000 to train nurses how to deal with abusive and violent people.
New statistics from WorkCover show that violence against nurses is increasing. In 1999, nine nurses were left with permanent disabilities as a result of being attacked at work.
A study in the Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing shows more than 40% of nurses in metropolitan emergency wards and 30% of those in rural hospitals experienced physical intimidation or assault each month.1
The Australian Nursing Federation today congratulated the NHMRC on the release of their manual When it's right in front of you: Assisting health care workers to manage the effects of violence in rural and remote Australia. The manual recognises the problem of violence towards health workers in remote and rural areas of Australia, and suggests some useful strategies to deal with it.
When it's right in front of you states that it is the employer's obligation to provide a safe workplace and to protect the well being of the employee - and that this should include the prevention of violent events.
'No violence against nurses is acceptable. Governments and employers have an absolute responsibility to make sure the environment in which nurses work keeps them physically and psychologically safe,' ANF Federal Secretary Jill Iliffe said.
'Nurses in remote and rural areas are at the front line and often have little infrastructure to support them when violence occurs. Over time, violent incidents have increased and become more serious. On occasions this has resulted in the closure of services and the evacuation of staff. Apart from any physical injuries, nurses are severely traumatised when violence occurs.'
Ms Iliffe said the ANF had been working around the country with employers to put processes in place to eliminate violence against nurses.
'We can't have services undermined by health professionals living in fear for their safety and their lives,' Ms Iliffe said.
'The ANF is calling for an urgent summit, aimed at building cooperation and finding solutions. As this is a national problem the Federal Government needs to be involved.
>> Looks like you are second again.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2503291.stm
My post is a serious NHS enquiry - your's is a .... *politician* - and you expect this to be unbiased news??
Something a little up-to-date (and topical) for you. Looks like fun in Leicester!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why just pick on Leicester , most of Australia is just as much fun?This
unbaised on ANF site .
the face of a growing number of violent incidents against nurses in New South Wales, the NSW Nurses' Association (NSWNA, ANF NSW) joined with NSW Health at the end of May to launch a joint zero tolerance publicity campaign.
There is no excuse for abuse involves a series of television advertisments, money for public education, and $500,000 to train nurses how to deal with abusive and violent people.
New statistics from WorkCover show that violence against nurses is increasing. In 1999, nine nurses were left with permanent disabilities as a result of being attacked at work.
A study in the Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing shows more than 40% of nurses in metropolitan emergency wards and 30% of those in rural hospitals experienced physical intimidation or assault each month.1
The Australian Nursing Federation today congratulated the NHMRC on the release of their manual When it's right in front of you: Assisting health care workers to manage the effects of violence in rural and remote Australia. The manual recognises the problem of violence towards health workers in remote and rural areas of Australia, and suggests some useful strategies to deal with it.
When it's right in front of you states that it is the employer's obligation to provide a safe workplace and to protect the well being of the employee - and that this should include the prevention of violent events.
'No violence against nurses is acceptable. Governments and employers have an absolute responsibility to make sure the environment in which nurses work keeps them physically and psychologically safe,' ANF Federal Secretary Jill Iliffe said.
'Nurses in remote and rural areas are at the front line and often have little infrastructure to support them when violence occurs. Over time, violent incidents have increased and become more serious. On occasions this has resulted in the closure of services and the evacuation of staff. Apart from any physical injuries, nurses are severely traumatised when violence occurs.'
Ms Iliffe said the ANF had been working around the country with employers to put processes in place to eliminate violence against nurses.
'We can't have services undermined by health professionals living in fear for their safety and their lives,' Ms Iliffe said.
'The ANF is calling for an urgent summit, aimed at building cooperation and finding solutions. As this is a national problem the Federal Government needs to be involved.
