Jump to content

DHSC says dying of cancer is your own fault (apparently)


hboy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It was the advocates who would have placed the arguments. And on the Isle of Man, when it comes to advocates and deemsters the outcome of a legal argument can be not what you know - or even how well you make your argument - but who you know.

The big wigs have lots of friends from their former days. The Isle of Man legal system is largely one big melting pot/cesspit.

An Impartial judiciary? Impartial my arse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No the DHSS is paying out compensation,doctor contributing because he did not emphasize. enough to the patient how important it was to follow up on treatment, the DHSS because the patient had to wait an inappropriate amount of time before seeing the skin specialist.   I had to wait nearly 2 yrs to see him, fortunately mine was very low grade cancer so just had it burned out. I did say to said specialist that it was a good thing it was low grade and not one of the more virulent types as I had been waiting a long time and he told me I was being dramatic!!!!! So that was that. All the publicity about sun damage and when you have a concern inaction!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The man's GP referred him to a consultant at Noble's Hospital. It seems that apart from seeing to god knows how many patients throughout the year, he is expected to monitor all of his patients hospital appointments? The man had sought help a year before his appointment, what a cop out by Nobles, almost criminal negligence. How many people die on waiting lists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GD4ELI said:

A shocking judgement - can anyone really had confidence in the IOM's NHS and/or legal system?

You didn't read the piece properly I suspect.  This was an appeal by the DHSC being turned down.  They tried to claim that the (now-deceased) patient was partly responsible for the failure to get treatment in time and that was dismissed.  The Court did say that the man's GP did bear some responsibility though for the slowness of the treatment.  It was the "negligence" of the DHSC and the GP that was ruled to "cost [the] teacher his life".

You'd like to hope that this sort of case would lead to more money being spent of doctors and less on advocates, but of the primary purpose of the DHSC seems to be self-defence, they'l  probably just spend even more on lawyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gettafa said:

It was the advocates who would have placed the arguments. And on the Isle of Man, when it comes to advocates and deemsters the outcome of a legal argument can be not what you know - or even how well you make your argument - but who you know.

The big wigs have lots of friends from their former days. The Isle of Man legal system is largely one big melting pot/cesspit.

An Impartial judiciary? Impartial my arse.

I've read crap legal advice like that somewhere else I'm sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why didn't the hospital consultant book a 3 or 6 month follow-up appointment instead of discharging the patient? I've been to the hospital for things far less serious than potential cancer and they have always made a follow-up appointment if it was something which may get worse. I think the fact that the patient did develop cancer suggests that proper investigation wasn't carried out. What are the odds of him not being at risk of cancer at the time of seeing the consultant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

You didn't read the piece properly I suspect.  This was an appeal by the DHSC being turned down.  They tried to claim that the (now-deceased) patient was partly responsible for the failure to get treatment in time and that was dismissed.  The Court did say that the man's GP did bear some responsibility though for the slowness of the treatment.  It was the "negligence" of the DHSC and the GP that was ruled to "cost [the] teacher his life".

You'd like to hope that this sort of case would lead to more money being spent of doctors and less on advocates, but of the primary purpose of the DHSC seems to be self-defence, they'l  probably just spend even more on lawyers.

I mean shocking that the NHS appealed, that the man had to wait so long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a shocking indictment of our health service and it's inability to offer proper medical care to residents. It is also a shocking indictment of the DHSC and it's Minister for attempting to cover up its failings by blaming the patient. Residents who can afford it need the protection of private health insurance. We need politicians with the courage to seek savings through changes in methods of service provision across all Departments in order to divert additional funding to failing core services. Instead we get ass-covering and endless consultations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an example of why charging to see your gp is a bad idea. A lot of people, mostly men, are reluctant enough to go anyway. Now that the DHSC think its your own fault if you die because you haven't sought treatment quickly enough (even though that claim was dismissed this time) sticking further obstacles in the way of getting treatment is not the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...