Skip to main content
I sent this mail to a discussion forum recently. The topic was concerns about the effects of increasing privatisation in healthcare:

I've been doing some union representation recently (they called me out of retirement because of an increase in referrals from the private/independent sector). The first two cases involved people with disabilities which were being ignored by their employers. To make this brief, the problem is that not being `public bodies` these organisations do not have to have a disability equality scheme and, in most cases (the Law Lords ruled last week that it is arguable that where there are `public functions` they do) they don't have to consider the Human Rights Act. Additionally these organisations are burgeoning with managerialism and, for instance, are using heavy handed and intimidating disciplinary proceedings to deal with anyone stepping off the corporate path.

The part answer of course is to keep a closer eye on the `standard level agreements` and the contracts made with their commissioning bodies as they should have to adhere to these. But it's an illustration of the slithy borogroves (I know it should be tothes, Tothy) we get into when we go in this direction.

(Tothes is there because it was addressed to Paul Tovey - http://bsmhtusersmedia.blogspot.com/).

I have yet another currently. A nationally known private socialcare company who are treating one of their workers with draconian disciplinary procedures which lie on the verge of corporate bullying. A public body could not do this. All the indications are it is driven by the organisation's need to look as good as possible for the regulating body OFSTED.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SURVIVOR HISTORY NEWSLETTER

>From Andrew Roberts Secretary Survivors History Group http://studymore.org.uk/ studymore@studymore.org.uk telephone: 020 8 986 5251 home address: 177 Glenarm Road, London, E5 ONB Survivor History Group Summer 2012 Newsletter The July London meeting of the Survivors History Group will be held on Wednesday 25.7.2012 from 1pm to 5pm at Together, 12 Old Street, London. Everybody is welcome and refreshments will be provided. The September meeting has had to be moved from a Wednesday to Thursday 27.9.2012 (subject to approval by this Wednesday's meeting) because of the availability of a room at Together.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the July meeting will be drawn up at the beginning of the meeting, but it will include Peter Campbell's regular report back on the research he is leading on the history of Survivors Speak Out and discussion of material received from other people about Survivors Speak Out.  Rick Hennelly has se...

The DLA and Workfare Scandals.

This ConDem Coalition is exploiting the apparent helplessness of disabled people by taking essential money away from them and forcing vulnerable people, for example, people with mental health difficulties. I remember, when I was a practising social worker, the horror experienced by service users when they received a letter summoning them to undergo a medical examination (25 miles away in Norwich). Some became absolutely terrified at the prospect and the stress of having to get to and face the appointment led to one or two relapses and hospital admissions. Against local authority policy, I always took them to the appointment, went in with them and supported them through the interview acting as advocate. The doctors at these reviews were employed by the Benefits Agency and usually retired from practice. They were also usually empathic with the service user and mostly helped to reduce the terror of the interview. The new 'Workfare' reviews which every DLA claimant will have to und...

inappropriate!!!

I tried to respond to a Patient Citizen Exchange blog by Laura Greene today. I said: Hello Laura. Welcome - and my admiration? for you "single-handedly representing the entire health voluntary sector and 1000+ PCX membership..." My first question has to be: what is the composition of the Strategic Advisory Board? And my second question: what proportion of service users to professionals is there on that Board? There are indeed millions of impatient citizens out there. They are called Service Users (primarily because 'Patient" carries the labels 'One that has things done to her/him'; 'One that is subservient to the "We know what is best for you" approach'; 'One that is at the wrong end of an imbalance of power.' etc). The Americans prefer the term 'consumers', but whatever, we should avoid the term with the negative connotations. I was listening to the 5 Live debate this morning on the Strictly Come Dancing row about whether...