In strikes where nurses and doctors vote to strike they invariably still provide emergency level cover.
As such there are few if any disabled people left to their own devices as a result of the strike.
Which is not the case as regards those who will be affected by the cuts.
Emergency level cover costs lives. In a myriad of ways that would be to painful and gory to go into. Of this I have personal experience.
You pointed out yourself how some hospitals are already operating at emergency levels.
I suspect that kizmet is on about stuff like catheterisation, medication, anti-bedsore measures, supervision of feeding and the like.
So in that I would like to thank you for showing me my limits. Now could you please shut the fuck up about it and engage me on some other aspect of this discussion.
And this subject is probably a little too close to home for me to be dispassionate about.
I suspect that kizmet is on about stuff like catheterisation, medication, anti-bedsore measures, supervision of feeding and the like.
You are using disabled people to justify inaction in the face of a brutal attack on... disabled people.
You're not wrong with that, but a 24 hour general strike will make fuck all difference to the risk.It's that 'emergencies only' service that worries me. The main problems with medical care aren't in the ICU's, HDU's or operating theatres... it's on the wards and in the outpatients. Where inappropriate standards of care already put thousands at risk.
I was very disappointed with the coverage. I expect more from my license fee. Srsly.
It's that 'emergencies only' service that worries me. The main problems with medical care aren't in the ICU's, HDU's or operating theatres... it's on the wards and in the outpatients. Where inappropriate standards of care already put thousands at risk. It's in the daily services that prevent people from falling over in the shower or on the toilet or help them to eat.
These are at biggest risk from the cuts, but they are so precarious that we have to be very careful how it is dealt with.
And infection control.
You're not wrong with that, but a 24 hour general strike will make fuck all difference to the risk.
why am I imagining Andrew Hertford shaking his haloed head at the tv while drinking a can of Directors Bitter?
utter crap. Either the right to organise collectively, and take industrial action in defence of your fundamental interests is non-negotiable...or you roll overI think we should be very careful not to mix up someone's 'rights'. With what is 'right'.
Infection control in a hospital environment is a busted flush, and has been since CCT of hospital cleaning services. As the DoH and the individual trusts have found out over the last 20 years, the only way to control infection is to spend above the lowest tender on cleaning.
While CCT/the "internal market"/part-privatisation may be financially efficient, it's extremely inefficient in terms of causing higher spend down the line to remedy the faults it causes.
How do you work that out?
utter crap. Either the right to organise collectively, and take industrial action in defence of your fundamental interests is non-negotiable...or you roll over
The FRFI! mob were also zeroing in on thatThere was a very small 'Hands off Libya' (green flags a-plenty) on the pavement by Westminster Bridge yesterday.
It has compelete relevance to the implication immanent within itThat's true, but it has little relevance to what I said.
Infection control in a hospital environment is a busted flush, and has been since CCT of hospital cleaning services. As the DoH and the individual trusts have found out over the last 20 years, the only way to control infection is to spend above the lowest tender on cleaning.
I would have thought it self-evident. Why do you think that a 24 hour general strike would have any effect on the risk on wards or in OPD? Wards are already staffed at the minimum and nothing will change there, and waiting one day more for an OPD appt will make fuck all difference (clinically) to anyone.
Bit of a tangent, but I don't think cleaning is the biggest factor in infection control. Our hospital has a shit cleaning company. Our infection rates are amongst the best in the country. The things that made a difference, it seems, were bare below the elbows and hand sanitisation by clinicians.
I would have thought it self-evident. Why do you think that a 24 hour general strike would have any effect on the risk on wards or in OPD? Wards are already staffed at the minimum and nothing will change there, and waiting one day more for an OPD appt will make fuck all difference (clinically) to anyone.
It has compelete relevance to the implication immanent within it
And how would a 24 hour general strike by public sector workers hurt the government?
I asked this earlier, because I doubt it would, but no one seems to want to explain.
I suspect that Kizmet made a statement without having a specific idea in mind of what he meant, as he saw it as a useful dig to make - and then got pulled up on it.
Okay, let's break it down into two simple statements then:It's not self evident. I think the effects could be devastating for people already at risk from inappropriate levels of supervision and care. Infection control standards slipping below already shoddy standards will result in many more deaths... not always easily traceable back to an initial source. Falls, breakages, burns on people trying to cope without careworkers who are late, stretched and ill-prepared. Those are just some examples.
Profile. International news coverage. A very clear expression of public dissatisfaction and rebellion. The only thing governments are afraid of (barring neckshots) is mass unpopularity, because that threatens their power and income.And how would a 24 hour general strike by public sector workers hurt the government?
I asked this earlier, because I doubt it would, but no one seems to want to explain.
Okay, let's break it down into two simple statements then:
Ward staffing levels are at a minimum.
Nothing would change on wards in the case of a general strike.
You asked me for personal details. I didn't expect that when I originally posted. It ain't normal to ask someone aggressively to prove their parents are disabled.
Perhaps had you asked in a more adult way I may have explained my personal circumstances more... it's no big secret. But with your attitude I wouldn't give you a hair out of my arse.
Please feel free to crow about it as if it was some kind if victory. Well done.