- Train companies reject whistleblower safety scheme. . The
Times, 22 October 1999.
- THE callous treatment of the elderly in NHS hospitals has been exposed by
a doctor who claims patients are denied life-saving treatment, are grossly
neglected and are given drugs which hasten death. Rita Pal, 28, a junior
doctor, was so disturbed by her experiences that she is leaving the
profession. This week she will submit a dossier to the General Medical Council
(GMC) detailing the cases of abuse that she saw.
Sunday Times April 2 2000
-
Rita Pal was so disgusted by the maltreatment of the elderly she saw
while working in 12 hospitals that she decided to leave the profession. But
not before she presented a dossier to the General Medical Council earlier
this month of the cases she had witnessed.
"In every hospital I have worked there is an attitude that if people
are over 65 it is often not worth bothering to treat them," said the
28-year-old junior doctor. "Doctors are unilaterally taking the
decision to put 'do not resuscitate' or 'nil by mouth' orders on patients'
medical notes purely based on the age of the patient. Nurses are being
bullied into doing things simply because doctors want a bed freed for
another patient."
Dr Pal, from Sutton Coldfield, west Midlands, said on one occasion a
doctor told her to withdraw all medication from a stroke victim who was
conscious and could hear what was being said. Dr Pal decided to carry on the
man's medication and held his hand, telling him: "You'll be all
right." He was transferred to another unit where he died.
"I was sickened by the whole episode," she said.
On another occasion she was told to put a pneumonia patient on
diamorphine. She injected the drug into the patient's mattress and the next
day a senior doctor commented: "She is still alive. Didn't you start
her on the diamorphine?"
The patient recovered and went home. Daily Mail, 14 April 2000.
For an update on the consequences for Dr Pal, leading through inappropriate
legal processes to an out of court settlement in 2005 see
NHS Exposed, especially
http://www.nhsexposed.com/healthworkers/doctors/gmc/pal_v_general_medical_council.shtml
and
my article for the October 2004 edition of The Whistle
- Six years ago I launched a campaign in this column on behalf of Pat
Cooksley, a ward sister at Derriford Hospital in my home city of Plymouth.
Pat was suspended for "gross misconduct" - rewriting a drugs
prescription sheet for a seriously ill patient. The doctor who should have
signed it had forgotten to do so. Paul
Foot in Guardian 27 June 2000
- There are a lot of nursing homes around Blackpool. It's the sort of place
many elderly people imagine spending their last days - in a pleasant home,
not far from the sea, with all those hazy memories of summer holidays. But
not all these places offer the sort of care for their elderly residents that
we might expect. In those where there is neglect and abuse, there are
probably staff who don't like what they see. They are reluctant to speak
out. They are frightened for their jobs. It is easier to stay silent or
quietly leave. Bryan Bladon did neither. He blew the whistle and, like many
before him, was sacked. But unlike his predecessors, Bladon had the law on
his side - a new law that protects whistleblowers against sacking or other
forms of victimisation. Guardian
3 July 2000
- The cost of whistleblowing Even in the new culture of openness that
employees are told now exists, blowing the whistle on wrongdoing can often
mean suspension and blighted career prospects, writes Maggie Murray.
Blowing the whistle on a colleague or raising awareness of bad practice
takes courage, even in the new culture of openness that employees are told
now exists.
For the individual who decides to challenge the status quo, the
implications of the decision to highlight wrongdoing may mean, at best, a
period of stressful suspension, and, at worst, blighted career prospects.
Last year, Sian Caiach, a consultant orthopaedic surgeon, raised concerns
that a fellow doctor at the Prince Philip hospital in Llanelli was using NHS
time and resources to treat private patients. An audit commission
investigation substantiated some of her claims and found that the hospital
was subsidising private patients and had lost income of £7,500.
Since that time, Ms Caiach has not worked and has been on what is
described as extended maternity leave for almost eight months. She is also
the subject of an investigation by the Royal College of Surgeons after
allegations were made about her clinical practice. Guardian
Society Thursday March 22, 2001
- Nurses who blow the whistle on poor standards of care run the risk of
threats, intimidation and physical and mental health problems, it is claimed.
Delegates at the Royal College of Nursing's annual congress in Harrogate
backed a call for action to protect nurses who speak out.
BBC 22 May 2001
- Doctor who blew the whistle and suffered a reign of terror. Stoke
Mandeville is one of Britain's most famous hospitals, but when a doctor in
A&E warned about a consultant she was ignored - then the anonymous
threats began. David Rose. Observer
Sunday January 27, 2002
- Pick of the day. Harold Jackson Tuesday
July 23, 2002 The Guardian. One of the constant and depressing
experiences for workers who blow the whistle is that public esteem is so
often followed by private retribution. Anaesthetist Stephen Bolsin, who
revealed the appalling toll of child deaths at Bristol infirmary, was
professionally ostracised until he sought work in Australia. The government
is supposed to be backing the protection of NHS whistle-blowers but, as
Allan Urry discovers in File On 4 (8pm, Radio 4), insiders say their
situation is as bad as ever.
-
Secretary 'driven to quit' after revealing problems in cancer unit
Martin Wainwright
Guardian Tuesday August 13, 2002
-
A hospital secretary who raised the alarm about problems in a breast
cancer unit won a whistle-blowing employment tribunal case yesterday.
Saturday August 17, 2002 The Guardian
-
Ambulance staff 'feared revealing fiddled 999 data'. John Carvel,
social affairs editor
Tuesday October 15, 2002 The Guardian
- An NHS "whistleblower", sacked after speaking out about an alleged
"fiddle" of statistics for cancelled operations is taking his case to an
employment tribunal.
BBC News Thursday, 9
January, 2003
- Hospital finance director 'sacked for whistleblowing'. Sarah Hall
Thursday January 9, 2003 The Guardian
- Blowing your job. The health secretary has urged people to speak out about
misconduct or mismanagement in the health service. But whistleblowers claim
they do not enjoy the same protection in other parts of the public sector.
Simon Parker reports.
Friday January 17, 2003
- The financial director of an NHS trust, who claims he was sacked for
"telling the truth", yesterday lost the first round in his fight to be
reinstated.
Saturday January 18, 2003 The Guardian
- Whistleblower lifts lid on NHS culture of secrecy. A senior health
service official who was fired after revealing his hospital's financial
problems yesterday lifted the lid on what he claims is the culture of
deception now endemic in the NHS. Jo Revill, health editor
Sunday January 26, 2003 The Observer
- Online commentary: The Observer today reports on the case of NHS
whistleblower Ian Perkin. Here he says that managers must be able to talk
honestly about the problems which the service faces.
Sunday
January 26, 2003
- Union leaders today called for an independent inquiry into allegations of
serious sexual abuse of female patients at one of the UK's high security
psychiatric hospitals.
Thursday March 6, 2003
- Broadmoor's cover-up. Another brave whistleblower suffers.
Leader
Saturday March 8, 2003 The Guardian
- One of Britain's most famous teaching hospitals is in a state of
unprecedented crisis and riven by internal quarrels due to government pressure
to modernise, a Guardian investigation has discovered. A number of doctors and
administrators at St George's in London have been suspended or sacked by the
trust board after alleging mismanagement as the hospital struggles to achieve
government "star" ratings.
Sarah
Hall Saturday April 19, 2003 The Guardian .This relates to
Ian Perkin
- Staff tell of cutbacks, quarrels and cover-ups. Sarah Hall
Saturday April 19, 2003 The Guardian
- The hospital finance director who claimed he was sacked for
"whistleblowing" was described by the trust's medical director as a "scorecard
keeper" with a "can't do attitude", an industrial tribunal heard today.
Wednesday April 23, 2003 .This relates to
Ian Perkin
- Finance chief 'not sacked for blocking NHS fiddle'. Rebecca Allison
Thursday April 24, 2003 The Guardian .This relates to
Ian Perkin
- No crisis at our hospital. Letter
Tuesday April 29, 2003 The Guardian
- Hospital falsified figures, whistleblower says. Angelique Chrisafis
Thursday May 1, 2003 The Guardian .This relates to
Ian Perkin
- A senior consultant at St George's hospital intensified pressure on the
trust yesterday, accusing hospital managers of massaging waiting lists to meet
government targets. Sarah Hall
Thursday May 1, 2003 The Guardian
- One in three NHS workers who has voiced concerns about bad practice in the
service has faced reprisals, figures reveal.
BBC News May 7, 2003
- A famous teaching hospital has brought in a top troubleshooter to replace
its chief executive, just as an employment tribunal discusses the sacking of
an award-winning colleague. Sarah Hall and Rebecca Allison Thursday
July
24, 2003 The Guardian
- A hospital finance director who claimed he was sacked for blowing the
whistle about fiddled figures for cancelled operations was unfairly dismissed,
but not for revealing wrongdoing, an employment tribunal has found. Rebecca
Allison
Saturday January 31, 2004 The Guardian
- Preventing the worst. Leader
Monday
October 4, 2004 The Guardian
- A leading London hospital fiddled data about cancelled operations as it
attempted to curry favour with the Department of Health to win a higher star
rating. Its chief executive also improperly charged £540 towards the cost of a
dinner at the Savoy to the hospital's credit card, an independent inquiry
found yesterday. Inspectors upheld two of six complaints by a whistleblower
against St George's hospital in Tooting, south London, concluding: "The
dysfunctional state of the senior management team was severe." But the inquiry
report, published by south west London strategic health authority, reserved
some of its sternest criticism for the whistleblower, Ian Perkin, the
hospital's former finance director, accusing him of "obsessive managerial
behaviour". John Carvel
Wednesday
October 20, 2004 The Guardian
- A HOSPITAL in Wolverhampton run by controversial health boss David
Loughton is suffering from crippling debts. Cash-strapped Royal Wolverhampton
Hospitals NHS Trust achieved just one out of three stars in the Healthcare
Commission rating. New Cross Hospital would have achieved top rating in the
latest health watchdog review but for the debts, according to bosses. Mr.
Loughton, who was chief executive of University Hospitals Coventry and
Warwickshire NHS Trust, resigned from Walsgrave Hospital in March 2002 after a
vote of no confidence. His departure followed calls from seven MPs for him to
leave and a vote of no confidence by 99 consultants. The Rugby Advertiser
launched a well-supported campaign to see his resignation. During Mr.
Loughton's ten year 'reign' over Walsgrave and Rugby's Hospital of St. Cross,
the trust was criticised in a Commission for Health Improvement report for
putting patients' lives at risk with unsafe practices. It also said
doctors feared being victimised for
voicing concerns. This report was swiftly followed by a zero-rating in
the Government's star rating system. But Mr. Loughton sprung back to become
chief executive of the Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS a year ago.
Rugby Advertiser
22
September 2005
- Two health service employees who highlighted fire and safety breaches at a
new privately financed psychiatric hospital were suspended within days of
giving evidence to a council investigation into the allegations. The workers,
who do not want to be identified, believe they are being victimised because
they have expressed concerns to Leeds mental health NHS teaching trust over
the building and design of three facilities. Their fears were vindicated in a
report by NHS Estates earlier this year. It found one of the sites, the Newsam
Centre at Seacroft hospital in Leeds, breached every section of the fire
safety code. Laura Smith
Wednesday October 26, 2005 The Guardian
- Trust attempts to gag its staff. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mental
Health NHS Trust has sent a letter to employees telling them not to speak to
the media about "contentious" issues, following "intense media scrutiny" over
the proposed £3m cut to services. Last week 27 consultant psychiatrists wrote
to the Cambridge Evening News expressing their fear over the cuts, and the
story was picked up by the Guardian. David Howarth MP has condemned the
trust's move, saying the doctors' letter "was a legitimate exercise of the
right of free speech by a group of people who know far more about the issue
than anyone else." Cambridge Evening
News 13 December 2005
- A proposed ethical code for scientists would help junior staff blow the
whistle on unethical behaviour and also help promote the subject in schools,
the Royal Society said today. The code has been drawn up by the government's
chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, with a small working group,
following a meeting of science ministers and advisers from G8 countries last
year. It calls for rigour, honesty and integrity among scientists, who should
take steps to prevent corrupt practices and professional misconduct and
declare conflicts of interest. Scientists should ensure that their work is
lawful and justified, they should "minimise and justify any adverse effect"
their work may have on people, animals and the natural environment. Donald
MacLeod
Thursday January 5, 2006
- NHS staff told
"shut up or lose your jobs". Staff at the University Hospital of North
Staffordshire have been told not to whinge about their place of work in public
places, for fear that any damage to the hospital's reputation could have
serious consequences under Choose and Book. They were also told that patients
should henceforth be known as customers. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Stoke Sentinel 18 January 2006
-
One of Britain's leading charities for people with
severe learning
disabilities has been accused of
abusing some of the most vulnerable people
under its care, The Observer can reveal. An employee of United Response, which
runs more than 100 care homes across England looking after people with learning
disabilities, turned whistle-blower to report on 'appalling' events he alleges
he witnessed at the company's Gombards care home in Welwyn Garden City,
Hertfordshire. Two senior members of staff at the home have been suspended,
although the company claims this is unrelated to accusations of abuse.
Sunday
February 19, 2006 The Observer
- Consultant
quits over op delays. A gynaecologist who spoke out over claims he was
left with nothing to do because his hospital delayed non-urgent surgery has
resigned. David Penman faced disciplinary action after saying
public money was being
wasted through the delays at Kent's £1m-in-debt
Medway Maritime Hospital. He resigned because he could "no longer tolerate
the way the NHS is being run". Mr Penman spoke out in March after the hospital
imposed minimum waiting times of nine weeks for outpatient appointments and 20
weeks for non-urgent operations. Upon resigning he said: "I come from a long
line of doctors and I was brought up to act and behave to my patients with
honour, honesty and respect and all I see is spin, lies and deceit from the
management. I don't feel I can work in a system like that. It is an important
principle not to allow organisations to effectively gag people who, for the
most honourable reasons, are wishing to expose
dishonourable actions to public scrutiny." The hospital is continuing with
disciplinary action against him despite the fact he has resigned.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of BBC
Online 5 June 2006
- X-ray films and scans belonging to more than 100,000 patients were dumped
in cardboard boxes lining a dirty hospital corridor and lay
unchecked for years. Now the senior doctor who revealed the scandal that
exposes the dire state of NHS diagnostic services has been sacked. Radiologist
Dr Otto Chan has spoken for the first time about the discovery that led to his
dismissal. On two separate occasions, some 15,000 packets of films and scans
were kept in corridors as the hospital had neither the manpower nor the money
to analyse them all. It is estimated that only half of the films and scans
were ever seen by a specialist meaning thousands of patients and their doctors
will never know whether or not their images showed any signs of disease. At
one stage in 2002, the packages of films were locked away in a storeroom
shortly before an official inspection visit. On other occasions, consultants
would keep patients' x-ray films in their car boots because they were so
worried they would go missing. Each x-ray or scan should be read, or
'reported' by a radiologist trained to detect early signs of illness and
infection, under medical royal college guidelines. But at Chan's hospital,
Barts and the
London NHS Trust, there was no computer system in place to count or record
the images in question, so staff had no way of knowing how many images were
stored or of cross-checking them with patients' records. Dr Chan, 49 and a
father of six, was suspended 18 months ago, and then dismissed last month - a
decision he is now fighting. 'I believe I was sacked because I was marked out
as a whistleblower and a troublemaker, and that's
because I refused to accept that thousand of films lying jumbled up in a
corridor constituted good patient care,' he said. He revealed to The Observer
that from 2000 the number of films started to accumulate in the Royal London.
'At first it was just few packets from outpatients and inpatients but
gradually they built up. By 2001, it was 10,000 packets of film (each packet
contains up to eight images) and by 2002, it was up to 15,000 packets. They
were stuffed into boxes and kept in the corridor. 'One day I turned up and
they had all disappeared. I tracked them down to a storeroom which had been
locked, and it transpired that the inspectors from the Commission for Health
Improvement [now the Healthcare commission] were coming round on a visit.'
Managers at the time said that the move was taken to protect safety of patient
records. These films were finally read at the end of 2002 after Chan demanded
action, and threatened to go public with it. But the hospital administration
then allowed a second backlog of another 15,000 packets of film to build up
between 2003 and 2004. This time, there was no agreement to read all of them.
Apart from chest X-rays the second pile of films was never checked by
radiologists. The scandal may now be investigated by the Healthcare
Commission, which looks at issues of patient safety. Charles Blakeney, a
radiologist at the Royal London who worked for years with Chan, said: 'The way
in which he [Chan] has been victimised is to my mind, disgraceful. He raised
the issue of the unread films because it mattered to him that patient safety
was being compromised. I was shocked beyond belief, as were many others, when
he was dismissed.' In January 2005, Chan was suspended and accused of
professional misconduct. The trust, under threat of legal proceedings from
Chan, appointed an internal investigation panel headed by a QC which took 12
days of evidence about the saga, and which included other doctors' accounts of
the piles of films. The findings of the panel remain confidential but it is
understood that in April this year, they concluded that although there were
'serious deficiencies' in his behaviour towards managers, he had made a 'very
substantial contribution' to the trust, and they should consider re-employing
him under a different structure. Chan was therefore shocked to be told on 7
June that he was 'summarily dismissed'. His suspension and dismissal has cost
the NHS some £1.5m but the amount will rise if the case goes to appeal. In a
statement last night, Dr Charles Gutteridge, medical director of the trust,
said: 'It is true that at times in the past our radiology service experienced
considerable pressure, due to the volume of films and a national shortage of
qualified radiologists and radiographers. It should be emphasised that the
images concerned were from patients with the lowest clinical risk. Patients
with the highest clinical risk have always been reported urgently.' He said
that robust new protocols for reporting were introduced in 2004. 'The
introduction of state-of-the-art digital imaging this summer will radically
transform the way we capture, store and distribute images and reports.' The
trust management said that the recent dismissal of a consultant for gross
misconduct followed a 19-month investigation, which included a formal hearing
by an independent panel. 'The panel concluded that there were grounds for
dismissal. The dismissal was in no way connected with issues with our
radiology processes in the past.' Jo Revill, health editor
Sunday July 30, 2006 The Observer
- GPs
blow whistle on walk-in centre. A GP has
resigned from his job at a walk-in centre run by a
private company over
his concerns about patient safety because of the Government's "slapdash"
introduction of the private sector centres. Dr Anila Reddy has written to
Patricia Hewitt about his concern that nurses at a privately-run NHS walk-in
centre were not working to protocols and that the area was "dangerously
under-regulated". "There appears to be a two-tier system whereby validated
safety netting is being thrown out of the window to promote an expansion of
the private sector," he said. The rushed introduction of the private sector
centres meant that companies like Atos Origin, an international IT company
which ran the centre for the NHS, were not setting up the same safeguards used
at NHS-run walk-in centres, Dr Reddy claimed. He said Atos had been told by
the DoH that nurses did not need to use protocols but should rely on Prodigy
and NICE treatment guidelines instead. The situation had led to nurses working
outside their competency, he added. Dr Reddy said nurses of varying
qualifications and experience were expected to carry out clinical assessments
of untriaged patients with no requirement to involve a doctor at any stage
unless they chose to. He resigned from his post as lead GP at the centre - one
of four new privately run NHS commuter walk-in centres - four months after it
opened at Canary Wharf in
London. He said: "Nurses who are of variable experience and training are
being allowed to see patients without the usual compulsory protocols necessary
for patient safety, and are being encouraged to see as many types of patients
as they can to ensure waiting time targets are attained, when these patients
are outside their scope of practice." Other doctors who have worked at the
centre expressed similar concerns. Locum Dr Nadeem Bhatti said he was shocked
that nurses were in charge of clinical decisions. He said: "Unless there is
more regulation of these centres, they will remain dangerous." A DoH spokesman
said it had asked Atos to investigate the issue "as a matter of urgency".
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Doctor
Update 22 August 2006
- Doctors expose
'crisis' at TV hospital. Blunders by bosses have endangered lives at one
of Britain's busiest casualty departments, the hospital's own doctors claimed.
Six senior consultants at the Royal
London claimed management decisions at the hospital had led to
serious lapses in patient care. An orthopaedic surgeon said: "Specialists
from every department have written letters to management that we can't do
without certain services like radiology. But managers are deaf and are
obsessed with targets." Some of the doctors claimed that two patients died
because equipment that could have saved them was not ordered; patients with
minor injuries are treated before seriously ill ones just to keep government
waiting time targets; bosses refuse to provide cover for doctors who are on
holiday, ill or suspended, with serious consequences to treatment; 15,000
packets of X-rays were found lying in a corridor, meaning some serious illness
may not have been spotted. One orthopaedic surgeon was concerned that some
patients at
high risk of carrying MRSA were shuttled into general wards to fulfill
government four-hour
waiting time
targets. Senior radiologist Dr Otto Chan was
suspended last year. He was summarily dismissed despite an investigation
panel recommending his reinstatement. Astonishingly half the £1.5million legal
costs of his suspension and dismissal were taken from the £7million radiology
budget. He discovered the numbers used to identify files were being reused
after three months for different patients "to save a few hundred pounds". "It
meant some patients with life threatening conditions were given the all clear
because someone else's report found its way onto their file. I told managers
it was unsafe but they threatened to discipline me."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Mirror 1 September 2006
-
Whistle blower wins enquiry into GP cover.
Urgent Care 24, the company which runs out-of-hours GP cover across
Merseyside, is being investigated after a former executive, Roy McNally,
raised concerns about its standards. Mr McNally has claimed among other things
that patients with life-threatening illnesses were not identified quickly
enough and performance figures were falsified. The company's call centre in
Wavertree is contracted to find doctors for the 800,000 patients in
Liverpool, Knowsley and south Sefton if they fall ill after working hours.
The three area's health bosses are now reviewing a dossier of allegations
handed in by Mr McNully after he resigned as the service's head of IT in
March. Mr McNully says he signed a three month gagging order stopping him
speaking about the service until now. Mr McNally said: "I am concerned for
patient safety. The risk of life-threatening cases being missed, particularly
among vulnerable groups and the elderly, is a real worry if it leads to even
the smallest delay in their treatment." Mr McNally and other current and
former employees took a long list of concerns to Liverpool PCT. These concerns
included a figure of only 9% of calls from patients with "immediately
life-threatening conditions" being referred to the ambulance service within
three minutes changing to 94% by the time it reached the service's clinical
monitoring board. The three PCTs have all confirmed that they are reviewing
the company's contract. A spokesperson for Urgent Care 24 said the allegations
were untrue and that the company did not wish to comment. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Liverpool Daily Post 18 December 2006
- Woman wrongly given breast scan all-clear dies. A woman
wrongly given the all-clear by a consultant radiologist who misread her
breast cancer scan results has died from the disease, it emerged last night.
The patient, who has not been named, was one of 28 women whose mammograms were
misreported at a hospital in
Greater Manchester. She died after the mistake went unnoticed for at least
three months. Another woman's breast cancer was only noticed two years after
she was given the all-clear, it emerged. The mistakes by a consultant
radiologist sparked a review of nearly 2,500 mammograms by bosses at the
Trafford General hospital and North Manchester General hospital. A total of
176 women had to be recalled and re-tested after the mistake was identified in
April 2005. Of the 28 wrongly given the all-clear, 18 were told that their
chances of surviving were "significantly" worsened because the delay in
spotting the error was more than three months. The details came to light as
the NHS North West published a report into the scandal, criticising hospital
procedures and saying that errors could have been spotted earlier if a
clinical audit of the radiologist's work had been ordered after his
colleagues raised concerns to their bosses in
November 2003.
Alex
Kumi Friday February 2, 2007 The Guardian
- Watchdog condemns deal behind health choice scheme. A groundbreaking
deal with the private
sector to provide millions of patients with information on the best
hospitals and GPs in Britain is condemned today by a parliamentary watchdog as
poor value for money and breaking almost every rule designed to protect the
taxpayer. The National Audit Office has lambasted the Department for Health for
signing an exclusive joint venture with the Dr Foster partnership - the
organisation behind the Good Hospital Guide - without putting out the proposal
to competitors and paying millions of pounds to the company to develop the
ministry's own data. The scheme, personally endorsed by the health secretary,
Patricia Hewitt, and former health minister Lord Warner, could, according to
advice taken by the NAO, leave Britain facing a court case for giving illegal
aid to a private company. The new system was seen as essential to Tony Blair's
plan for every patient to be offered a
choice of four hospitals for operations. The joint venture company, known as
Dr Foster Intelligence, would sell the latest data to health trusts so they
could help patients make an informed choice. According to the NAO some £12m of
taxpayer's money was sunk into the project with a further £1.7m spent on
consultants to evaluate it. This included a £50,000 payment to Dr Foster's
partnership, headed by Tim Kelsey and Jake Arnold Foster, to advise them on
setting up their own centre. The NAO says the £12m included a strategic premium
of up to £4m - which was higher than the financial advisers told the ministry it
was worth. Edward Leigh, chairman of the Commons public accounts committee,
said: "Taxpayers should be grateful to the anonymous
whistleblower who first alerted the NAO to the Department of Health's
hole-and-corner deal with Dr Foster." "The department simply paid no heed
whatsoever to the rules that are set to protect taxpayer's money ... there was
an unseemly urgency to complete the deal ... the truth is that the department
and its information centre cannot demonstrate how investment in one company, Dr
Foster, rather than any other providing similar services, is to the benefit of
the NHS." David Hencke, Westminster correspondent
Tuesday
February 6, 2007 The Guardian
- Hospitals told
not to operate until patients have waited 20 weeks. An NHS surgeon has
exposed how cash-strapped hospitals are being barred from operating on cancer
patients who have not waited long enough. In a withering assessment of the
financial management of the health service, Mr Jaffe said that doctors were
being restricted in getting waiting lists down by financial limitations and
ever-changing targets. The consultant plastic and reconstructive surgeon said he
and his colleagues are being prohibited from operating in non-urgent cases
unless the patient has been waiting for a minimum of 20 weeks. This is because
the hospital would not get paid - even if the patient and staff were ready for
the operation. Mr Jaffe said the Prime Minister's pledge to have patients
waiting no longer than 18 weeks between referral and treatment would be
"impossible" unless more money was made available to primary care trusts. Mr
Jaffe, who works at the University Hospital of North
Staffordshire NHS Trust, said the 20-week ruling was a "global issue" within
the NHS and not just a problem at UHNS. He claimed that he was unable to fill
his evening lists because of the 20-week constraint, and that patients were
having to wait longer to be seen than necessary. He said: "It's not the
hospitals - these rules are being put in place by the PCTs to take them over the
April 1 threshold, when the new financial year begins and they get their money
from the Government. The way things stand, waiting lists will grow, not shorten,
if operations have to be put back because of a lack of money. It's clearly a
ridiculous way of doing business." His candid remarks come on the same day that
radiotherapists reveal how other cancer patients are having to wait months
beyond their recommended dates for treatment that can prevent the disease
returning. Channel 4's Dispatches programme found that the waiting gap between
operations to remove cancerous growths and radiotherapy treatment is at least
three months in
Kent, breaching the Royal College of Radiologists' guidelines. Three
patients have seen the disease return during the long gap between their
operation and radiotherapy. The programme found that five UK radiotherapy units
have an average wait of 28 days, which means that many patients are waiting
longer. In two centres, more than three-quarters of patients were not treated
within 28 days. Mr Jaffe said Government proposals to increase operating hours
into the night were "laudable". But he added: "We would need more doctors, more
nurses, more staff. More, in fact, of all the people they keep making redundant.
They are getting rid of people yet trying to impose regulations on us that mean
we need more people. Nurses are qualifying yet no trusts are employing them
because they have no money." Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
26 February 2007
- NHS doctors 'gagged by a culture of fear'. BMA survey of
consultants finds many under pressure. · More than half say cuts or targets
halting treatments. The British Medical Association accused the government
yesterday of instilling "a culture of fear" across the NHS to stop doctors
revealing how health service
reforms are putting
patients' lives at risk. The BMA surveyed senior consultants in hospitals
throughout England and found 56% knew of
clinically
effective treatments being withdrawn by their NHS trust to save money or
comply with policy directives. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Wednesday
March 7, 2007 The Guardian
- NHS 'reforms'
are not helping patients, say hospital doctors. Senior hospital doctors
believe that major NHS reforms, such as
payment by results
and Patient Choice, will fail to
improve the service patients receive, according to a British Medical
Association survey. The poll of 265 consultants in England will be worrying
for the government, coming at a time when ministers hoped to regain
clinicians' backing for their reform programme. The survey showed they have
much work to do to reduce doctors' scepticism - 53% said PBR would worsen or
considerably worsen patient care. Only 11% said choice would improve patient
care, while a third believed moving care out of hospitals and into the
community would result in better services.
Independent sector
provision would make patient care poorer, according to 72%, while 58% said
they had examples of patients being adversely affected by a national
initiative. More than half (56%) said they or their colleagues had experienced
problems because
clinically effective treatments or procedures were no longer available or
restricted. BMA consultants' leader Jonathan Fielden said senior doctors
were implementing better services for their patients - 81% of respondents had
initiated service improvements in the past year. However, their efforts were
being hampered by funding constraints and poorly thought through government
policies. 'The government is wasting millions of pounds on health reforms that
have not adequately involved senior doctors and consequently fail to benefit
patients,' he said. 'Consultants are going the extra mile to bring down
waiting lists only to be told to slow down and be less productive. Meanwhile,
work continues to be diverted away from NHS hospitals to under-performing
independent sector providers at greater cost. Plans to increase recruitment or
buy new, modern equipment are being put on hold or abandoned because of a lack
of money.' He added that many of the doctors who took part in this survey felt
unable to speak out openly. 'There is a culture of fear
in the NHS and doctors are under severe
pressure to
meet targets and keep their mouths shut. Doctors want to be at the
forefront of health reforms, both locally and nationally, to ensure government
policy has clear benefits for patients.'
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Public
Finance 9 March 2007
- Warning for GPs
call-out service. The company which runs
Merseyside's largest GP out-of-hours service has been given three weeks to
bring its operation up to basic national standards. An investigation was
launched into the Urgent Care 24 call centre last year after its former IT
director raised concerns lives may be at risk. Roy McNally claimed patients
with life-threatening illnesses were not being identified fast enough by call
operators and accused managers of falsifying performance figures. One GP, who
regularly worked evening and weekend shifts for UC24, revealed he is about to
raise further concerns about the service. Dr Srinivas Dharmana is meeting
officials at Liverpool PCT this week to ask them to consider commissioning two
or three companies to run the service. He claims he has encountered several
problems working for UC24, including: Basic medical supplies like painkillers,
pregnancy tests and swabs were not available for doctors working at the Urgent
Care centre next to Aintree hospital's A&
E department; Criteria used by non-clinical call handlers meant one of
Dr Dharmana's patients, a 19-year-old with mild chest pain, was thought to be
more urgent than a middle-aged man with a hernia who needed emergency
life-saving surgery; Non-medical staff often failing to provide basic details,
like GPs' names, whether drugs were prescribed, or what time a patient died,
in written reports passed to patients' regular doctors. Dr Dharmana said he
believed doctors across the region felt constrained by only having one option
for out-of-hours care.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Liverpool
Daily Post 12 March 2007
- Ambulance row
worker quits. Steve Jetley, an ambulance worker involved in a dispute over
leaked documents, has resigned from the service claiming that bosses are more
concerned with targets and image than patient care. He also warned that
sending ambulances to deal with calls in the West Midlands was "recklessly"
putting
Shropshire patients at risk. Service chiefs have denied the claims,
releasing figures which they say show "no significant drain" on Shropshire
resources in such circumstances. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Shropshire
Star 15 August 2007
-
Nurses loth to report abuse of the elderly. More than half of nurses
would not report the abuse of an elderly person in their care, according to a
survey published today. The poll of NHS and private sector nurses, conducted
for Help the Aged, found that a lack of training, heavy workloads and fear of
confrontation or of upsetting the victim all prevent nurses taking action. The
findings come amid growing evidence that elder abuse is a widespread problem
in families, care homes and hospitals. A study by the National Centre for
Social Research and Kings College London suggested that 342,000 older people
living in private households are subject to some form of mistreatment every
year in the UK. A report by the parliamentary joint committee on human rights
this month highlighted significant levels of abuse and neglect suffered by
older people in care homes and hospitals. Its latest study, based on 848
responses from readers of Nursing Standard and Nursing Older People, found
that 58% of nurses would not report abuse of an older person because they fear
having got it wrong. The poll revealed that 68% of nurses felt a lack of
training in how to deal with elder abuse was a barrier to them providing
decent care. Lucy Ward, social affairs correspondent
Wednesday August 29, 2007 The Guardian
-
Finance chiefs confess to burying bad news. A survey of NHS finance
professionals by the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants has found
that finance directors are reluctant to publish poor forecasts for fear of being
fired. The survey found nearly a third had given different figures to their
boards than their SHA or Monitor. The report, which also drew on previous
research, calls for greater "honesty" in forecasting. "Understandably, they may
delay bad news for as long as possible, ignoring worsening overspends to date
and hoping for miracles," it says. The institute says that forecasting is vital,
but that it can be tactical or dogged by politics. More than a quarter of the
100 surveyed said that their predictions made in December 2005 were more than
half a million pounds of the eventual figure. In-year Forecasting in the NHS
says: "The NHS financial regime and the way strategic health authorities and the
Department of Health manage the NHS don't always encourage accurate
forecasting." Steven Bliss, chair of CIMA's NHS group, said there were
suggestions that NHS finance professionals were under pressure to forecast what
people wanted to hear, and former NHS finance director Noel Plumridge said it
had happened to him. "It's quite common for any forecast that doesn't show
break-even to be returned to an organization with a question on what they are
going to about it," he said. Mr Bliss pointed out that some of the issues
highlighted had been acted upon by the Department of Health. Keith Wood, chair
of the Healthcare Financial Management Association's financial management and
research committee, said there had been major improvements, adding: "Forecasting
is not a precise science and is impacted by a number of external factors." Mr
Plumridge said he feared there was still pressure due to the need to break even
to qualify for foundation status. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Health
Service Journal 30 August 2007
- No dignity for older patients on NHS wards, says report. Health
inspectors are to mount spot checks on NHS hospitals after finding hundreds of
older people being treated without dignity or adequate privacy on wards across
England. In a report today on conditions in 23 hospitals, the Healthcare
Commission said only five complied with all the government's core standards
for dignity in care. Others were found to provide degrading treatment,
including making incontinent patients wear nappies and placing older women in
mixed-sex bays shielded by skimpy curtains on insecure rails. The commission
included Barts and the
London NHS trust among eight hospitals that failed the dignity test and
were issued with a formal warning. Another 10 trusts were told to make
improvements, including seven of the government's flagship foundation
hospitals, which were supposed to be among the best in the country. The
commission appealed to patients, carers and relatives to blow the whistle
whenever they have concerns about the treatment of vulnerable older people.
John Carvel, social affairs editor
Thursday September 27, 2007 The Guardian
- Trust tries to
gag consultants. Hospital doctors in
Cumbria have been told they could be reported to the GMC if they speak out
about controversial proposals to change hospital services. The revelation
stems from an email sent to consultants working at the West Cumberland
Hospital, Whitehaven, which warns that they could be in breach of their
contract if unauthorised statements are made. The email, sent by North Cumbria
Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, also points out that consultants could be reported
to the GMC if they provide factually inaccurate information that causes
unnecessary panic. It follows concerns voiced by consultants over Cumbria
Primary Care Trust's 'Closer to Home' consultation document, which suggests
cutting bed numbers at the West Cumberland Hospital from 350 to 172. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Doctor
14 November 2007
- You can't go
round telling people you've been sacked. Comedian and political activist
Mark Steel writes: Until recently, no one seemed to have worked out how to
apply budget cuts and privatisation to the field of care for the mentally ill.
But then the
Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust, in an effort to cut its
budget by £5m, began transferring patients to the voluntary sector, where
staff were paid much less than by the Trust. So one nurse, Karen Reissman, who
campaigned against this tactic, was suspended and then sacked, on a
magnificent set of surreal charges. The first was that she was "interviewed
for an article opposing the transfer of NHS care ... affecting the reputation
of the Trust." For example, she mentioned that because of cuts, there were 24
patients being kept in 20 beds. An elderly ward has been closed, and a
thousand patients have had to change the nurse assigned to them, so obviously
the person who affects the reputation of the Trust is the person who mentions
this in an interview. The next reason for her sacking was that, having been
suspended, "she told people she had been suspended". No wonder they've got
more mentally ill people than they can cope with if that's considered sane.
How are you supposed to not tell people you've been suspended
? What a wonderfully chaotic world if this rule applied everywhere,
with no one allowed to tell anyone they'd been suspended or sacked. Charles
Clarke and Blunkett would have to turn up every day at the Home Office,
pretend to deport someone and come home again. But the next charge went
further - she was also sacked because "she told people she was innocent". This
takes the matter beyond the issue of industrial relations and creates a
philosophical puzzle. Maybe the Trust could come up with extra charges along
these lines, such as "she contemplated the nature of innocence", or "she
offended the concept of perfection by considering human innocence despite our
essentially flawed soul".And the fourth charge was "she allowed the press to
print misleading statements about her case". What a test case that would be if
they get away with it. Every time someone has a pack of lies written about
them in the press, they'll be arrested for it. It would be quite a twist for
the McCanns - the Daily Express headline would be, "Yesterday we said they
were guilty. Today they're to be charged with allowing us to lie that they're
guilty. Have they NO shame ?" The
people of Manchester don't appear to have followed this logic, which is why
the 180 staff of the Trust have gone on strike to demand Karen's
reinstatement, and the campaign to support them is growing. Maybe that's
because the sacking seems like an attempt to intimidate all health workers
against speaking about budget cuts. Or maybe because the Manchester Mental
Health Trust is officially rated 173rd out of 175 in the country, which is
terrifying. Because it means somewhere there's two other Trusts even worse
than the one run by these idiots. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Independent
14 November 2007
-
NHS staff strike in support of 'whistleblower'. Thousands of NHS staff
are expected to take part in protests today in support of a nurse who was
sacked after speaking out against privatisation of services. Health union
Unison said it expected workers to join a day of action wearing gags to
symbolise the plight of psychiatric nurse Karen Reissmann. An indefinite
strike is already underway by 160 of her colleagues. Reissman was dismissed
last month after being found guilty of gross misconduct by
Manchester mental health and social care trust for giving an interview to
a local magazine. In it she expressed concern at moves to privatise NHS
services. She wrote on a campaign blog: "I am a mental health nurse who has
been sacked for being a whistleblower - for speaking out against cuts in
services and their privatisation." Sara Gaines and agencies
Society Guardian, Wednesday December 5 2007
-
NHS in Scotland 'not reporting mistakes'. The NHS in
Scotland is failing
to do enough to deal with mistakes and near-misses which could harm patients and
staff, a report revealed yesterday. A survey of almost 4,000 NHS workers found
54 per cent said some incidents in the health service which should have been
reported were not. Experts said a blame culture in the NHS and fears that
admitting mistakes could affect people's careers were partly to blame for the
problem. Incidents which should be reported in the NHS include mistakes which
have led to disability, injury, disease, suffering or even death. The latest
report, by NHS Quality Improvement Scotland, found that no health board had
achieved a desirable score in their measure of incident reporting.
Care & Health 13 December 2007
- Health ministry
faces 'scapegoat' claim. The Department of Health made a "scapegoat" of a
top statistician who raised the alarm with senior officials about a
contentious public-private venture to provide data to the National Health
Service, an employment tribunal heard. Prof Denise Lievesley, former chief
executive of the Information Centre, the NHS's data factory, says she
consistently highlighted concerns about the joint venture's worth and its
handling of information. Prof Lievesley's claims are the latest in a series of
questions raised about the joint venture, known as Dr Foster Intelligence,
which a committee of MPs last year said had been set up in a "backroom deal"
at a cost of £12m to the taxpayer. In an affidavit lodged at Leeds employment
tribunal, Prof Lievesley, a former Royal Statistical Society president, claims
the health department let her become a scapegoat for the deal. Stuart Ritchie,
for Prof Lievesley, said she had "consistently complained about the joint
venture and its operation" throughout her two-year tenure at the Information
Centre. Professor Lievesley says she felt she had no alternative but to sign
off in January 2006 on the creation of Dr Foster Intelligence, as talks on it
were far advanced by the time she arrived at the Information Centre in July
2005. She claims she helped the public sector secure better terms for the
joint venture, which is 50-50 owned by the Information Centre and Dr Foster
LLP, a successful private health data company. Prof Lievesley, who was a
non-executive board member of Dr Foster Intelligence, says some data processed
by the joint venture was not, in her view, "fit for purpose". She says she
high-lighted a "wholly inappropriate" use of statistics in letters to senior
officials including David Nicholson, chief executive of the NHS. The Dr Foster
deal first came under fire in a National Audit Office report in February last
year, which rebuked the health department for failing to follow a proper
tendering process and for paying too much for its half of the joint venture.
In July the Commons public accounts committee unveiled a stinging report on
the deal, in which the Information Centre paid £7.6m to Dr Foster LLP and sank
another £4.4m into the joint venture company. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Financial
Times 15 January 2008
-
|