Jump to content

IOM DHSC & MANX CARE


Cassie2
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Roger Mexico said:

There's no financial limit to compensation in whistleblowing cases and if Ranson could claim for lost earning for the rest of her career, pension contributions etc it could be a pretty sizeable sum.  As serious will be the damage to the Island's reputation as a place to work for medical staff, particularly after the incomprehensible attempted prosecution of the anaesthetists.

Agreed, on the back of the anesthetists farce this is the silver bullet. Will any healthcare professional ever take the IOM seriously again? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bandits said:

Agreed, on the back of the anesthetists farce this is the silver bullet. Will any healthcare professional ever take the IOM seriously again? 

Have any taken the IOM seriously in the first place. Other than those long standing consultants, doctors, surgeons and nursing staff the island is now having great difficulties in recruiting. We will get medical staff, but what calibre of staff, and have they been booted from a job in other jurisdictions, but not necessarily from the medical registers?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 2112 said:

I wonder if Ashie comes out of this unscathed?

This is what happens when you put a rank amateur in charge of Health during the biggest medical crisis in generations. Still, in finest Manx fashion, lessons were learned and at least he wasn't subsequently put in charge of finances during the biggest fiscal crisis in generations. No, wait...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Omobono said:

A few red faces in Manx care , the system has not exactly covered itself in glory ,but not to worry just pay out the money ,  which will lead to  even more loss of  creditable status in the medical profession , 

Can we have some accountability please? Those who have made serious errors of judgment - the same applies to politicos - should be thinking about their positions?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sheldon said:

This is what happens when you put a rank amateur in charge of Health during the biggest medical crisis in generations. Still, in finest Manx fashion, lessons were learned and at least he wasn't subsequently put in charge of finances during the biggest fiscal crisis in generations. No, wait...

Post of the year. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bandits said:

Agreed, on the back of the anesthetists farce this is the silver bullet. Will any healthcare professional ever take the IOM seriously again? 

Mercifully so far the anaesthetists story doesn't seem to have any coverage outside the island - the BMA didn't issue a press release like they did with Ranson.  It doesn't mean the story might not get revived though - especially when the judgment is published.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 2112 said:

Can we have some accountability please? Those who have made serious errors of judgment - the same applies to politicos - should be thinking about their positions?

I'm sorry, are you new to the island? The only thing they'll be thinking about is pension pots and salary increases. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 2112 said:

Can we have some accountability please? Those who have made serious errors of judgment - the same applies to politicos - should be thinking about their positions?

There are so many threads on here where exactly this is the problem , no one is ever accountable for anything so who gives a toss !

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sheldon said:

This is what happens when you put a rank amateur in charge of Health during the biggest medical crisis in generations. Still, in finest Manx fashion, lessons were learned and at least he wasn't subsequently put in charge of finances during the biggest fiscal crisis in generations. No, wait...

Actually that’s what happens when you elect a delusional fantasist into power who is capable of projecting a layer of outer confidence to the world but who subliminally knows that’s he’s a fraud who probably needs an instruction book to boil an egg. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, asitis said:

There are so many threads on here where exactly this is the problem , no one is ever accountable for anything so who gives a toss !

From Paul Moulton's comment it sounds like we may actually see some accountability. I suppose the women who has already left will be the scapegoat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cissolt said:

From Paul Moulton's comment it sounds like we may actually see some accountability. I suppose the women who has already left will be the scapegoat

That’s how it usually works. By the time someone is found to blame someone else parachuted out a year before because they knew they’d be the one to blame. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, cissolt said:

From Paul Moulton's comment it sounds like we may actually see some accountability. I suppose the women who has already left will be the scapegoat

Hopefully a few will be sweating !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Gladys said:

Isn’t the judiciary independent of the AG's office, so why would an external  judge need to be brought in because the  AG's office presented one side of the case? 

I can see it if it needs someone with particular technical skills, eg an understanding of documentary forensics,  although you would think weighing the veracity of evidence is part of the job anyway. I can't see it as necessary on the grounds of impartiality. 

The way it was presented by PM sounded more like a judicial review, with the AG arguing the strength of their client's evidence rather than an investigation as such. 

I could be wrong, but we only have PM's tweets to go by. 

Sorry Gladys, I forgot to answer this before.  While the judiciary is nominally independent, there are bound to be connections in such a small place and it would certainly look chummy to an outsider.  In any case it's not automatically the job of the judiciary to investigate this sort of thing (which is why I said it might be a QC or similar) it's just they they tend to called in as obvious impartial outsiders.

In our case there's the additional practical problem that any Deemster called in to assess the evidence would then be unable to hear any subsequent criminal case(s) or any appeals afterwards.  And one of the usual acting Deemsters might not be seen as impartial as they would be reliant on the government for future work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...