General Election

There must be more to life than football?
User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18477
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Gibbon » Mon Dec 09, 2019 5:09 pm

Maybe he was looking at it to turn it off?

That is bizarre though. (And a bizarre choice of picture)

User avatar
Dan
Unemployed ex-pro
Posts: 7060
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:08 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Dan » Mon Dec 09, 2019 6:43 pm

Here's the incident. Best bit is the forklift drivers doing bugger all but driving round to get on telly 😀

mcteeth
Ageing international
Posts: 4598
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 9:44 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by mcteeth » Mon Dec 09, 2019 11:23 pm

At least the Tories didn't respond by fabricating an assault by an apparent leftwing activist outside the hospital to deflect attention... :footinmouth:

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27950
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:21 am

mcteeth wrote:
Mon Dec 09, 2019 11:23 pm
At least the Tories didn't respond by fabricating an assault by an apparent leftwing activist outside the hospital to deflect attention... :footinmouth:
That reminds me of the Steven Gerrard assault case.

mcteeth
Ageing international
Posts: 4598
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 9:44 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by mcteeth » Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:09 pm

Seemingly a rather worrying number of Twitter accounts spreading fake news of the photo being fake news :?

User avatar
Dan
Unemployed ex-pro
Posts: 7060
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:08 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Dan » Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:59 pm

mcteeth wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:09 pm
Seemingly a rather worrying number of Twitter accounts spreading fake news of the photo being fake news :?
https://tompride.wordpress.com/2019/12/ ... czLse_kDjY

Image

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27950
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:40 pm

The photo is not fake news, it's non-news. Hospitals don't have a bed in A&E for every patient who needs a nap, and won't have whoever wins the election. Of course politicians daren't point out this obvious truth.

I was in and out of hospital with my 1 year old daughter a few weeks ago, encountered a similar situation as the family in the news. Hour after hour sat in plastic seats passing our sick baby between my wife and myself. But when you look around the waiting room, you get a dose of realism that although your child is the most important thing to you, everyone is in the same boat with equally sick or worse kids. At one point one of the doctors had to cut off seeing a patient because there was a life-threatening emergency in the maternity ward.

Maybe we should have insisted the kid on the drip being sick every few minutes be moved so our little one could get some kip? Maybe we should have demanded the doctor see us first before rushing off to save someone's life? On our first trip we did get one of the three beds in A&E for a while, but were told we may have to give it up for someone in a more urgent condition, which eventually happened. Maybe we should have refused to move?

I do have a picture of my daughter asleep on me in one of the waiting rooms. I won't be sending it off to any newspapers because I don't think the world revolves around me. It was a horrible experience, and I could identify plenty of faults with the system. Not being able to magic up extra beds on demand ain't one of them.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15546
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by mrblackbat » Tue Dec 10, 2019 7:37 pm

Nobody is asking them to magic up extra beds. People are asking for the right number of beds to be there, and the right people to be in those beds.

It's not long ago that you were bemoaning the lack of a bed for you to sleep in in hourwife's maternity ward. Now whilst I personally think that's a step too far, I do think it's unacceptable for the patient to be waiting on plastic chairs with her parents.

A recent visit to A&E myself due to concussion left me (wobbly with concussion), a man with a broken leg and a pregnant woman left standing queueing to be checked in to see how serious whatever injury we had was. Another visit, during my other half's pregnancy, saw her left sat in a plastic chair for five hours through the night to be recommended to be discharged without ever seeing anyone. During that visit I couldn't help but notice how many elderly people were there, that should probably have been picked up under social care services, if they weren't so underfunded.

So, let's not be stoic about this: the care provided under the NHS for many people is pretty shit. People shouldn't have to put up with it.


User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27950
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Rover the Top » Wed Dec 11, 2019 8:44 am

Ah, I knew you'd pipe up missing the point as usual blackbat.


There's a world of difference between providing some basic facilities for people you know are going to spend a long, long time in hospital, and providing hundreds of spare beds in every a &e department so that every kid with flu can have one even on the busiest day. I'm sure deep down you see the problem with trying to provide a bed for every potential patient with finite space and virtually unlimited demand for a free service.

Take away the politics and it's a non story.

Now if want to talk about why we have to pay excessive parking charges to access a free service, or why using 111 takes longer than simply turning up at hospital, or why staff don't communicate whats going on and are often rude, or why you have to repeat the same details over and over again everytime someone sees to you, then there's clear problems there. Waiting times could be shorter, more doctors could be available. But there's obvious practical limitations that mean there won't be beds for everyone.

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18477
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Gibbon » Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:48 am

111 takes longer nowadays because the Tories stripped back the service a few years ago so that you’re now triaged by call centre staff with a questionnaire rather than the trained medical staff that previously took the calls. In fact most of the problems you list boil down to under funding.

It’s the same old tactic we see again and again, if you want to remove public opposition to privatising a publicly owned asset, then first underfund it and cause it to fail. I seem to remember you, RTT, saying a few years ago that your local ambulance service response times were much faster since they’d been outsourced to a private company which in my opinion is a perfect illustration of the process.

User avatar
Dan
Unemployed ex-pro
Posts: 7060
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:08 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Dan » Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:43 am


User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15546
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by mrblackbat » Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:08 pm

Rover the Top wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 8:44 am
Ah, I knew you'd pipe up missing the point as usual blackbat.


There's a world of difference between providing some basic facilities for people you know are going to spend a long, long time in hospital, and providing hundreds of spare beds in every a &e department so that every kid with flu can have one even on the busiest day. I'm sure deep down you see the problem with trying to provide a bed for every potential patient with finite space and virtually unlimited demand for a free service.

Take away the politics and it's a non story.

Now if want to talk about why we have to pay excessive parking charges to access a free service, or why using 111 takes longer than simply turning up at hospital, or why staff don't communicate whats going on and are often rude, or why you have to repeat the same details over and over again everytime someone sees to you, then there's clear problems there. Waiting times could be shorter, more doctors could be available. But there's obvious practical limitations that mean there won't be beds for everyone.
I didn't miss the point at all. And you've completely failed to acknowledge my point. I'm not suggesting there should be hundreds of beds in A&E, as you would understand if you'd read my post: you clearly haven't. I'm suggesting that A&E is being overstretched significantly because there aren't beds elsewhere, or provision for social care of the elderly.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15546
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by mrblackbat » Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:05 pm

Gibbon wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:48 am
111 takes longer nowadays because the Tories stripped back the service a few years ago so that you’re now triaged by call centre staff with a questionnaire rather than the trained medical staff that previously took the calls. In fact most of the problems you list boil down to under funding.

It’s the same old tactic we see again and again, if you want to remove public opposition to privatising a publicly owned asset, then first underfund it and cause it to fail. I seem to remember you, RTT, saying a few years ago that your local ambulance service response times were much faster since they’d been outsourced to a private company which in my opinion is a perfect illustration of the process.
That was me, and not about my local service. It was about the Red Cross taking over in the North East, to opposition from the locals despite getting a better service.

And the argument about underfunding doesn't stand, either. The Red Cross were receiving less than the NHS was, and yet providing a better service.

As for 111, the biggest problem is that all they do is refer you to A&E or the out of hours service anyway. You could do away with it and send a brochure out with the location of your nearest out of hour (and, incidentally, in my experience better performing service, coincidentally privately run, and for profit oh noes) service and the same cheat sheet that the 111 staff use to decide whether you need a&e or not. Would save loads, which could go into social care, for instance.

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18477
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: General Election

Post by Gibbon » Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:39 pm

Ah okay.

Your point about 111 is interesting, I’ve used it 7 or 8 times over the last decade. The first few times under the original system we spoke to a nurse and ended up variously with paramedics sent out to us, being advised to monitor symptoms and call back if things deteriorated, and yes a trip to A&E.

After they changed the system it became pretty much a recommendation to go to A&E each time.

It’s clearly not working as well as it did originally, that triage system probably cut down on crowded waiting rooms and unnecessary visits whereas now it adds to the problem.

Post Reply