Hospital condemned for "horrific" care

[WriteDown]

LONDON (Reuters) - An independent inquiry said on Tuesday it had found "shocking" standards of care at a National Health Service hospital trust in the midlands, including patients being left unwashed for up to a month.

The inquiry's chairman Robert Francis said many patients treated by the Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust had "suffered horrific experiences that will haunt them and their loved ones for the rest of their lives."

"I heard so many stories of shocking care ... The deficiencies at the trust were systemic, deep-rooted and too fundamental to brush off as isolated incidents," he said.

Last year a damning report from the Healthcare Commission, an NHS watchdog, said it had found appalling standards of emergency care at the trust and said patients would have died as a consequence of the deficiencies it found.

The chairman and chief executive of the trust, which runs an accident and emergency department at Stafford Hospital, stood down in March last year.....

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE61N3J620100224



Sounds like a fun place to be treated.

[Gman]

1. More fodder for Sean Hannity and the rest of the RW

to say this is what "socialized medicine" looks like.

[WriteDown]

5. This particular place sounds like something out of a Stephen King novel...

""suffered horrific experiences that will haunt them and their loved ones for the rest of their lives."

[Gman]

9. all the more why Hannity et al will repeat this story ad nauseum

I expect Congressman Boner to be talking about this.

[WriteDown]

13. Didn't he just die in Canada? nt

[liberalhistorian]

19. Sounds like the care received by my nearly lifelong

best friend a couple years ago at one of the "best" hospitals in the state; "care" that was directly responsible for killing her after a year of terrible physical suffering that included nearly six straight months of hospitalization. The hospital tried its best to scrub her medical records before turning them over to her family's attorney, but he knew their "tricks" and didn't let them get away with it. The two "doctors" involved will now likely lose their licences after the legal action is over, and good riddance. Any "doctor" who committed the kind of negligence they did should not be practicing, period. And her "care" and her loss will haunt her family and friends for the rest of our lives. Not that the AMA and politicians care. They're too busy pushing for malpractice "reforms" that will mean no one will be able to seek any redress, no matter how grievous the negligence, and protecting themselves from accountability for the consequences of any negligence.

So, yes, this is a horrific story and everyone involved needs to be held strictly accountable and punished and the place shut down, as well as compensation and counseling for the victims. But this also happens here, in this country, every day, even in the so-called "best" hospitals. And for people without money and/or insurance, they're lucky to get care at all, let alone quality care.

[conservdem]

23. What is a good reply to such an assertion from the right?

[secondwind]

2. we have that here now, even without healthcare reform!

[WriteDown]

3. I wonder if the patients are able to sue the hospital in this case. nt

[clu]

4. was it a hospital or a nursing home?

there have been a few homes in TX with conditions that sound about the same.

[WriteDown]

12. In New Orleans too. nt

[Christa]

6. Our sick people have to die at home or in the street

if they have no health insurance.

[Historic NY]

7. How about the nursing home horrors here in the US ?...

we sweep most stuff under the carpet.

[Christa]

8. Thank you!

Frankly, I a sick and tired to hear about the horrific care of the NHS. At least they HAVE health care.

[WriteDown]

11. The difference is that you have no recourse in these situations. nt

[Horse with no Name]

15. You don't have it in all of the US either

Tort reform nixes it as "frivolous".

[WriteDown]

16. Tort reform has passed?

Somebody tell McDonald's and the McCafe.

[Horse with no Name]

17. In Texas it has. It was GWB's gift

Just ask someone poor that has been injured by malpractice and they will tell you that according to the law, their lives are worthless--no matter how egregious the offense.

[WriteDown]

18. I see plenty of lawsuits in TX. I'm in Dallas which is pretty blue though. nt

[Horse with no Name]

30. Wealthy people can sue.

Poor people cannot.
Do you not see the disparity of THAT?

[liberalhistorian]

31. No, he doesn't. He's one of those dips who

believe the financial gurus should be able to do whatever they want and that consumers are always at fault. He's one of those who believe that ALL lawsuits, especially medical ones, are frivolous and shouldn't be permitted, those harmed or killed by real negligence be damned. That is, until something happens to him or one of his family or friends. He's also quite quick and ocntent to point any and all flaws of the health care systems of other industrialized countries while completely failing to acknowledge that such happens here as well and that the difference is that, if you don't have money or insurance, you ain't gettin' good or any care at all.

[WriteDown]

32. Walk into any lawyer's office with a decent case against a large corporation and you can sue...

And pro bono. Especially if its a tobacco corp.

[liberalhistorian]

33. Ummm........no, that isn't true at all.

You obviously know very little about actually being in the legal field if you honestly believe that. Just parroting RW talking points ain't gonna cut it. Attorneys specialize just like doctors do and, just like not just any doctor can handle every treatment, not "any" attorney can handle "any" case. And preparing cases, especially the kind you're talking about, takes a tremendous amount of work, time, effort, plenty of staff and plenty of upfront money, sometimes tens of thousands if not more. Solo attorneys and small firms, and many medium firms, are not up to being able to do that.

But thanks for playing and displaying your blissful righteous ignorance yet again. :hi:

[WriteDown]

34. If the payout is worth it, they'll do it...

How do you think John Edwards made his fortune? And he wasn't representing "rich" clients. Of course you can't walk into a corporate attorney's office to try to sue someone over hot coffee. Nice red herring though. Thanks for playing! :rofl:

[liberalhistorian]

37. Really? A solo real estate or probate attorney

or a small firm is gonna have the knowledge, staff and resources to put months of work and tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of dollars upfront? You think any solo or small firm attorney is gonna be able to do that, especially with no litigation training or knowledge (and believe it or not, that takes specialized training and knowledge that not every attorney has and undergoes. It's like expecting all doctors to know all facets of all medical specialties no matter what).

Edwards was a litigation specialist. And he was absolutely right in those cases and the plaintiffs deserved to win. And I thank God for the specialist who is handling the case of my dead friend, for her family, against the doctors and hospital who killed her. She and her family deserve justice and he will get it for them.

Somehow, I don't think you'd walk into a heart surgeon's office and expect him or her to perform your neurosurgery. Or vice versa. Then again, if you don't have good insurance or money, the surgeon isn't gonna care or touch you, so it's a moot point.

You still have no idea what the fuck you're talking about in this regard. You really need to stop absorbing RW talking points, it's affecting your brain.

[WriteDown]

40. I think you mean ambulance chasers, and like John Edwards....

They do exist. Of course we know he's a phony bologna at this point.

[liberalhistorian]

43. Just because he's a disgusting phony trash in his personal life

doesn't mean he wasn't on the right side in his cases. They were egregious negligence that caused great harm and the plaintiffs had every right to compensation. Funny how people call them "ambulance chasers" until something happens to them and they need one themselves.

And you appear to be under the delusion that all attorneys make tons of money and, no matter the size of their office or specialty, can afford to take on any of these cases, even for months at a time. That is so far beyond true that I don't even know where to begin. When hubby was in private practice he not only hardly made any money at all (because people couldn't afford to pay him, but he still wanted to help), there was NO WAY he could have taken on a case that would have required tens of thousands of dollars upfront in preparation costs and months of preparation. NO. WAY. And the same is true for other solo and small firm attorneys I've worked with and known. One would sometimes have to forgo any payment to himself in order to be able to pay me. Now, if you're a corporate shill wasting your skills helping corporations screw people over, then that's a different story entirely. You not only don't have to worry about money, you'll have more than enough of it. Funny how people never seem to care about that, only about attorneys who try to get justice for people.

But the notion that all attorneys are rich is as false and wrong and nonsense as is the notion that all doctors are rich, when the majority are not and far from it (especially primary care doctors who do much of the necessary "grunt" work in medicine), for the same reasons that the majority of attorneys are not. It's just that the specialists and surgeons make it seem like they all are.

[WriteDown]

45. All of John's cases were egregious negligence? Really?

Please link to that claim. And you may want to state what causes cerebral palsy while you're at it.

[liberalhistorian]

24. Let me tell you something about that

McDonald's coffee suit, because I'm fucking sick and tired of the wingers using that as their prime example all these years.

McDonald's had been previously warned many times that their coffee temperatures were much hotter than normal, beyond the normal guidelines. Even people who were careful with their coffee were getting burns. But they paid very little, if any, attention, as most corporations that you love to bow before are wont to do. The woman in that suit had suffered very severe burns over a large area of both her legs and groin. The experts involved and her doctors all said that the burns should not have been that severe if the coffee was at the temperature it should have been, under normal guidelines. The woman incurred tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills, even with insurance, and suffered severe pain for months, especially during the treatment, as well as permanent scarrring.

When the jury heard the evidence that Mickey D's had been warned many times previously about it, by their OWN people, no less, as well as others, and saw the extent of the damage and suffering, they awarded the woman's medical bills and then the amount MD's was ordered to pay was the amount of approximately ONE DAY'S coffee profits. Period. Nothing else but one day's coffee profits. As it should have been.

So stick it if you're gonna use that as an example. Under your leadership based on your posts, banksters would have free rein no matter what they did while everything would be the ocnsumer's fault, bad doctors could practice with impunity while their victims could go to hell, and the hell with teachers and blue-collar workers.

[WriteDown]

26. This is an issue that I know very well since I actually know the family who filed the suit...

The woman was holding the coffee between her legs when it "spilled." Darwin award. 'Nuff said.

Oh, and I work with a younger male relative who is teased incessantly about it. He is good-natured about it though.

[liberalhistorian]

27. Yeah, right, like I actually believe that.

How very conveeeeeeenient. Well, I've studied the case in paralegal school and read the documents involved. And how nice of you to simply dismiss the woman's suffering with "Darwin award" bullshit. How very humane.

[WriteDown]

29. Believe whatever you like.

I'm sure you also read how she was using her inner thighs to hold the coffee cup. I've always been a tad hesitant to do that with hot beverages.

[Kingofalldems]

36. Oh man. All RW talking points all the time.

You're on fire today. Wow!

[WriteDown]

39. Most people are uncomfortable with the truth and you have....

zero cogent response :rofl:

[Kingofalldems]

41. Republican talking points--Let's see --Trial lawyers-check

HCR will cut Medicare--check. Using Fox news as a source--check. Plenty cogent. :shrug:

[WriteDown]

42. I was defending trial lawyers a bit genius....

And the current proposal does cut medicare pmts unless you want to disprove that.

[liberalhistorian]

20. They have recourse as well.

The government does a much better job at redress in these situations; they use a national liability fund to compensate victims. That is one reason why doctors there don't pay liability insurance, because it's taken care of. Unlike here, where bad doctors are protected and all they and the government care about are protecting bad doctors from accountability and putting up even more barriers for victims to seek any redress.

And in the states where the "reform" has passed, insurance companies haven't reduced their liability rates. In many cases, they've raised them. Why? First, because they can and, second, because their rates really don't have all that much to do with award caps.

[WriteDown]

21. Very interesting...

How much in punitive damages can they get for this type of instance?

[Manifestor_of_Light]

47. you don't know about "foreseeability", do you??

Showing your ignorance.


McD's created a DANGEROUS situaton with too hot coffee.

McD's had been WARNED by their people their coffee was too hot. They had NO reaosn for it to be that hot. They had been sued by other people for having coffee too hot, so it burned them OVER ONE HUNDRED TIMES. Sued previously, one hundred times.

It was quite foreseeable that McD's customers would have put the cup between their thighs in a car.

And furthermore, McD's KNEW there was a hazard, was WARNED about it, was SUED over it, and could FORESEE that cups would be placed between peoples' thighs in cars, and they did NOTHING.

That is not only negligent, it is intentional.

[WriteDown]

49. And it was impossible to foresee that a woman would hold hot coffee with her thighs.

I see. :)

[conservdem]

25. I have very little about horrific care by the NHS. Have you heard

much and has any of it been true incidents of bad/horrific care?

[JuniperLea]

10. I'll take "horrific" over "nonexistent" any day...

I'd rather suffer horrible conditions, filth, bad food INSIDE than die untreated on the street, eating out of garbage cans and pissing in storm drains. THAT is what American healthcare does to the poor here.

[NC_Nurse]

14. Newsflash: It happens here too.

[walldude]

22. Ok say it with me... WALTER REED HOSPITAL.

Same shit different country.

[clu]

28. the only real criticism IMO for canadian or UK healthcare

is that areas can be underfunded. as a country, it looks like we'd rather spend the money in iraq.

[Kingofalldems]

35. Thanks for posting.

Rush would be proud of you! Wow!
And so would JonQ!

[BooScout]

38. It's pretty sick....

That this thread has been unrecommended by so many and most of the comments are about the right wingers using this as an example of socialized medicine. I hate to break it to folks.........but it did happen and Im more concerned with why it happened and continues to happen since I live here. Oh but I digress.........carry on with your evil Hannity comments (and yes I think he's a pompous prick but not everything on this earth is all about political talking points in the US).

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

44. Before everyone gets all wound up...

...it's useful to understand that the NHS is not exactly a top-down hierarchical organization. There are many individual trusts, each is granted great leeway over how they conduct their operations. This was a problem at one trust and from what I've seen so far it looks like a completely legitimate problem. It's hardly an indictment of the NHS as a whole. Though I think there is a legitimate criticism to be made of the NHS here, as they were not ensuring that this trust was meeting basic acceptable standards for care.

I'm sure this will be all over the right-wing blogosphere, but then when were they ever concerned with telling the truth about health care?

[upi402]

46. "It's cold here, so where's the global warming Obama?"

Conservatives will toss the baby with the bathwater here. We need HCR desperately. Now they'll exploit this one incident and they'll use their media to run it on a damn tapeloop 24-7.

[bobbolink]

50. And what that illustrates is that the RW abolishing OVERSIGHT on ANY business

is endangering us all.

Maggie Thatcher did a bang-up job with following Raygun-Shrub policies in favor of trashing any regulations, so NONE of this should come as any surprise.

The upshot?

Eternal vigilance.

Nothing less will work in our favor!

[LeftishBrit]

48. As a Brit, I would like to point out...

that this is not a problem with 'socialized medicine', but mainly with too much attempt to partially de-socialize it and make it run like a business (the so-called 'internal market' introduced by the Tories, and continued under New Labour)! Of course, as always in such cases, a lot is also due to the incompetence of specific individuals in charge.

This particular Trust was so preoccupied with meeting financial targets and thus justifying its status as a 'foundation hospital' that it neglected its duty to its patients in order to save money.

Fortunately most Trusts here are not like that. It is horrible and tragic, but at least it's being treated here as a scandal. When has it been treated as a major scandal when an American insurance company has denied patient access to adequate care in orde to save money, thus resulting in unnecessary deaths?

[johnaries]

51. Thank you for the clarification and the perspective.

The full truth is quite enlightening.