Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
bern,you forgot the other word,profit.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
That is an awful story to condemn someone to death like that purely on their age.
The trouble is when you first meet a doctor for the first time you are judged on what they see in other words your weight and age. The fact that you might not have had to see a doctor for a couple of years or longer does not seem to matter.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
sarah
and you dont think under a profit run private enterpirise these type of decisions wont be a top priority
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Can't you see what is in front of you Keith? Currently there is little or no rein on individual practitioners prejudice in their decision making in the NHS. There is a token audit but it matters not a jot in practice. It is, to make it easier to understand, a closed shop. Opening it up to better scrutiny with tighter governance and proper, effective audits, has the potential to safeguard people much better.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Bern, I fully understand Keith's and Reg's problem. There is a feeling among some people that only the public sector can be relied upon to produce quality patient-oriented care while the private sector will always have its eye on the bottom line.
There is an element of truth in this; but it assumes that the NHS is actually as good as it was originally designed to be. And that is not the case.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
peter
bern
I can see what is in front of me, thus my concerns that looking after shareholders interests may be no better than we already have.
it's the hope that under the reforms everything in the garden will be rosy
worse, some are saying it has to better more in hope than actually believing it,.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
For shareholders, substitute health professionals. See how that sounds.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
sadly bern we are likely to see SHAREHOLDERS as being the future problem
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Why do shareholders have to be a problem? They are the ones with the potential to hold organisations to account, and give far more safeguarding than we currently have.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Whether by accident or by design the way things begin gives a fairly accurate indication of how things will pan-out. Some of what we have at the moment is considered here...
http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2011/08/23/important-read-circulate/Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
interesting article, have read a lot on this atos crowd, most of which has not been complimentary.
it is clearly in their interest to decrease the number of people claiming any sort of disability benefit.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
BERN;
Would love to think the shareholder would have the power you feel they would have, but they would want reurns
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
That isn't inappropriate. And for "returns" read status, autonomy and a large salary, and then you have the senior health professionals instead. It is all semantics - what we have is a top heavy largely autonomous organisation with reduced accountability nd that has lead to poor quality services overall. In what way would the terms you use be so different as to be unacceptable? Life, organisations and business are all built on trade-offs and mutual benefit. What is the difference?
Dogma !
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the word "professionals" gets bandied about a lot, not sure what it means though as nobody works for free except in the voluntary sector.
If you are referring to my post, you are right, it is an all-encompassing term for those on higher salaries who have the higher status to match their experience and qualifications. They have more to lose if a more robust accountability is in place.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 580 ,,,,,,Hello.....for the umpteenth time....profit is good,excellent,prerequisite for business........many of us would
not be enjoying the life as we do without it...................profit should produce economic growth but we have not seen
much for the last two years................profit from ill-health is a .........no...no.....its a no brainer........
# 590 ....desperate stuff......shareholders have a snow balls chance in hell to unite to be effective in controlling elite
greedy pigs salary and bonuses....they would need to form a union but the`stigma` would prevent that happening....
RE 599
Managers in Partnership exisits its an off shoot of Unison , it was responsible for Rose Waters from the Maidstone debacle getting her payout .
