Oh my blinkin-blimey. With news of the NHS England review panel into the deaths of patients receiving mental health and learning disability services at Sloven Towers since April 2011, our backstage investigative tweeters were busy at work.
The West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group reported 36 unexpected deaths as SIRIs (serious incidents requiring investigation) in Slovens mental health/learning disability provision across a ten month period. This seems astonishingly high (almost one a week)* but was no cause for concern (or even note) apparently. Back in May 2013, the Sloven board meeting papers brush over serious incidents with the following flimflam, completely erasing the human;
Eh? There were 10 serious incidents and 5 unexpected deaths involving SIRIs in April 2013 (in MH/LD services) and the Chief Medical Officer just gives a load of figure flannel?
And another peculiar thing. LB seems to be the only one of the 36 patients to get a mention in the board minutes in that period. That now infamous statement about the service user and natural causes back in July, a couple of weeks after LB died. Not a peep about the remaining 35 (and the however many other patients who died but weren’t categorised as SIRIs). That’s a bit puzzling, I thought.
I mentioned it to Rich when he got back from work.
Without a blink he said “Well we’d got our lawyer by then and had asked for all the records. That’s probably why he was mentioned in the minutes.”
Stinky Pete stench at Candour Crush Towers.
*To provide some comparison Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Trust report 8 unexpected deaths among inpatients between October 12 and Jan 14.
That is appalling.
36? That’s….I don’t have words.
Unbelievable. This is terrible.
Be appalled but not amazed. Writing and interpreting minutes is one of the dark arts. Also chairing meetings: a skillful chair can place items on the agenda, and manage discussion of them, in such a way that a board can be steered away from any “unpleasantness”.
1. Send out enough paperwork before a meeting to ensure that a good number of members will not read it, or will only skim through it.
2. Waste time on minor, but contentious items, so that by the time the “awkward” matter comes along, the board are tired, inattentive and keen to finish.
3. Nurture resentment towards “difficult” board members. Allow opportunities for conscientious board members to become unpopular. Let them talk a lot on minor items and prolong meetings. In this way, if they try to pursue an “awkward” item, especially one buried in a sheaf of obscure statistics, most board members will simply switch off.
5. Make a close ally of your clerk. The clerk can bury bad news by skillful reporting. Few board members will recall the exact detail of meetings, or if they do it will only be of an item that was of specific interest to them. Most only skim through minutes in any case (Refer back to point 1).
Most minutes are approved without too many points arising and then you have an official record of the business of your institution for public consumption. Only the most determined painstaking member of the public will ever be able to work out the devil in the detail.
I stand in awe of Chris. What a sterling guy.
Thanks for this Granny W. More wise words and yes, he is!
So. Who should be involved that is not already? Eg owen jones. Ann begg. Dan goodley. Alan roulesdon. Tom shakespeare. Ed milliband.
Sent from my BlackBerry smartphone from Virgin Media
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 17:28:33 +0000
Subject: [New post] Stinky Pete and the Slovens
sarasiobhan posted: “Oh my blinkin-blimey. With news of the NHS England review panel into the deaths of patients receiving mental health and learning disability services since April 2011, our backstage investigative tweeters were busy at work. Before breakfast news was in:”
Dan G is taking the campaign to Glastonbury with his family which is fab… The rest, who knows.