NHS - Do Not Reply. (574)

To the Health Secretary:

574) Do Not Reply.

Dear Mr Hunt,

I attempted to raise a number of issues with you regarding the governance, transparency, accountability and illogical decision making emanating from NHS Livewell Southwest Ltd. It seems, without success.

I did however receive the following response - at the bottom of which I was told: Do Not Reply,  so I am replying clearly, there is a Culture of Silence in the NHS and its origins can be traced back to you and your Department - Our ref: DE 1071730;
Dear Mr Gilbert,
Thank you for your correspondence of 26 January to Greg Clark about NHS continuing healthcare (CHC). As your email relates to social care, it has been passed to the Department of Health and I have been asked to reply. I apologise for the delay in doing so.

I was sorry to read of your concerns about the responses you received to your Freedom of Information requests.

As you are aware, NHS continuing CHC is a package of ongoing care that is arranged and funded solely by the NHS where the individual has been found to have a, "primary health need" as set out in the national Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare and NHS - funded Nursing Care. Eligibility for NHS CHC is based on individual assessed needs and the diagnosis of a particular disease or condition is not in itself a determinant of eligibility.

As clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) are responsible for the assessment of individuals and delivering this eligibility for NHS CHC based on professional clinical judgement, a multidisciplinary approach and local knowledge of the individual's needs, it is not possible for the Department to provide the information you requested.

I realise this may be disappointing, but I hope it clarifies the Department's position.

Yours sincerely,
Tracy Sutton,
Ministerial Correspondence and Public Inquiries,
Department of Health.

I should like to thank Tracy Sutton for taking the time to respond to my email and I am not disappointed with their contents as they are expected. On the plus side Tracy Sutton's was quicker in her response than Professor Waite's, CEO of Livewell Southwest Ltd, was with his.

Although they both said very little.

Before going any further I should like to say that I believe, having experienced it at first hand, that the National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare and NHS Funded Nursing Care, is an affront to civilised society, a humanitarian disaster and an extortion racket that would have shamed even Ceausescu's Romania. It turns healthcare professionals into functionaries whose duty of care has switched from their patients to anonymous, and to all intents and purposes, unaccountable, shadowy organisations.

It typifies the broken market in social care. 

There would appear to be some confusion as to what my email was seeking to ask but the Health Department's response does raise further concerns.

It mentions, "professional judgement."

I did ask Professor Waite what, in his professional judgement, was contained in my late father's medical records that led his Anonymous Desk Top Reviewer to the extraordinary conclusion that the NHS would fund the cost of my father's care, "for the last two weeks of his life." But I did not get an answer.

Q. Mr Hunt, if the NHS is to persist with these absurd so-called "assessments" why don't NHS patients have the automatic right to a full clinical explanation sa to how such decisions are arrived at?

Q. Mr Hunt, why does a dead person need a Desk Top Review - they're dead after all - is it not a degrading and inhumane practice?

Q. Mr Hunt, not only does the NHS have a Culture of Silence but it has a Culture of Anonymity too. These cultures seem to be multiplying.  How can an Anonymous desk Top Reviewer claim to have a duty of care to their patient when they won't even tell them their name?

Q. Mr Hunt, as Health Secretary why don't you act today to put an end to the Cultures of Silence and Anonymity that infest our health service?

Q. Mr Hunt, when NHS patients successfully challenge these anonymous decisions doesn't it imply that the original decisions were unsafe and those arriving at them, at the very least, unprofessional?

Q. Mr Hunt, having been forced to challenge an abusive and inhumane system why aren't NHS patients automatically entitled to the full costs  of the legal fees they've incurred in retrieving what was rightfully theirs in the first place?

Tracy Sutton's email suggests that it was not possible for your department to provide the information I requested. This is concerning as it suggests  transparency and accountability no longer matter at Governmental level. If you are going to persist with this abusive and inhumane system at least have the decency to collect and publish the data on the performance of local CCGs and those healthcare professionals making such hugely important decisions.

Not only does Devon have a demoralised police force it also has two of the worst performing CCGs in the country: NEW Devon CCG and South Devon and Torbay CCG both of whom have been rated as, "inadequate."

Q. Mr Hunt, is it not an inadequate failure of your Department not to collect and publish nationwide data on CCGs' decisions regarding NHS CHC Assessments - ie how many NHS patients were granted in full NHS funded nursing care - how many weren't and how many NHS patients were successful in appealing those decisions?

Many could be forgiven for thinking you run a National Stealth Services - one that has successfully devised a racket for parting NHS patients from all they've ever worked for.

I look forward to you reply.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert.