They are at IT again

#1
Gen Lillywhite on the television saying there is good practice for serving soldiers with all health conditions, the story broke on Saturday about EX Forces Mental Health, the two are very different and for those who suffer now must get very angry that still the Mod shirk their 'Duty of Care'.

Why DID the Mod feel the need to employ a PRIVATE Healthcare company to treat those with psychological conditions? Why did they NOT use the NHS if the NHS is up to the mark?

It has been proven that the NHS don't have the Care Pathways for the ex military and the SPVA are failing in their duties to all those who are now seeking a WP, or who already have a WP for service related Mental Health!

I have met many WP Welfare Officers who have to pick up the pieces once an individual has got that far. However, with the NHS doing little of nothing for those who present with Combat Stress, why, well for the most the GP has been told nothing or what is on offer, where it is or how to access it.

Why the Mod are getting involved with EX forces healthcare who knows, as they will tell you, it is the job of the NHS, yet the SPVA seem imputant in getting the NHS to move forward on this very issue.

Is there the Political Will to see all the services that have already been passed, such as the Priority Treatment to ALL ex servicemen and women who need said help?

Why is it that Hull PCT can have a dedicated service and other PCT's don't, where is the priority and who sets said priority?

Again government lead generals seem intent on muddying the waters, there are real problems for those who have served and we don't want Ostrichs burying their heads in the sand, be they politicians, or military.

I wonder if General Lillywhite would answer the important questions? Or if he would be allowed to by HIS Political Masters, Mr Kevan Jones MP (Veterans Minister)
 
#2
CharlieBubbles said:
Why is it that Hull PCT can have a dedicated service and other PCT's don't, where is the priority and who sets said priority?
Probably because there is a real or perceived need in their area and someone there is switched on enough to realise this and act on it. Most PCTs, however, probably take the view that it is simply not cost effective to cater for what is (at present) a relatively small target population.
 
#3
With regard to priority treatment
below is an excerpt from the reply I received from SP&VA after I sent a letter to thePrime Minister (who passed the buck), also attached is the govt. response to the e-petition to No 10 regarding war pensioners and priority treatment.

SP&VA said:
It may help if I clarify the situation regarding priority treatment, which is contained in the Welsh Health Circular WHC (2004) 045. NHS hospitals should give priority to war pensioners both as outpatients and inpatients for examinations or treatment that relates to the condition of (sic) conditions for which they receive a pension or gratuity.

The degree of priority given is a matter of clinical management and therefore solely the responsibility of the hospital doctor in charge of your case who has taken into account the clinical needs of all their patients, regardless of war pension status.
...
The priority treatment scheme is for NHS Inpatient and Outpatient treatment and not for appointments with your GP
My bold - the degree of priority is decided by the hospital doctor/consultant, however one has to be referred to the hospital by a GP who does not have to recognise priority for war pensioners/AFCS recipients - so it boils down to whether your GP surgery is pro/contra military personnel - the first GP I saw did not recognise or agree with priority treatment for War pensioners.
 

Attachments

#4
I realise that this article in todays Daily Express touches on Beharry VC thread.Opinions chaps.

Army brass snub hospital for injured

MILITARY top brass have snubbed calls for a hospital dedicated to Britain’s Armed Forces and veterans, the Daily Express can reveal today.

In a pointed rebuff to UK troops, they insist current NHS provision is adequate and defiantly refuse to see the need for a specialist military medical unit.

The Army’s most senior medical officer has said the case is now closed and he is not willing to discuss the issue any further.

Lieutenant General Louis Lillywhite made his views known following an audit which found there were no more than 65 service personnel in-patients currently in NHS wards. “That does not make a military hospital,” he said.

“Furthermore I think it’s right that I, the Surgeon General, should be focused on deployed hospitals rather than peacetime hospitals.

“As far as I’m concerned the argument is closed – the numbers don’t justify it.”

His comments have infuriated war veterans and campaigners who say there is an overwhelming need for the dedicated care and treatment of our troops and veterans.

Over the weekend, VC hero Johnson Beharry, Britain’s most-decorated serving soldier, attacked the Government over its treatment of traumatised troops.
ì
As far as I’m concerned the argument is closed – the numbers don’t justify it.

Lance Corporal Beharry, 29, whose brave actions saved 20 comrades in Iraq, said the lack of resources for helping depressed veterans was a “disgrace”.

Johnson, who was badly wounded in the head in Al Amarah in 2004, said he went to an NHS hospital one night to get help for appalling pain – and was forced to wait for three hours before he was treated.

He said: “Ex-servicemen and women do not get the treatment they need. The Government is not doing enough for soldiers.”


Falklands hero Denzil Connick, who supported the Daily Express Hospital For Heroes crusade, said: “If you speak to anyone who has been injured in the Armed Forces they will all say a dedicated military hospital is needed. I will argue until I am blue in the face that the Government has not got to grips with the veterans situation.”

Lance Corporal Connick, 51, who lost a leg in battle, delivered his own petition to Downing Street, urging the Government to look after returning troops.

It was signed by 113,000 people, including Falklands hero Simon Weston. Lance Cpl Connick led the Daily Express march on Downing Street to hand in our petition of over 50,000 signatures in September.

Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox said: “Our duty of care lasts a lifetime and in areas such as mental health we need to find ways of picking up problems which may take years to manifest themselves.”

More than 5,000 servicemen have been injured in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001 and a significant number complain they are forgotten.

Lt Gen Lilywhite said he had visited Selly Oak Hospital, in Birmingham, where most troops wounded in action overseas are sent, and was “quite content with the quality of care”.

He claimed “grumbles” about the ageing Victorian hospital would vanish next year.

He said: “Selly Oak does not give the ambience of a modern hospital. The new hospital in Birmingham will.”
In December, Gordon Brown wrote to the Daily Express ignoring our pleas for a dedicated military hospital.

Mr Brown explained that five major NHS Trust hospitals would help provide care for returning wounded personnel and said there was “no difference” in the medical treatment of veterans and civilians
. :roll:
But it's nice to see Cyclops is happy,but Gordo,I dont know many civvies who get blown up by a IED on the local High Street,do you?

But the's some good comments by readers.This one by KarlH sums it up..

ARMY CHIEFS SNUB CALL FOR MILITARY HOSPITAL

02.03.09, 12:55pm

The article states

"The Army’s most senior medical officer has said the case is now closed and he is not willing to discuss the issue any further.

Lieutenant General Louis Lillywhite made his views known following an audit which found there were no more than 65 service personnel in-patients currently in NHS wards. “That does not make a military hospital,” he said.

“Furthermore I think it’s right that I, the Surgeon General, should be focused on deployed hospitals rather than peacetime hospitals.

Well Lieutenant General Loius (Lillylivered) Lillywhite how many "wars have you ever fought in ?
By reading this piece you are just another arrogant, self centred tos*er who should be stripped of your rank, and thrown out of the Army with a dishonourable discharge.
You are not fit to be in the army, but then again, who would employ you in civvy street.

WAN*ER

• Posted by: KarlH •
Wonder if he's an ARRSER?...
 
S

Screw_The_Nut

Guest
#5
I was going to get the keys to the armoury, but just remembered it's still open over the H Harman incident...

To The Armoury!!!

PS. But seriously, some officers are mad, some are bad and some deserve to be stripped and hung and drawn and quartered and thrown to the hungry pigs.... :x
 
#6
Screw_The_Nut said:
I was going to get the keys to the armoury, but just remembered it's still open over the H Harman incident...

To The Armoury!!!

PS. But seriously, some officers are mad, some are bad and some deserve to be stripped and hung and drawn and quartered and thrown to the hungry pigs.... :x
I've known the man in question for over 30 years, when I first met him I thought he was a useless tosser that would do anything to get to where he wanted to be. 30 years and still nothing to change my mind.
 
S

Screw_The_Nut

Guest
#7
And one more thing... Surely it doesn't come down to ONE man to say ye or nay or any matter in the MOD? Is the whole organisation staffed with yes bods, and snivvelling career-men?
 
#8
Screw_The_Nut said:
And one more thing... Surely it doesn't come down to ONE man to say ye or nay or any matter in the MOD? Is the whole organisation staffed with yes bods, and snivvelling career-men?
Ermm - Spookily yes
 
#10
roadster280 said:
When we HAD Military hospitals, they didn't just treat soldiers, sailors and airmen. They treated families and local folk. A far wider population than just mil folk. Much better for the staff to see a wider range of cases. I think I'm right in saying that DKMH in Catterick was a major trauma centre for the area. How valuable is that?

As for the Lt-Gen saying that he should be responsible for deployed hospitals, I have no problem with that. There should be another Lt_Gen (or RN/RAF 3 star) in charge of peacetime military hospitals. And then a 4* in charge of the pair of them.
Nothing like jobs for the boys.....

So that would be two massive wage and pension packets to find in our budget.

I have no drama with the current arrangement, particularly if there are sufficient military/military orientated personnel to help the wounded soldiers.

Military wards with security would be nice (nothing mental just coded doors or similar), and of course military welfare facilities. If that means the soldiers get better treatment than the civvies, so be it. Ie free phones by the bed and tvs etc.

However, there should be some sort of fast track procedure for us. Sitting around waiting is not really acceptable for someone who has been injured on behalf of the nation. Ie the JB incidient above.

Perhaps instead of ONE hospital, there should be facilities where a serviceman/ex-serviceman, could attend a medcen and get a dedicated treatment system through that, at local hospitals. A bit like a BUPA system.
 
#11
Too right we shouldn't have military hospitals.

Dedicated wards, staffed by AMS personnel, in civilian hospitals is the best solution. Whether that should be several MDHU's (the status quo) or one big wing at selly oak (the current plan) is a different question.

Edited to add:

If JB had massive head pain living anywhere except Haslar, then he'd be just as f*cked if we did have hopsitals. We also need a fast track system for mil personnel in the NHS.
 
#12
Please - all you outraged dullards - have a search and dig up the last time this was discussed on here. It was, despite best spaz efforts, a pretty resounding result in not having a dedicated mil hospital for all the bleeding obvious reasons. If you lot did half as much in the real world as you bang on about on here, we'd have no recession or PTSD - it was a sad day when you discovered the internet wasn't just for pictures of pretty girls.
 
#13
roadster280 said:
chocolate_frog said:
roadster280 said:
As for the Lt-Gen saying that he should be responsible for deployed hospitals, I have no problem with that. There should be another Lt_Gen (or RN/RAF 3 star) in charge of peacetime military hospitals. And then a 4* in charge of the pair of them.
Nothing like jobs for the boys.....

So that would be two massive wage and pension packets to find in our budget.
Ah yes. Make them both Brigs then and a 2* i/c. Or a couple of lancejacks and a fullscrew if preferred on cost basis.

I had treatment at DKMH, RAF(H) Wroughton, RAF(H) Wegberg and BMH Rinteln. All of it was very good. It may have been expensive, but that's the nature of the beast.

Mr C - so the outcome of a debate on ARRSE means it's all blx then? Surely the patients should be the ones who decide where they're getting the best treatment.

Just because they get the best treatment at army facilities doesn;t mean it would be the same at a military hospital.

The MOs serving in MDHUs and elsewhere are some of the very best trained doctors in the world, particularly in trauma. There wouldn't be nearly enough traffic in a military hospital to maintain this, so standards would definitely drop. This is also something that your average patient wouldn't conisder.
 
#14
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
Please - all you outraged dullards - have a search and dig up the last time this was discussed on here. It was, despite best spaz efforts, a pretty resounding result in not having a dedicated mil hospital for all the bleeding obvious reasons. If you lot did half as much in the real world as you bang on about on here, we'd have no recession or PTSD - it was a sad day when you discovered the internet wasn't just for pictures of pretty girls.
That's the trouble with t0ssers like your good self. Puffed up windbags full of their own importance who think they have the answer to everything.

Search all you like there is still a massive feeling that the Military should still have military hospitals in all the major garrisons and medical reception stations elsewhere. Because miserable people like you only see the cost in terms of money it will never happen. The cost in terms of Army morale, especially amongst the injured and sick is astronomical. When did our troops stop deserving the very best then Mr C Windbag?

Arguments about training the staff are just so much claptrap, for specialisations they can be seconded or rotated round military establishments. The Army trained its own doctors and nurses before but had to give it up when it got rid of all the hospitals.

Now why don't you go back to grooming little girls in their chatrooms?
 
#15
Markintime said:
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
Please - all you outraged dullards - have a search and dig up the last time this was discussed on here. It was, despite best spaz efforts, a pretty resounding result in not having a dedicated mil hospital for all the bleeding obvious reasons. If you lot did half as much in the real world as you bang on about on here, we'd have no recession or PTSD - it was a sad day when you discovered the internet wasn't just for pictures of pretty girls.
That's the trouble with t0ssers like your good self. Puffed up windbags full of their own importance who think they have the answer to everything.

Search all you like there is still a massive feeling that the Military should still have military hospitals in all the major garrisons and medical reception stations elsewhere. Because miserable people like you only see the cost in terms of money it will never happen. The cost in terms of Army morale, especially amongst the injured and sick is astronomical. When did our troops stop deserving the very best then Mr C Windbag?

Arguments about training the staff are just so much claptrap, for specialisations they can be seconded or rotated round military establishments. The Army trained its own doctors and nurses before but had to give it up when it got rid of all the hospitals.

Now why don't you go back to grooming little girls in their chatrooms?
Its not just about training specialty posts, its about maintaining clinical skills in conditions that would normally be treated in the NHS. With such a small army, we cannot have military medical staff waiting for cases in a dedicated hospital. We should have dedicated wards with AMS staff who, when not busy with army cases, can act as supernumary staff for the NHS hospitals. Hang on, we already do that and both the AMS and the NHS love the arrangement.
 
#16
jew_unit said:
roadster280 said:
chocolate_frog said:
roadster280 said:
As for the Lt-Gen saying that he should be responsible for deployed hospitals, I have no problem with that. There should be another Lt_Gen (or RN/RAF 3 star) in charge of peacetime military hospitals. And then a 4* in charge of the pair of them.
Nothing like jobs for the boys.....

So that would be two massive wage and pension packets to find in our budget.
Ah yes. Make them both Brigs then and a 2* i/c. Or a couple of lancejacks and a fullscrew if preferred on cost basis.

I had treatment at DKMH, RAF(H) Wroughton, RAF(H) Wegberg and BMH Rinteln. All of it was very good. It may have been expensive, but that's the nature of the beast.

Mr C - so the outcome of a debate on ARRSE means it's all blx then? Surely the patients should be the ones who decide where they're getting the best treatment.

Just because they get the best treatment at army facilities doesn;t mean it would be the same at a military hospital.

The MOs serving in MDHUs and elsewhere are some of the very best trained doctors in the world, particularly in trauma. There wouldn't be nearly enough traffic in a military hospital to maintain this, so standards would definitely drop. This is also something that your average patient wouldn't conisder.
If we went back to military hospitals the doctors would still be serving in the field in places such as Afghanistan. The experience they would gain would then be spread around all the hospitals. As has been mentioned DKMH was the major trauma hospital in that area and used to receive all the road traffic accident victims from the A1 in that area. At the moment unless you serve at Selly Oak you are not that likely to see GSW trauma so all the experience is in one hospital. The plans to scrap hospitals were drawn up in the euphoria of the 'peace dividend' when the short-sighted assumed that there would be little need for hospitals. If military hospitals are so useless how come we are the only nation to have scrapped them?
 
#17
jew_unit said:
Markintime said:
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
Please - all you outraged dullards - have a search and dig up the last time this was discussed on here. It was, despite best spaz efforts, a pretty resounding result in not having a dedicated mil hospital for all the bleeding obvious reasons. If you lot did half as much in the real world as you bang on about on here, we'd have no recession or PTSD - it was a sad day when you discovered the internet wasn't just for pictures of pretty girls.
That's the trouble with t0ssers like your good self. Puffed up windbags full of their own importance who think they have the answer to everything.

Search all you like there is still a massive feeling that the Military should still have military hospitals in all the major garrisons and medical reception stations elsewhere. Because miserable people like you only see the cost in terms of money it will never happen. The cost in terms of Army morale, especially amongst the injured and sick is astronomical. When did our troops stop deserving the very best then Mr C Windbag?

Arguments about training the staff are just so much claptrap, for specialisations they can be seconded or rotated round military establishments. The Army trained its own doctors and nurses before but had to give it up when it got rid of all the hospitals.

Now why don't you go back to grooming little girls in their chatrooms?
Its not just about training specialty posts, its about maintaining clinical skills in conditions that would normally be treated in the NHS. With such a small army, we cannot have military medical staff waiting for cases in a dedicated hospital. We should have dedicated wards with AMS staff who, when not busy with army cases, can act as supernumary staff for the NHS hospitals. Hang on, we already do that and both the AMS and the NHS love the arrangement.
What is wrong with a military hospital which also acts as an NHS hospital for the local population? That's how it used to work, spare beds were taken up by the local populace.


Edited to Add: jew_unit I know you are currently at medical school so I'm not sure how much contact you actually have with the AMS but there are many who just put a brave face on things. In the quiet of the mess there is a great deal of unhappiness, not at the standard of training but at the lack of service to the Army and the feeling of losing contact with military life that many of them either feel in themselves or observe in others.
 
A

ALVIN

Guest
#18
Why, does it look bad if a dedicated hospital is built ? That is the way the so called top brass and polititions think. The N.H.S is not suitable for veterans as a whole. This is because the vast majority of N.H.S. staff are NOT trained in battlefield trauma. To reinforce my point, why are there 3 combat stress units in the U.K , who specilise in militery psyciatric disorders ! --------- Its just not good enough, infact its a bloody disgrace, which can not, and will not be tolerated in todays society ! :evil: :evil: :evil:
 
#19
Is the reasoning behind wanting a military hospital, purely a medical one?

i.e. it would be staffed by specialists in 'military' type injuries and conditions, thus increasing the efficacy of the treatment?

or is it that some Armed Service personnel have the self percieved 'hero' status, and truly believe that they should have their own hospitals due to what they have percieved or actually done for the UK population?

Because if that is the case, surely the workings of nurses, carers for the disabled etc would deserve their own hospitals also??
 
#20
The costs of that would be through the roof, particularly as the NHS .would never pay for any of it. It would also lead to problems if a large number of mil casualties need to be treated. You can't exactly kick people out of post op just because they don't wear green.

Besides, if the hospital was large enough to keep staff properly trained (the size of Frimley or even Selly Oak) then there would be no advantage to the military as there would still be far more civilians present than there would be soldiers.

Edited to add: thats in response to markintime. I also have quite a lot of contact with serving MO's, and this seems to be the prevailing view. The training argument is also the one kicked around the shadow cabinet.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S The Intelligence Cell 24
msr The Intelligence Cell 29
M The Intelligence Cell 14

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top