Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Sam Redlark's avatar

With everything up in the air, I can sympathise with the impulse to be master of your own destiny and steer a Hoth-bound course of your own making.

I am concerned that your proposed one-way journey onto the pack ice will negatively impact the likelihood of you being accepted through the portals of Valhalla. You deserve better and I think you should fight for it if you have to. That would be a more positive way of taking back some measure of control.

Discharging long-term inpatients is an area where, in my direct experience, the NHS was prat-falling on a regular basis long before the current funding crisis. In fact, a pair of dire incidents both involving the improper discharge of patients were the source of my first and second resignations from the service. (They enticed me back the first time. I stupidly ignored my gut instinct which was telling me to run for all I was worth.)

At the point in your hospital stay where you are nearing the end of the conveyor belt and are perhaps expressing concerns that there doesn't appear to be anything beyond it, responsibility for your care, and your future, will have shifted, usually rather gracelessly, into the hands of individuals who will, at best, have only briefly met you in person, and who seldom, if ever, engage with patients at any meaningful level.

It is often a jarring transition and could certainly be done better and with more consideration. To these people you are an abstraction. Some will argue that this distance and detachment is necessary to do the job. I beg to differ. The absence of empathy, that was a disturbing hallmark of members of the Discharge Team at the hospital where I worked, was rivalled only by a collective dearth of common sense and a tendency towards covering their eyes and their ears, so as to avoid being made party to any inconvenient truths. The impact of this is that decisions were made that practically guaranteed patients would end up back in hospital when, had a little more thought been given, and a little more care been taken, the patient would have stood a better chance. This perverse model of care - that is exacting and committed right up until the end, when people who have had no prior involvement step out of the shadows, push all the chips into the middle of the table and make some wild speculative gamble - never sat well with me. Sometimes – actually a lot of times – the NHS is its own worst enemy.

I assume that, after you are discharged, your notes will make their way to your hospital's equivalent of the coding office where esoteric formulae copied from the walls of mysterious South American pyramids will be used to calculate how much money you have cost the NHS. From that limited financial perspective it makes sense that, if you are no longer a patient and only remain at the hospital because there is nowhere else for you to go, then they should dial down your treatment. The reality is that you still occupy a hospital bed. You are not sharing it with the person who is waiting to take your place. So why not provide the rehab. Why allow a patient to languish and potentially backslide, undoing the costly and painstaking work that has already been done by the hospital?

My experience of working for the NHS left me with a pronounced nervous tick that made me want to reach over the table and slap anyone of the useless middle-men (I was one for a while) who uttered the buzz-phrase 'joined-up care.' There is no joined up care. There are yawning canyons and it takes good people to guide you over and around them.

It is concerning that the NHS wilfully avoided sending a representative to a meeting that will have a fundamental impact upon your future. I would go so far as to call it negligent. There may adult safeguarding issues if they have not taken appropriate steps to see that your best interests are served, given your vulnerability. Added to that, they have placed you in a position of mental anguish where you don't have a clear picture of which way the NHS is leaning. You are expected to subjectively divine their intent from their absence, as if you are reading tea leaves.

You disability is profound and I fail to see how you can manage without CHC funding. If it were denied then you would be left in a demonstrably unsafe environment, tortured by the knowledge that the failure of a piece of fundamental medical equipment might bring about your painful and humiliating end. Added to this is the mental torture of knowing this event, which might occur at any time, is avoidable with the right care. Nobody should be expected to live like that. It is inhumane.

I read, many years ago, one of the Greek philosophers – you would probably know who. He was describing a person who is not evil but who, in the knowledge of what is the right thing to do, fails to follow through and take the appropriate action. There seem to be a lot of individuals like this who take the path of least resistance, even when they are aware that doing so will cause harm. Should such a person deny you the appropriate funding, I would urge you to fight back. Don't allow someone so mediocre to draw the blade across your throat without at least spitting in their face, figuratively speaking, of course. Don't allow a pawn take you off the board.

Expand full comment
MORAND's avatar

courage Paul on pense beaucoup a toi meme si j'ai conscience que c'est une aide minuscule par rapport a tes souffrances. on t'aime

Expand full comment
17 more comments...

No posts