Bedpan2zero
LE
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...tml?in_article_id=441603&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
further calls for dedicated military care facility
further calls for dedicated military care facility
Army Rumour Service
Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!
Daily Mail - betrayal of the wounded
- Thread starter Bedpan2zero
- Start date
LE
Perhaps Mr Ross needs a visit to Helmand to have a better understanding of his patients' needs....
David Ross, an intensive care consultant, said: "There are some senior people in the MoD, perhaps three or four senior generals in the Army, who very strongly want a military hospital.
"One of the complaints we have had is that we tell these squaddies to stop swearing. That is because it's not acceptable to use foul and abusive language in a public place.
"It seems to me some of these generals believe that side of the camaraderie among soldiers is more important than our core business, which is to make sure patients don't lose their life or limbs."
Mr Ross, medical director of University Hospital Birmingham Trust, which includes Selly Oak, added: "Some of these generals want to be in control of how we do things in this hospital but the fact is, they do not understand what it is they are trying to control."
David Ross, an intensive care consultant, said: "There are some senior people in the MoD, perhaps three or four senior generals in the Army, who very strongly want a military hospital.
"One of the complaints we have had is that we tell these squaddies to stop swearing. That is because it's not acceptable to use foul and abusive language in a public place.
"It seems to me some of these generals believe that side of the camaraderie among soldiers is more important than our core business, which is to make sure patients don't lose their life or limbs."
Mr Ross, medical director of University Hospital Birmingham Trust, which includes Selly Oak, added: "Some of these generals want to be in control of how we do things in this hospital but the fact is, they do not understand what it is they are trying to control."
Mr Ross is clearly an unreconstructed consultant who has no sense of treating the 'whole patient'. Thus, he perfectly illustrates why we need military clinicians and nurses treating soldiers. In doing so, it will save him from having to mix with the rude soldiery. What a tw#t. I'm glad he isn't a member of my profession!
I second the "TW@T" title for Ross. The fact he uses the word 'squaddie', sums up his opinions of the Armed forces.
But its not acceptable to go to a foreign country and get wounded and expect a certain level of care by people who know and understand what and where your coming from.
Richard_Hannay said:
But its not acceptable to go to a foreign country and get wounded and expect a certain level of care by people who know and understand what and where your coming from.
I hope one of our RAMC clinicians can have a free and frank discussion with him in the near future.
nurse_ratched said:
I thought that was the point of an intelligent debate on a public forum! Not least of which giving you the opportunity to present your case.
The problem in health care is that even 99.9% perfection is not good enough. That still means 1 patient in 1,000 is failed by the system. How good is the current system? It is entirely possible that a few have fallen through the net and are waiting 18 months for an appointment within the NHS. In my experience the issue is more often one of active case management, particularly of soldiers at home on long term sick leave.
With regard to the selection of the Priory, they may well have been the best of the bidders, but as you say, the appreciation was situated from the start with the decision to privatise. A fundamental in business is that your never outsource a core capability. I would said that the provision of psychiatric care is a core AMS capability.
I have seen the work of military CPNs - its excellent - but I wish it would better resourced and was available to veterans.
nurse_ratched
Old Salt
I agree - we should have a Veterans health programme. The problem is that our current establishment is designed for Serving Soldiers, any expansion would have to be properly resourced and funded. At present, there does not seem to be any political will for this.
With regard to soldiers waiting 18 months for mentral health treatment, I repeat, this is not the case and I don't know where the statistic has come from. It is easy to pull out soundbites as if they are fact. This one isn't.
With regard to soldiers waiting 18 months for mentral health treatment, I repeat, this is not the case and I don't know where the statistic has come from. It is easy to pull out soundbites as if they are fact. This one isn't.
Bedpan2zero
LE
Treatment of military patients at Selly Oak Hospital â the facts
from their website - as venty linked to.
There has been a lot of local and national press coverage surrounding the alleged treatment of military patients at Selly Oak Hospital, run by University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, in the last few days.
In the main, the articles are inaccurate, unbalanced, ill-informed and unsubstantiated. They do not, in any way, represent the views of the RCDM, the Ministry of Defence or the military patients who have received what can only be described as excellent medical and nursing care from military and UHB staff. The same can of course be said of the treatment UHB staff give to all our patients, whatever their clinical need or background.
In a letter from the Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne MP, published in the Daily Telegraph today referring to the recent coverage in the newspaper, he says: âMore widely your (Daily Telegraph) relentless attack on the work of the outstanding medical staff, military and civilian, at Selly Oak Hospital is not only demotivating for them, but also unfair. I have been there twice in recent months. It is one of the most successful hospital trusts and provides a major specialist centre for trauma, burns, plastic surgery and neuroscience.â
On no occasion has the Trust been approached to comment on any of the allegations. There have been reports of an alleged Muslim visitor verbally abusing a paratrooper at Selly Oak Hospital. Neither the Trust, nor the Ministry of Defence, has any formal or anecdotal reports or evidence that this alleged incident took place.
As far as military patients are concerned it is more important that they receive the appropriate specialist care for their specific injuries from specialist medical and nursing staff than what ward they are treated on. If a patient has a burns injury they will go to our burns unit, for a brain injury they will be treated by our neurological experts, for plastic surgery our top-class plastics team will be involved, and our specialist trauma team will care for the severely wounded.
These patients could not get the standard or breadth of specialist care they receive at Selly Oak and Queen Elizabeth hospitals in any military hospital, or on any military ward.
'there is no smoke without fire - just because a soldier didnt report the incident formally, doesnt mean that it didnt happen - he just chose not to fill in a reply slip'
from their website - as venty linked to.
There has been a lot of local and national press coverage surrounding the alleged treatment of military patients at Selly Oak Hospital, run by University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, in the last few days.
In the main, the articles are inaccurate, unbalanced, ill-informed and unsubstantiated. They do not, in any way, represent the views of the RCDM, the Ministry of Defence or the military patients who have received what can only be described as excellent medical and nursing care from military and UHB staff. The same can of course be said of the treatment UHB staff give to all our patients, whatever their clinical need or background.
In a letter from the Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne MP, published in the Daily Telegraph today referring to the recent coverage in the newspaper, he says: âMore widely your (Daily Telegraph) relentless attack on the work of the outstanding medical staff, military and civilian, at Selly Oak Hospital is not only demotivating for them, but also unfair. I have been there twice in recent months. It is one of the most successful hospital trusts and provides a major specialist centre for trauma, burns, plastic surgery and neuroscience.â
On no occasion has the Trust been approached to comment on any of the allegations. There have been reports of an alleged Muslim visitor verbally abusing a paratrooper at Selly Oak Hospital. Neither the Trust, nor the Ministry of Defence, has any formal or anecdotal reports or evidence that this alleged incident took place.
As far as military patients are concerned it is more important that they receive the appropriate specialist care for their specific injuries from specialist medical and nursing staff than what ward they are treated on. If a patient has a burns injury they will go to our burns unit, for a brain injury they will be treated by our neurological experts, for plastic surgery our top-class plastics team will be involved, and our specialist trauma team will care for the severely wounded.
These patients could not get the standard or breadth of specialist care they receive at Selly Oak and Queen Elizabeth hospitals in any military hospital, or on any military ward.
'there is no smoke without fire - just because a soldier didnt report the incident formally, doesnt mean that it didnt happen - he just chose not to fill in a reply slip'
Bedpan2zero
LE
And the Yanks are having similar problems, but at least they have military hospitals
Lessons to learn from Walter Reed disgrace
Daily Kent Stater
Issue date: 3/12/07
If you've seen the news recently, you've seen images from the Walter Reed Medical Center. Images of crumbling drywall. Images of cockroach and rat infestation. Images of mold-covered walls and ceilings. Images you certainly would not expect to find at the most premier rehabilitation and medical facility for America's veterans. Along with the disturbing images of the living conditions in the hospital are reports of patients' requests and medical care being ignored.
These reports came after the Washington Post ran a series of articles about being embedded in the hospital. They detailed the conditions and lack of care these veterans have been subjected to.
In this sad story of neglect and bureaucratic irresponsibility, we can only think of one positive outcome.
That is, thank God some news organization is digging into actual news and making a change rather than doggedly reporting on what Britney Spears did to her brown locks. The positive changes these articles can make in the lives of future residents of Walter Reed, and veterans in general, are results of the type of journalism that inspires us to continue in this field.
Those 64 words you just read are the only positive ones you will find in this editorial, because, put simply, what was happening at Walter Reed Hospital is a disgrace. It's appalling to think that the government seemed to be sweeping this under the rug until it was faced with the problem in the headlines.
So how could something like this go so overlooked? William Winkenwerder, assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, said in a news conference that he was a regular visitor to the hospital and continually asked if they needed anything. He said everyone was surprised by the Post reports.
The Post revealed just how monumentally our system can fail and how those failings caused unnecessary suffering to individuals who quite rightly deserve the best medical treatment in the whole United States.
Our generation has heard stories about the negative reaction to Vietnam veterans after they came home. We've heard about how they were demeaned and criticized simply for their service in the armed forces.
This lack of attention to veterans' medical needs and care is just as sad.
The one thing we've heard throughout the Iraq War (other than "Stay the course") has been "Support our troops." That phrase means more than plastering a magnetic ribbon to the back of your car and hanging a poster in your window. It means actually looking out for them.
Obviously, the medical center wasn't.
The public needs to not let this go easily. We need to continue to question those in charge and make sure the money is being properly allocated to veteran's hospitals. There also needs to be a continuing check on the hospitals' performance â?not just someone calling over and saying "Hey, you all OK over there?"
There needs to be investigations and financial support from the government, and there needs to be more commitment from the public to assure that the finest care is being provided to wounded troops â?that's the least we can do to match the commitment they gave all of us by serving.
The above editorial is the consensus opinion of the Daily Kent Stater editorial board.
Lessons to learn from Walter Reed disgrace
Daily Kent Stater
Issue date: 3/12/07
If you've seen the news recently, you've seen images from the Walter Reed Medical Center. Images of crumbling drywall. Images of cockroach and rat infestation. Images of mold-covered walls and ceilings. Images you certainly would not expect to find at the most premier rehabilitation and medical facility for America's veterans. Along with the disturbing images of the living conditions in the hospital are reports of patients' requests and medical care being ignored.
These reports came after the Washington Post ran a series of articles about being embedded in the hospital. They detailed the conditions and lack of care these veterans have been subjected to.
In this sad story of neglect and bureaucratic irresponsibility, we can only think of one positive outcome.
That is, thank God some news organization is digging into actual news and making a change rather than doggedly reporting on what Britney Spears did to her brown locks. The positive changes these articles can make in the lives of future residents of Walter Reed, and veterans in general, are results of the type of journalism that inspires us to continue in this field.
Those 64 words you just read are the only positive ones you will find in this editorial, because, put simply, what was happening at Walter Reed Hospital is a disgrace. It's appalling to think that the government seemed to be sweeping this under the rug until it was faced with the problem in the headlines.
So how could something like this go so overlooked? William Winkenwerder, assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, said in a news conference that he was a regular visitor to the hospital and continually asked if they needed anything. He said everyone was surprised by the Post reports.
The Post revealed just how monumentally our system can fail and how those failings caused unnecessary suffering to individuals who quite rightly deserve the best medical treatment in the whole United States.
Our generation has heard stories about the negative reaction to Vietnam veterans after they came home. We've heard about how they were demeaned and criticized simply for their service in the armed forces.
This lack of attention to veterans' medical needs and care is just as sad.
The one thing we've heard throughout the Iraq War (other than "Stay the course") has been "Support our troops." That phrase means more than plastering a magnetic ribbon to the back of your car and hanging a poster in your window. It means actually looking out for them.
Obviously, the medical center wasn't.
The public needs to not let this go easily. We need to continue to question those in charge and make sure the money is being properly allocated to veteran's hospitals. There also needs to be a continuing check on the hospitals' performance â?not just someone calling over and saying "Hey, you all OK over there?"
There needs to be investigations and financial support from the government, and there needs to be more commitment from the public to assure that the finest care is being provided to wounded troops â?that's the least we can do to match the commitment they gave all of us by serving.
The above editorial is the consensus opinion of the Daily Kent Stater editorial board.
nurse_ratched said:
Longlostlabtech
Clanker
Treatment of military patients at Selly Oak Hospital â the facts
from their website - as venty linked to.
""""There has been a lot of local and national press coverage surrounding the alleged treatment of military patients at Selly Oak Hospital, run by University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, in the last few days.
In the main, the articles are inaccurate, unbalanced, ill-informed and unsubstantiated. They do not, in any way, represent the views of the RCDM, the Ministry of Defence or the military patients who have received what can only be described as excellent medical and nursing care from military and UHB staff. The same can of course be said of the treatment UHB staff give to all our patients, whatever their clinical need or background.
In a letter from the Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne MP, published in the Daily Telegraph today referring to the recent coverage in the newspaper, he says: âMore widely your (Daily Telegraph) relentless attack on the work of the outstanding medical staff, military and civilian, at Selly Oak Hospital is not only demotivating for them, but also unfair. I have been there twice in recent months. It is one of the most successful hospital trusts and provides a major specialist centre for trauma, burns, plastic surgery and neuroscience.â
On no occasion has the Trust been approached to comment on any of the allegations. There have been reports of an alleged Muslim visitor verbally abusing a paratrooper at Selly Oak Hospital. Neither the Trust, nor the Ministry of Defence, has any formal or anecdotal reports or evidence that this alleged incident took place.
As far as military patients are concerned it is more important that they receive the appropriate specialist care for their specific injuries from specialist medical and nursing staff than what ward they are treated on. If a patient has a burns injury they will go to our burns unit, for a brain injury they will be treated by our neurological experts, for plastic surgery our top-class plastics team will be involved, and our specialist trauma team will care for the severely wounded.
These patients could not get the standard or breadth of specialist care they receive at Selly Oak and Queen Elizabeth hospitals in any military hospital, or on any military ward.""""
Re comments made as above in the last paragraph;
How dare they say that military patients
"" could not get standard or breadth of specialist care they receive at Selly Oak and Queen Elizabeth hospitals in any military hospital, or on any military ward.""
This is complete garbage; ask all those treated at QEMH, Woolwich and CMH, Aldershot especially the civilian patients taken off NHS waiting lists. Most would say they preferred the Military system as it was "cleaner, more staff, better treatment and treated as adults".
Also there were specialist units in these hospitals i.e. QEMH was a regional burns and plastics unit and also had an ITU and a Psychiatric unit.
CMH had A and E, children's ward, ITU, SCBU and maternity services.
(all closed now due to the government).
All medical military staff were well trained and up to date on most if not all procedures required by the soldiers and their local civilian communities.
This shows the person from this health trust obviously does not know the military system or the people they are treating from it.
BRING BACK UK MILITARY HOSPITALS NOW
from their website - as venty linked to.
""""There has been a lot of local and national press coverage surrounding the alleged treatment of military patients at Selly Oak Hospital, run by University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, in the last few days.
In the main, the articles are inaccurate, unbalanced, ill-informed and unsubstantiated. They do not, in any way, represent the views of the RCDM, the Ministry of Defence or the military patients who have received what can only be described as excellent medical and nursing care from military and UHB staff. The same can of course be said of the treatment UHB staff give to all our patients, whatever their clinical need or background.
In a letter from the Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne MP, published in the Daily Telegraph today referring to the recent coverage in the newspaper, he says: âMore widely your (Daily Telegraph) relentless attack on the work of the outstanding medical staff, military and civilian, at Selly Oak Hospital is not only demotivating for them, but also unfair. I have been there twice in recent months. It is one of the most successful hospital trusts and provides a major specialist centre for trauma, burns, plastic surgery and neuroscience.â
On no occasion has the Trust been approached to comment on any of the allegations. There have been reports of an alleged Muslim visitor verbally abusing a paratrooper at Selly Oak Hospital. Neither the Trust, nor the Ministry of Defence, has any formal or anecdotal reports or evidence that this alleged incident took place.
As far as military patients are concerned it is more important that they receive the appropriate specialist care for their specific injuries from specialist medical and nursing staff than what ward they are treated on. If a patient has a burns injury they will go to our burns unit, for a brain injury they will be treated by our neurological experts, for plastic surgery our top-class plastics team will be involved, and our specialist trauma team will care for the severely wounded.
These patients could not get the standard or breadth of specialist care they receive at Selly Oak and Queen Elizabeth hospitals in any military hospital, or on any military ward.""""
Re comments made as above in the last paragraph;
How dare they say that military patients
"" could not get standard or breadth of specialist care they receive at Selly Oak and Queen Elizabeth hospitals in any military hospital, or on any military ward.""
This is complete garbage; ask all those treated at QEMH, Woolwich and CMH, Aldershot especially the civilian patients taken off NHS waiting lists. Most would say they preferred the Military system as it was "cleaner, more staff, better treatment and treated as adults".
Also there were specialist units in these hospitals i.e. QEMH was a regional burns and plastics unit and also had an ITU and a Psychiatric unit.
CMH had A and E, children's ward, ITU, SCBU and maternity services.
(all closed now due to the government).
All medical military staff were well trained and up to date on most if not all procedures required by the soldiers and their local civilian communities.
This shows the person from this health trust obviously does not know the military system or the people they are treating from it.
BRING BACK UK MILITARY HOSPITALS NOW
