We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
 
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

High Court Judge Imposes Death Sentences


fourm member

Likes # 0

The problems with child heart surgery in Bristol happened from 1990 to 1995, nearly 20 years ago.

Today's High Court ruling means the NHS is still not able to make the changes that will reduce the number of deaths resulting from surgeons not having enough practice for the most difficult cases.

Most of the media coverage seems to be suggesting this is a victory for patients but it is not. Until the changes in heart surgery are implemented children will die when they could have survived.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

"The medical profession is united in the belief that expert care needs to be done at fewer sites."

Quite. It makes absolute sense to concentrate the best medical skills and financial resources into fewer surgical units, so that the outcomes for children who need this specific surgery and care can be improved.

The people who feel they have won a victory in this case may well come to regret their action - one that was based on an emotive response to a considered policy change.

Like this post
carver

Likes # 0

It all depends on who you believe

Like this post
fourm member

Likes # 0

carver

The choice is between scientists who have examined the clear correlation between number of procedures and survival rate and a group of people who don't understand why they should have to travel to a hospital some distance away.

Who do you believe?

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

carver

I believe the medical profession, which is united in the belief that expert care needs to be done at fewer sites, because it makes perfect sense to adopt a policy which, it is said, will result in fewer children dying during or after heart surgery.

Judging from your response you don't believe the medical profession is right. Presumably you believe the people who don't want to travel Leeds to Newcastle or Liverpool with their children, despite the fact that the surgical outcome is likely to be better.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

Last year I brought this very subject up within the forum, mainly due to the fact that I was and still am involved with one of the mentioned hospital's in the link. That particular hospital is part of the University Hospitals of Leicester, which as a very good record on pioneering heart surgery and associated problems, and perhaps as much so for children and young adults.

There is an ongoing massive campaign for retaining these provisions and services within the East Midlands as a centralised position (which Leicester is), which also benefits young and old from further afield. This campaign as been going on for years, and due to this campaign, there have been many rethinks as to the government intentions or duty of care.

When its stated "It makes absolute sense to concentrate the best medical skills and financial resources" doesn't always improve the situation, but may well worsen the situation, and in the long term become cost or skills ineffective, especially if lives are lost.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

spuds

How can concentrating the best medical skills and resources lead to making a situation worse?

As for lives being lost, in the context of the subject under discussion the whole idea is to save lives which are at present being lost. There is general agreement in the medical profession that this plan is an excellent one - that's agreement by doctors and surgeons, not administrators.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

Forum Editor

I suggest that you come to some of the campaign meetings whose areas will be effected, and you will find that the views you suggest are just not true.

You state that " There is general agreement in the medical profession that this plan is an excellent one - that's agreements by doctor's and surgeon's, not administrators". Can you provide proof as to these doctor's and surgeon's are, and who or what they represent?.

Like this post
oresome

Likes # 0

The High Court has ruled on the legality of the consultation process, not on whether there should be fewer hospitals carrying out the surgery.

Yes the High Courts decision may delay the final outcome but I'm sure forum member would be one of the first to complain if due process wasn't carried out correctly.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

oresome

And that's one of the main points, the consultation's process as been going on for a long time, and its perhaps obvious to see the reasons why?.

Like this post
carver

Likes # 0

Some of the opinions are based on facts given by this government and are just about as true as the headline in this posting.

If I was the judge in this case and saw your posting I would be very annoyed.

Has any one tried to put names to the "Doctors" who believe it will save lives if Leeds is shut because I can't find any names who are willing to say it will cost lives.

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

Samsung Gear 2 review: Classy Tizen smartwatch is too expensive

IDG UK Sites

Eight possible names for the next version of Mac OS X: What will Apple call the follow-up to Maveri?......

IDG UK Sites

Why our gadgets will kill us all: bleating notifications, too many chargers and the proliferation...

IDG UK Sites

Inside Twitter's new design and ad offerings