Skip to main content

There'll be some Changes Made.

A friend from our Parish Council casually asked if I'd be interested in a meeting involving 'future health care' at South Norfolk (District) Council. I was and foiund out that:

Norfolk Community Health and Care NHS Trust is currently the new provider of community services (nursing, occupational therapy etc) in our 'not so local' area. Here in Thurlton we're relatively fortunate to be served by one of three satellites of the South East Community Team based in which is based in Wymondham. However, our satellite team is based in Chedgrave - a marked improvement on previous services, usually based in Norwich or Wymondham.

But when the new Commissioning Manager for South Norfolk, Chris Coath spoke, he revealed something of a snag:

Being in the extreme south east of Norfolk, right against the Suffolk border, half the patients (I'll say 'patients' rather than 'service users' for the sake of populist clarity) are registered with the Beccles GP practice in Suffolk and the other half with the Chet Valley GP practice in Norfolk.

The snag is that the new Norfolk community provision will only apply to Chet Valley patients. The Beccles practice patients will have their services delivered by a provider commissioned by the GP commissioning group which includes the Beccles practice - most probably (although not impossible) not the Norfolk Community Care and Health NHS Trust (NCCH).

So, for instance, half the people in our village, Thurlton will be served by NCCH and half by whichever organisation is contracted by the Beccles group in Suffolk (not known at the time of writing). Discussing this with Chris Coath after the meeting, we agreed a conflict of standards and methods would probably occur, leading to inequalities for people living next door to one another.

Yesterday, I also spoke to Gerard Whitfield, practice manager at the Chet Valley surgery. Gerard told me they are making no special arrangements as far as they are concerned and, pretty well shrugging his shoulders, said the practice divisions had existed for many years. He seemed not to be concerned that inequalities might occur.

Perhaps I and Chris Coath, his background being in heath scrutiny, are being ultra-sensitive. Time will tell.

Mike.

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...

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.