Skip to main content

Norfolk PCT response

Had this swift and courteous reply from Norfolk PCT today:

Dear Mr Cox

Thank you for your e-mail, which has been forwarded to me by Trish Turner.

I will attempt to address your concerns in the order in which you originally laid them out.

1. Unfortunately due to the size of the printed consultation feedback document, we are unable to post a copy to you. However, a printed copy is available for anyone to view in each of the nine community hospitals involved in the original consultation process. You are very welcome to visit any of these hospitals to look through the document, though it must remain in situ to give other people the chance to view it. The statement on the PCT’s website is misleading and will be corrected. Thank you for highlighting the issue.

2. With regard to your response not being included in the files on the internet, it appears that you are correct and for this I must apologise. It was an oversight on our part and will be remedied as soon as possible. Please be assured, however, that your response was taken account of during consideration of the results of the consultation.

3. In relation to your formal complaint regarding the Disability Equality Duty, I will pass all copies of your correspondence with Trish Turner regarding the various issues onto the PCT’s complaints department for their attention. They will then be in touch with you in due course.

Thank you for highlighting the errors on the public website.

Assuring you of my best intentions at all times.

Caroline Howarth
Communications and Patient & Public Involvement Manager
Norfolk Primary Care Trust

Tel: 01603 307378

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
2 comments
Read more

Mental Health Labels?

I read this valuable little report yesterday. It presents issues and dichotomies around disability labels, models of disability and rejections of the disability label by mental health service users/survivors. The report makes positive recommendations about furthering the debate but, in my opinion, the user contributions muddy rather than clarify matters. The subjects are seminal to the work being carried out to integrate physically, sensory, mental health and intellectual disabilities - essential if we are to progress further in our strivings for human and statutory rights. For me, the report is enormously helpful in providing a foundation for discussions of what are important questions and perhaps, if properly distributed, it could bring a better focus towards some resolution. Heddwch. Mike.
Post a Comment
Read more