NHS Trust responds to mother's outrage

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/76450/hospital-trust-responds-to-mothers-outrage

Of course he is the first person ever to have had an appt or operation cancelled
at short notice,I mean we pay for the NHS and so it should provide a service whatever else is happening in anyone elses lives.Of course it would have been even more catastrophic if the hospital had been unable to let him know in time.Can you imagine the consequences of THAT? His mum would have had to bring in the police and MP to resolve that.Take a reality check you silly woman,and this is hardly headline news RO.

Good to see Christmas spirit is alive and kicking.

My Christmas Spirit is fine, Thank you.

I cannot see how this made the news page, except as a whinge. I am sorry her son is ill, but he is improving, and I have supported fundraisers in the past for him. I think it wrong that his treatment is not paid for by the NHS, but to complain so vehemently because you have had an appt cancelled?

For goodness sake why should a Drs personal information be given out to all?
I am not criticising her maternal skills, just saying I think she is silly (RO too) to have tried to make front page news out of such an item. Had it been a life saving operation I could see her point, but an outpatients appt? Come on, get a grip.

The explanation given referred to future appts, it didnt say it was the reason Adams was cancelled.

The Hosp hand delivered the letter to make they got as much notice as was possible, what more could they have done?

The details of the doctors circumstances needn't have been given out. Just something better than was given.

We will have to agree to differ, you wrote the article and clearly considered it worth column inches, I did not.

But you thought it important enough to start a thread on.

Touche! Its triviality touched my need for literary outpouring.

As far as my offerings for RO go , my scriblings fall into one of four categories:-

1. My pieces go online with very minimal editing; mainly typos and style.

2. My piece is added to as the editor thinks it needs a bit more.

3. My piece has cuts made as it presumably, is felt to be overly verbose.

4. My piece gets spiked by my editor as either not interesting or for possible legal reasons. This has only happened twice.

I am not defending anything I write. The last call is always my editor's. As to what is newsworthy, that is highly down to personal choice. Personally, I'd spike half the stuff that goes into the tabloids but most of the tabloid-buying public would disagree.

If triviality is your bag, I can highly recommend the local rag. It's full of it.[u]

Hinch

Better add a five category, has to be passed by southernbelle

But this item does highlight what sort of service we can expect in the future.

(By paying for some of his treatment, it has freed up the monies for others)

Had the letter to Rachel said the cancellation was due to a bereavement she would not have complained (she has posted a comment on the RO news article to say so.

But the letter didn't say that, it said the VERY late cancellation was down to them changing the system - which she had every right to be annoyed at.

As for whether it was newsworthy and should have been published - RO has ten years worth of stats to help decide what readers like to read.

Had the letter to Rachel said the cancellation was due to a bereavement then no it would not have been newsworthy.

But the letter didn't say that, it said the VERY late cancellation was down to them changing the system, and that IS newsworthy.

And finally, walk a mile in Rachel Kutereba shoes, she has been to hell and back and is still fighting to give her son the best possible chance, even if one disagrees with her annoyance, in my opinion, in the circumstances, one should keep one's counsel.

I would just like to point out that had I been told a valid reason for the cancellation, there would have been no complaint. The letter clearly stated that his appointment was cancelled due to a new waiting system being put in place. If this was the case surely they would have known about it weeks before so no need for the short notice.

This has nothing to do with Adam's surgery not being available on the NHS, it is completely different.

I have no issues with the Consultant and if a relative of his a passed away I am very sorry. Adam has been under this Consultant since he was born and we hold him in high regard but to me the cancellation letter we received was wrong.

You are entitled to your opinion as am I.

I think your comments are a bit harsh Southernbelle. There are ways of getting your point across without being so rude. We are talking about human beings here who have feelings and have every right to speak up if they feel they've been badly treated.

The reason Adam's mum was annoyed is because she received a letter late at night, saying her appointment the following morning was cancelled. She didn't see the letter until 10:30pm, as she wasn't home when it was delivered. She had booked a day off work and Adam's support worker at school had made other arrangements. It was too late for her to reinstate her holiday and how was she supposed to send Adam into school without any support? He's disabled and in a wheelchair.

They made absolutely no effort to get hold of her throughout the day, despite having various numbers for her (all of which have answermachines on them) and the reason quoted in the letter was pure and simple.. it was cancelled as they were introducing a new waiting system.

When Rochdale Online picked up on her story initially, there was no mention of a bereavement at all, as that only came to light after someone else contacted the NHS for their side of the story.

She has every right to be peeved, as the letter was so ironic.. cancelling her appointment to introduce a system that is supposed to stop appointments being cancelled.. Doesn't make sense to me..

No one is expecting the hospital to give chapter and verse of the consultant's personal circumstances, but an honest explanation would have made Adam's mum more understanding of the situation. The letter received clearly states that the cancellation was due to the new appointment system (maybe you should take the time to read things fully before putting comments on here). You clearly have no knowledge or understanding of Adam's condition or the importance of his reviews with his consultant. Adam's mum works full time rather than sponging off the government and unfortunately her place of work don't give holidays out for fun. She has to use a lot of her holidays for his appointments and therefore can do without wasting one unnecessarily. Adam's school had been informed that he would not be in that particular morning and therefore his support worker had been allocated to elsewhere in the school. Adam's Dad had to go to a member of staff's house to advise the cancellation to ensure Adam would have the support he required the next day.

I think your comments are offensive and out of order – ‘’that silly woman’’ has been through more than you can imagine with Adam, and unless you can walk a day in her shoes and see the struggles she faces, I suggest you keep your opinions to yourself! She never tried to ‘make front page news’, she was approached for her comments which she gave openly and honestly based on the information the hospital gave her. If they had given her the truth there would not have been a complaint. I would also like to point out that the hospital have various contact numbers for Adam’s parents, none of which were used to get in touch.

Although you may not find this important or news worthy (mainly because it does not directly affect you), it was important to Adam's family, who unlike yourself raised and discussed this issue in a dignified manner.

Mrs Wildy wrote:No one is expecting the hospital to give chapter and verse of the consultant's personal circumstances, but an honest explanation would have made Adam's mum more understanding of the situation. The letter received clearly states that the cancellation was due to the new appointment system (maybe you should take the time to read things fully before putting comments on here). You clearly have no knowledge or understanding of Adam's condition or the importance of his reviews with his consultant. Adam's mum works full time rather than sponging off the government and unfortunately her place of work don't give holidays out for fun. She has to use a lot of her holidays for his appointments and therefore can do without wasting one unnecessarily. Adam's school had been informed that he would not be in that particular morning and therefore his support worker had been allocated to elsewhere in the school. Adam's Dad had to go to a member of staff's house to advise the cancellation to ensure Adam would have the support he required the next day.

I think your comments are offensive and out of order – ‘’that silly woman’’ has been through more than you can imagine with Adam, and unless you can walk a day in her shoes and see the struggles she faces, I suggest you keep your opinions to yourself! She never tried to ‘make front page news’, she was approached for her comments which she gave openly and honestly based on the information the hospital gave her. If they had given her the truth there would not have been a complaint. I would also like to point out that the hospital have various contact numbers for Adam’s parents, none of which were used to get in touch.

Although you may not find this important or news worthy (mainly because it does not directly affect you), it was important to Adam's family, who unlike yourself raised and discussed this issue in a dignified manner.

I know from his young years what Adam's Mum has been through and what every step of his life she has had to fight for,She is a credit to Adam and to every parent of a disabled child fighting for everything they need and deserve. A proper explanation was all that was needed but then again what "IF" it had been more urgent were is the back up in situations like this ? and she is right to expose what is happening Adam has been through more than enough in his 10 years and his care needs to be continuous not reliant on one consultant which proves a point in the direction of care we are currently in !

[size=18]Poor communication, pure and simple. Easily avoided in future if a bit of commonsense is applied. [/size

Having just got back and read all the posts on this and on RO again, I see that I only fully read the first article with the contents of the letter explaine as below:

“The letter explained that they were putting a new system in place which they say aims to provide more choice of appointments to patients and reduces the number that need to be changed by the hospital. It went on to say that our details will be added to the waiting list and they will write to us approximately six weeks before the next appointment is due."

I did not take from this that the new system was the reason given for the cancellation.

BUT I now realise (having fully read both articles again and the comments below the second one) that my comments were as a result of my own negligence in fully understanding the contents of the letter.

I therefore unreservedly apologise to Mrs Kutereba for my remarks.
I also owe an apology to RO for suggesting they print unimportant items.

A lesson learned.

Having read through all the above -. Well done everyone and might I just add the same to southernbelle for her last post, a gracious lady indeed.

Indeed, quite an emotive subject, being lied to one way and the other by the medical profession. This is a problematic aspect of our NHS. The problems of misinformation range from 'asking relatives for permission to take a tissue sample', then secretly removing many body organs, as happened at Alder Hey for many years, to putting patients on the Liverpool Pathway without telling them or their relatives. The whole culture of misinforming patients and relatives needs to be recognised for the problem that it is, and stopped.

Hinch wrote: tell 'em well-meaning lies and they will get angry.

When people or their relatives are seriously ill, they have to put great trust in the medical profession. If people are then lied to in one of their most vulnerable situations in life, as does happen, it can have more serious and long term emotional and psychological consequences than simply making people angry. Quite a number of patients and relatives come out of such an experience with a changed, more cynical and mistrustful attitude to life and society.