Printable View
Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere, but shows how vital it is in certain jobs to "never assume" and to check thoroughly all details!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7358644.stm
As if the trauma of having one kidney removed wasn't enough:eek:
It was on the news last night. Mary Harney said something about errors occuring in the best healthcare system in the world, which personally I thought was unnecessary, I mean why have a pop at Cuba when she's asked about this particular case? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sligo Hornet
My mother was going in for an eye operation and they had the wrong eye to be operated on written down.
She actually had a job convincing them otherwise even though anyone with half a brain would have been able to tell which eye had the problem.
She was not surprised about this mess up when she heard about it yesterday.
You can blame Harney for a lot of things but might be unfair to lump her with this one. I don't think she can stop surgeons from making mistakes.
I know it is off topic but linked to surgeon errors. I see RTE reported last week that Dr. Neary in Drogheda (he of the serial hysterectomies) has been paid by the HSE ever since his gross errors were detected. :rolleyes:
I don't feckin believe this country. anywhere else in the world he'd have been locked up. He Did my cousin's wife and she's still awaiting compensation AFAIKQuote:
Originally Posted by pete
poor kid. I noticed the story on rte's website yesterday.
All part of the general state of the Health Service though. Of course, some of us would think it's part of the plan - afterall a functioning public health service would make a private health system less attractive to the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
I don't think removing Harney will make a different though as this is government policy. The opposition are pretty much offering the same policies so I think the public have now to come to accept the Health Service is doomed & little point in worrying about which explains election results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
I would have no problem with 100% public funded system paid proportionally by income tax or similar. Most people will an income already pay money to the VHI or others although this is subsidised by the state. Would like to see someone provide a costing for this so at least would know what getting into. In such a system I think private hospitals count co-exist allowing choice. There are already a lot of private hospitals anyway run by religious orders.
Make no mistkaes Pete, harney is definitely pushing her agenda in health.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
Before the last election, all opposition parties (including the greens) were against co-location. FF when they were canvassing were against it too. Co-location involves giving public land (with no garantee's that they'll only be hospitals) to for profit organisations to build hospitals on, and giving them massive tax breaks to build them with. It suits this agenda for the public system to be totally fooked, as it makes the untruths spouted about co-location (like the numbers of beds that'd be freed up) more attractive.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
The difference with the religious order run private hospitals is that they are not for profit for shareholders, unlike the one's like the beacon. The beacon is the prime example - supposedly an a&e, but only open office hours. Most a&e admissions outside those times. That is Harney's vision.
Still, it's not like companies that have her husband's company representing them are at the forefront of wanting to cash in on co-location or anything...
Patients don't need choice, they need competent professional care. I personally would ban all private hospitals. If we can't put in place a proper healthcare system then what the hell are we playing at ? The whole point of paying tax is that it allows the Government to fund things (Health, education, transport, etc) which are just not appropriate to a market system. Or at least I thought that was the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
Whatever way you look at it currently either the state is incapable of running the system or it does no have the funds to run it properly. If you wants 100% public system this means more tax - again you can debate how this is raised but it has to be got from somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD
The system was broken before co-location so I don't see that as the cause. I doubt it is the solution either.
I think the idea of choice is that there will always be differences in standards. If you have choice then everyone gets to use the good hospital & the worst ones will lose funding as no "customers".
With over half the population already paying for health insurance as well as tax, it surely wouldn't be much more for those that would be paying to have compulsory health insurance.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
But, the electorate has shown it wants it everyway - they vote for parties that continually cut tax, and specifically give avoidance measures to the super rich, while at the same time bitching about public services.
There were probably about 5 people in that operating theatre who should have spotted the mistake. Checking which side of the patient you're operating doesn't take funding, resources or large structural reform. The mistake happened because people weren't doing their job properly, you can't blame this one on society.
Bang on the button, Dodge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
She is pursing a certain line that even her advisors have difficulty understanding let alone endorse.
AFAIK, some senior civil servants and members of government are aghast at both the reasons for, and the methods in which she is intent on implementing this form of a two tier healthcare system.
Then again, she may not be in a position to rail road these through for much longer ;)
Here is a Dail debate from last night in relation to people with Acquired Brain Injury.
Note her amendments which do nothing to address the original motion
And if they were working under pressure because of the staff embargo, working in less than ideal working conditions? Ultimately it's human error, doesn't mean that you can dismiss possible contributory factors that could've lead to the situation where the mistake was made.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bald Student
I agree. Is there a reason why no one has costed this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
I think the problem may be that would need a large tax to bring this about. I am not sure of the amount but the state already subsidies private health insurance & system is under funded.
Checking your left and right can't take more than a few seconds. That check wasn't skipped because of staff shortages, it was skipped because the people there forgot to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
I had a knee op last year when I was working in the US and the surgeon marked the bad knee with a biro mark. Then the nurse and an aide did the same thing. Simple but effective. Took all of 10 seconds. This is done for all ops now in Pennsylvania. Don't just trust notes or x-rays. Ask the patient or the patients guardians as well. Feel terrible for the kid and his family.
Yes, if only he'd thought to write on his kidney. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
I agree with Student Mullet here. You can provide all the excuses you like, but ultimately this is a failure by highly paid staff to perform a simple check.
My point is repititon not pen marks. Repititon over arrogance.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83