Safeguarding will an issue happen in Sheffield?


Sheffield Social Services are they creating safeguarding issues

Sheffield Social Services (1) are currently in a financial dilemma, with an anticipated budget overspend, do they cut spending in the department or endeavour to obtain monies from other budgets, it would appear the former, but what will this eventually create?

What has occurred?

The Social Services budget for 2012/2013 was overspent by £6.3 million and there is now a projected overspend for Social Services of £11 million, of which £6.5 million is in Learning Disabilities (1).

So if there were not significant changes in practices or other means from 2012/2013 to 2013/2014 there would have been an expected overspend of £6.3 million. But due to Government austerity cuts, it is said that savings of 20% need to be made.

The following is an extract from  Budget Conversion 2014-2015: Shaping our future together (1)

‘But Sheffield Social Services accept that we have an increasing number of older people, particularly very old people. They also expect a 32% increase in people aged over 85 in the next 10 years.

For disabled Adults with complex needs (2), there is an increase of 5% each year.

This is in addition to an increase in the number of older people being discharged from hospital who need social care support.

There is more people with mental health issues seeking social services funded support – a 64% increase from 2011/2012 to 2012/2013.

An increase in the demand and cost of support packages for people needing support. Between 2011/2012 and 2012/2013

– number of customers supported increased by 11%

– average cost of support per customer increased by 8%.’

This is at a time when according to the article 72 more jobs in social services are at risk. Who will be going and what action is being taken?  Is this action appropriate? As the facts are extremely limited, and knowledge is not forthcoming due to apparent employment restrictions.

So at a time when demand is increasing to make savings staffing levels are being reduced.

If by any methods of reducing costs the demands on the service are not met, this will result in some safeguarding issues for the most vulnerable adults residing in Sheffield.

While this may not be at the scale of Winterborne (2) or Mid-Staffs (3). It will cause a degree of risk to some, at least, of these adults who are vulnerable.

These are not people who can be discarded or left to fend for themselves.  Without the services they require to ensure their critical needs are met, these needs will not be met.

These social services are priority services and need to be maintained at all costs.

While I do not have the figures to hand, it is logical to assume, if there was an over spend in the budget of 2012/2013, then there would be an over spend in 2013/2014, before taking into account the budget reduction, and the increases in the demand and resultant increase in costs.

You have to question, was the budget set for 2013/2014, a realistic budget (1) and if not, it was doomed to an over spend greater than in the previous year.

As the budgets, I assume, are monitored by the Chief Executive and the Leader of the Council, why have they been so quiet?

Some budget information was apparently released, but no apparent mention re Social Services

Is Sheffield being fairly treated by Central Government.

(1) © Copyright of Sheffield City Council 2013

(2) Crown Copyright. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0

(3) © The Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry 2010

NHS; Is it fit for Purpose?


NHS Scandal

Why has the caring stopped?

Over the last few months many problems with the NHS have become known, so therefore, are we now saying the NHS is not fit for purpose?  I believe there are some of us are saying YES, while others are saying NO and even others who are not sure. So lets try to find some answers. The NHS was created in 1948 and since that time has undergone many changes, some because the NHS wished to, some due to advances in technology and medical science and some inflicted upon it by successive governments.  But during all this time the fundamental principles of the NHS have not been changed. When created it was to be ‘free at point of delivery for all citizens of the UK’. This in most cases is still correct. So why are all these problems occurring? Lets start at its beginning.

  1. Every UK citizen was entitled to signup with a local general doctor, known as a General Practitioner (GP), it may have been the same doctor to whom they went to when ill in the past, but then they would have had to pay the doctor directly for this service.
  2. The NHS was born out of a long-held ideal that good healthcare should be available to all, regardless of wealth. At its launch by the then minister of health, Aneurin Bevan, on 5 July 1948, it had at its heart three core principles:
    • That it meet the needs of everyone
    • That it be free at the point of delivery
    • That it be based on clinical need, not ability to pay
  3. These three principles have guided the development of the NHS over more than half a century and remain. However, in July 2000, a full-scale modernisation programme was launched and new principles added.

    The main aims of the additional principles are that the NHS will:

    • Provide a comprehensive range of services
    • Shape its services around the needs and preferences of individual patients, their families and their carers
    • Respond to the different needs of different populations
    • Work continuously to improve the quality of services and to minimize errors
    • Support and value its staff
    • Use public funds for healthcare devoted solely to NHS patients
    • Work with others to ensure a seamless service for patients
    • Help to keep people healthy and work to reduce health inequalities
    • Respect the confidentiality of individual patients and provide open access to information about services, treatment and performance

Since then there have been the setting of targets by successive governments.

I do believe in having targets, but wish to call them standards. We have always had standards to maintain in the NHS, but these days in trying to run the hospitals as a business, finance as become the main factor instead of care. Before all else, care has to be the first priority.When the NHS was created in 1948, it was not envisaged that the population would increase in great numbers and that medical science would advance so quickly in both technology and treatments. To cater for this, our hospitals have had to increase in size to cope and this as left management abilities to flounder. We need to maintain standards, but not by tick boxes, use the technology in administration practices that have been created. All records are computerised, so all relevant information should be to hand from the computers, no additional staff in put required. Proper supervision of all staff needs to be reintroduced and all work as one team and that is to the betterment of care to the patient.

When the NHS is working well it can not be bettered and unfortunately, this is not deemed news worthy by the media. But many aspects of hospital care are wanting and an investigation should not just look at the present, but look to the past to see when this change for the worse occurred. Was it Government targets being introduced, withdrawal of Matrons, Sisters or charge nurses becoming more hands on, instead of managing the ward, the replacement of cottage hospitals with the large hospitals of today, aging population, emphasis on academic  nursing qualifications instead of the ability to care, influx of staff where English is not first language and understanding it is limited, changing from larger open wards to smaller units within the ward, increasing in technology and medical conditions, hospitals run as a business instead of a caring facility. The list is endless, just what is the answer, this has to be known before steps can be taken to improve them.

Alarm bells should be ringing, the NHS is provided with money from Government, from money raised from UK taxpayers, to be used to provided care for patients. Why is some of this money being used to gag people from letting the UK public know the truth.For one thing no one should be gagged for telling the truth, if the NHS is not fit for purpose then the public need to know.

What all employees in the NHS should realise is that by the source of the money for their salaries in coming from the public, it is the public who are effectively their employers, it is just that it has been sub-contracted to the Government and the NHS.

Image or Care, What is of most concern to the NHS?

It should be care, but who knows when you follow the current articles in the UK press.

How many More?

It makes you wonder how many other gagging orders are in operation and what is still left to be uncovered.

So it is not only Sir David Nicholson who is a fraud, but also his right hand , Dame Barbara Hakin. You will see both these persons have received Royal Honours, but for what, in these two it would appear to be for incompetence and lack of professionalism. If the people at the top of the NHS are not fit for purpose, what hope is there for the NHS. A clean sweep needs to be undertaken and this should start at the top and go as far down as possible until we find those who are fit for purpose. Hopefully there will be some.

It is time that every aspect of the NHS is given a full audit and every detail investigated. If staff are not up to the job, then they must go, but the facilities have to remain open. If the staff are not up to the job, then get staff who are, there would appear to be plenty qualified staff ready and waiting to be employed.

As I have said when the NHS is working well, it is excellent, as I have seen myself, by the care afforded to my own family from all aspects of the health service in Sheffield.

The creation of the National Health Service 1948 was a magnificent achievement, unfortunately, without the aid of a crystal ball, the founders could not have envisaged so much would be happening in the UK in so short a time. As stated successive previous governments have created target to be achieved and certainly at Stafford Hospital this is one reason for its failings. As it was concentrating to much on attaining these targets than maintaining its primary function of providing good quality care for its patients. Unfortunately, I believe more hospitals will have been found to fail for similar reasons as time goes on. Then as to gagging orders and payments made to gag NHS officials to stop then advising what is happening, how can this have been allowed to happen.  Not only is this diverting money needed for providing the care function, it is also being dishonest with the public, who are all contributing to the cost provided by them by paying their taxes.

Anyone responsible for misleading in this way should not be employed, certainly not within the NHS, more likely should be doing time in prison for, hopefully, what should be a criminal act.

The NHS should be fit for purpose and where this is not currently so, every effort needs to be made to make sure that it is. The NHS can not be left to fail, as it is an integral part of the UK and one that we should be proud of. All within the NHS need to work as a team, as no one individual can work without the support of the others.

Hopefully, in the very near future, we can all say that it is.

Nicholson still holding on to office

Nicholson should go and go now and so should any others of the same ilk. His right hand woman, Dame Barbara Hakin for a start.

To remove Sir David Nicholson sign the E-petition

The Blame Game

The NHS is safe in whose hands, all parties are to blame for the current situation, maybe some parties more than others.
But, surely, now is the time for unity to ensure all can be done to save the NHS where it is failing.

The NHS is an intergral part of the UK and can not be allowed to fail in any shape or form. Many of the problems have been successive government interference in creating bureaucracy to administer systems to keep to, what may have been welcome targets. But if an organisation is only concentrating in maintaining its operation into achieving certain targets, this could and most likely as, caused other non-targeted area to suffer. When you have an organisation based on care, no one area can be concentrated on, with the exclusion of some others. The management have to oversee the whole operation not selected parts.

It is for the reason to save the NHS, that all parties, be they in Government, opposition, NHS or any other areas, should work together for the common good for all in the UK

India RAPE, could it happen in the UK?


Culture; India Rape

In response to the article ‘Culture; India Rape’ I have just made the following post:

‘In a so called civilised country, you would not believe acts of this nature could happen and with apparent frequency.  But this is what happens when for one reason or another, a certain person, whether by race, gender or religion are not respected.  It should be a stated Human Right, that all humans should expect to receive respect from their fellow beings. If this finds not to be so, then the forces of Law and Order should ensure anyone not showing this respect, be punished accordingly.  When the forces of Law and Order can not be expected to show this respect, then anarchy is the outcome.

One hopes that the outcome of this abhorant act is seen as the catalyst to a change for respect of others to be ensured in the India Society.’

But has made me think, could something similar happen in the UK.

Now lets see, in my view this abhorant act has occurred due to to the lack of respect females in India receive and has been compounded by how this lack of respect has been allowed to become, what appears to be part of the Indian culture, by way of inaction by the Indian authorities of Law and Order over many, many years to bring this to an end.

But in the UK we have Laws, which are upheld, to punish anyone found guilty of rape and thereby do respect the Rights of the female population.

But is this lack of respect shown in other ways?

Currently there is a major investigation under way with regards to alleged pedophile activity spread over the last 40 – 50 years, which it is alleged took place in some of the Establishments of the UK, namely, BBC, some hospitals, some mental institutions and children’s care homes.

There are also reports of abuse occurring in some of the care establishments involved in the care of our elderly, Winterborne view Hospital being only one.

In both of the above mentioned the practices or alleged practices had been ongoing for many years and the appropriate authorities at all the establishments had failed for one reason or another to act on reported comments of abusive acts taking place. This lead to the culture of abuse to continue unheaded, with the authorities, apparently condoning the committing of these acts of abuse. I say, condoning the acts of abuse, as in my view if  you are aware of allegations of abuse and you fail to act upon this information, you are actually condoning the act. Also, in my view, you are therefore as guilty as the perpreters of the abusive acts. The rights of the people being abused have not been respected.

So back to my original headline ‘India RAPE, could it happen in the UK?’.  While rape does occur in the UK, I hope it will never be allowed to manifest, as it as apparently has done so in India.  But if we do not all respect the Human Rights of each and every other person in the UK, other forms of abuse could continue to occur, with the perpreters being allowed to go unpunished.

When I mention Human Rights, as stated above, I am not relating to the Human Rights Act of 1998, as I believe this Act itself is the creator of many instances of injustice.  It is debatable, but why should the rights, for UK prisoners and illegal immigrants, as are interpreted from the Act, override the Rights of the citizens of UK. It is my belief, if you commit a crime you, as well as losing your freedom for the term of your prison sentence, you also lose your right to have Human Rights for this period. Also for illegal immigrants, how can they claim to have Human Rights to settle in the UK, if there came here illegally.

But that is something to consider for a further article.

Pranks, Think before you do


Pranks and the consequences

An extremely good and balanced report.

No prank is funny to the victim, as no matter what the prank is about, it is intended to humiliate the victim. I believe that many of us, myself included have all done pranks on others at sometime in our lives. Who has not inflicted something on someone on April 1st (April Fool). Then you have supposedly innocent practices as Trick or Treating on Halloween, the actions of some people on November 5th (Bonfire Night) and others that have been allowed to happen over the years.

With Trick or Treating, while the innocent action of some children, with their parents, going round knocking on doors of their friends and acquaintances may be acceptable, it is not when you have older children or adults going to homes of vulnerable people just to scare them.

This is also the case with Bonfire Night. some misguided individuals use this occasion to put lighted fireworks through letter boxes of people they do nor like or again vulnerable people. The fireworks scare the people and in extreme cases cause fire to occur in these peoples home, causing, at least, damage to the homes, but in some instances injury and even death.

When you look at it, playing a prank on someone is a form of bullying as the person playing the prank is using the prank as a form of control. Most pranks would appear to have innocent outcomes, but who can fully understand how varying emotions can affect the victim.

If anything good can emerge from this incident, then I hope it is that when you may wish to carryout a prank you remember the consequences of this prank and hopefully you then have second thoughts.

Take responsibility for your actions.

Abuse are there reasons behind police actions


Police actions

When abuse takes place anyone who as knowledge should report it. I can understand why a victim may not report it, due to the emotional stresses on them, but others who know should tell. To know some one has been abused and you know the abuser and you do not report it, makes you as guilty as the abuser.

No matter how high this person or persons are within society, if they did not report the facts they know, then they should also be part of the investigation.. While abuse will always be taking place, no act of abuse should be allowed to go unreported.

Abuse


With all the media coverage in the UK regarding the allegations of abuse, this has prompted myself to consider abuse, not in relation to the specific media coverage, but to abuse in general.  I have therefore put together an article which contains my own thoughts and views, with referencing to various websites to expand or explain some of the terminology contained in the article.  To access the article please follow the link Abuse, What is it and to Whom.

A scandal at the BBC, apparently


Abuse documentary at BBC

If heads do not roll at the BBC and all the other organisations involved, then justice will not be done.

While the acts of abuse are a very serious matter, the apparent cover up is even more so. Abuse Protection procedures are there as a back up to the usual safeguarding practice. It is essential therefore that Protection procedures are followed in all cases.

For major organisations, as the BBC, hospitals, care homes and others to apparently ignore their protection procedures is extremely worrying. Anyone who is found to have not complied with them should be sacked and prosecuted.

Rights are they being respected?


NHS decide when you die

This opens up a number of questions.

When is a persons right to die being allowed, certainly not at the choosing of the person.  The health officials are playing GOD, as and when they choose.

This is also a form of abuse, the health officials are in control and using their power of life and death for their own means.

Rights, are there such things as family rights?

John Terry banned by FA


John Terry banned by FA and fined

I welcome the FA verdict, but is the sentence sufficient as John Terry as only been given a slap on the wrist.

Many people are saying the FA was wrong to bring this action against Terry as the British Courts had found him not guilty.

But was the verdict in the British Court of Law right or wrong?

I believe it was wrong and is giving a green light to other footballers and their supporters to continue making racist comments.

It was therefore right for the FA to bring the action and for them to find him guilty.

As we have seen in many recent cases British judges are completely out of touch with reality and the social culture of the UK.

Are British Judges right.

The reason being, supposedly, in a Court of Law, there should be no degree of doubt to bring in a guilty verdict on which a judge or jury have to decide.

In a Civil action or an Employment Tribunal, of which the FA case could be classed, the degree of doubt is not as great as that in the Court of Law.

On viewing Terry’s actions and hearing his comments, while he has admitted saying the words, all be it not racially, he says, he as not shown any remorse.

This, I believe, truly shows Terry for the person he is.