In message <[log in to unmask]>, Julian
Bradley <[log in to unmask]> writes
>We've resisted Choose and Book so far - but are told the system is now
>sorted locally.
>
>Does that seem credible?
No.
If Milton Keynes is refusing to accept non-C&B referrals, could you ask
what the arrangements are for patients who have decided - for reasons
which seem very good to them - to be labelled as "sensitive" (used to be
stop-noted) on PDS?
C&B cannot handle these patients.
*Presumably* this means that, if you have a need to conceal your
demographics *and* may need access to NHS care, you are obliged to
sacrifice one or the other? For yourself and your family?
It seems a high price to pay for being legitimately in business with a
connection to Huntingdon Life Sciences - the latest victims were posted
on a USA website , and were two removes from direct contact - or being
stalked.
*GPs* would not be aware that these patients *were* sensitive on PDS
until they tried to make a referral - so maybe every practice should
decide how to address the problem when/if they are faced with it? Part
of risk management?
And if there is no way for patients who need to have their home address
and phone number concealed making an appointment with the hospital of
choice if that hospital is totally C&B bookings, what are the
implications for everyone when *all* appointments have to be made via
C&B?
I have asked my local PCT and have not received a reply (but it was only
last week): how are other PCTs/Trusts/practices/commissioning bodies
addressing this problem?
MaryH
PS I did ask Lord Hunt at Harrogate (on a national scale) at HC2007 on
19.3.07. He said he would have to take it away - fair enough - and I
haven't received a reply as yet: it's early days - I'll start chasing
after Easter once I've recovered from QOF!
>
>Julian
>
--
Mary Hawking
|