intexasatthe moment

Hugenot - nothing "to get out there " ,I said early on in this thread that my mother's care at Kings had fallen short of their normal high standards ,so no revelations there . I'm not sure why you're talking about " unique requirements " ,my mother's health issues are fairly standard for elderly people . I'm also not sure why you're saying that treating patients with the tablets they bring in with them is a receipe for disaster - patients are asked to bring their medication in and it is dispensed to them. .All my mother's tablets were in blister packs - no bottles with unidentifiable tablets . I'm not "trying to take down the NHS " I was responding to comments about how money could be saved . But you're not really interested in discussion or other people's views are you ? Just in trying to whip up hysteria and make personal remarks about people . I have tried not to respond in like way ,but my resolve is obviously weakening .

well - how about reducing the time ( 6 hours from arrival to x ray and diagnosis )for a 90 year old attending A and E with a fractured femur ,then the degraded skin and dehydration they develop during the wait won't also require treatment - how about not insisting that people whose opticians have diagnosed macular degeneration attend a clinic at Kings so that macular degeneration can be confirmed in order for the patient to access other services - how about not loosing ( 3 times ) the patients medecines that they have dutifully brought in from home when admitted as an inpatient so that more have to be issued - how about not insisting " we don't treat patients holistically on this ward " so that patient has problem they were admitted with attended to and then discharged with deteriotation in other conditions so that patient readmitted 3 weeks later - how about not ordering diagnostic tests for inpatients and then loosing the results so that they have to be repeated /aren't held on file and can't be compared with further ones - how about thinking of a way in which porters delivering a patient to a ward could then take someone waiting to leave that ward ,rather than a second porter having to be called And if we were to think of NHS expenditure in the community - the overordering of dressings and related items ( dressit packs ,manuka honey ,sterile water ,etc ) has lots of potential .

and cue a post from someone who hasn't read this thread ,or the letter , to express outrage that low lifes are slating Kings for fundraising ....

Hugeunot - I've not " laid into " anyone .I've said that I don't like this technique of fundraising . I don't know if you've seen the letter in question but the main body of it ,the clear message it gives out ,spelt out very clearly in the first few lines is that it is about giving to Kings charitable funds . It does also mention ,at the end ,about keeping ones details on record for the purposes of updating the receipent . I don't think that Kings should use patients addresses in this way and I think the letter is disengenious ,am I not entitled to that view ? And for the record I have not expressed a view on whether Kings should be fundraising or not so I do not belong in the category ( if there is one ) of "being up in arms " about it .

I've not accused anyone of illegal acts . As I said the letter was within the law - as Kings explained earlier on this thread ,legal advice had been taken. Most people reading the letter wouldn't ( IMO ) understand the implications of it being from the the CEO rather than the charity ,or that it was not just a straightforward request for donations rather than one asking whether you wanted to be kept updated . If it had been a direct request for donations from the charity to recent inpatients it would ( as I understand it )have been illegal .Because it was from the CEO ,it wasn't illegal .Personally I think that equates to cunning and underhandedness . My mother who received the letter didn't understand the legal niceties - as far as she was concerned Kings were using her address to write to her about nothing to do with her health . She felt it was a breach of privacy and it upset her . I don't think that Kings should use patients data in this way - the fact that they've managed to find a way of avoiding breaking the law doesn't make it any better . And I don't believe that it's on a par with consumer groups using one's name and address . Your So now we've taken someone who cared and we've rubbed muck on their faces. The only real outcome is that after this petty abuse they'll now care just a little bit less. How terribly sad. The tragedy is that this pungent cynicism has now fecked it up for everyone. is all supposition . This is a public forum ,I've expressed a view about one of the methods that Kings uses to raise money ,if this makes Kings or their charity reconsider their techniques or reflect on their impact ,then I'm glad .

Disrupted ? As in temporarily ceasing to function/impaired ? By this thread ?

Thank you PeckhamRose . I wonder if they were looking horrified because they imagined something illegal had been done . The letter cunningly avoided that ,sent from CEO ,asking about whether receipient wanted to receive further info . It would be nice to think that they were concerned about the targeting and general underhanded ( look at us ,we can pull this mail shot off and stay within the letter of the law )ness of this . Hopefully people at KIngs will think again when they are devising fund raising techniques .

Medley - having been told by Southwark's contact for the "consultation " that Barry Mason and Southwark cyclists were in favour of this plan ,I emailed southwark cyclists asking if they could tell me why/explain what I was missing . But I didn't get a reply . I also raised it with James Barber but his reply didn't deal with the concerns I'd raised ,only said that it was a good thing to extend the cycle route that runs from Old Kent Rd area along old canal past library . I did respond to the "consultation " but the impression I got was that it was already decided . I had asked if the date for replies could be extended ( given the lack of publicity ) and was told that this wouldn't be possible as a delay would mean loosing the money allocated to the project .

I'm a bore I know ,but one of the things that makes me so mad about the Peckham Rye contraflow is that there was a consultation . But who knew ? And how much did the "consultation" cost ?

cyclists overtake buses everyday and filter in and out of the bus lane to do so- yup ,and down in Peckham they filter into the bike contraflow going in the opposite direction . Hopefully they manage to avoid any bikes /pedestrains coming the other way but obscured by the bus they are overtaking .

I think most supported housing ,either that you buy or rent ,offers only minimal support . And sadly ,ime ,because it's usually a number of flats with some shared common facilities it can be quite a confusing environment .Think hotel corridors and trying to remember which is your door . But a lot of help can be available to people continuing to live in their own homes from social services - carers calling in several times a day ," meals on wheels " . Ask GP to refer ? Or try Alzheimers society for help and advice ?

Well it doesn't matter if they have does it ? Sure there's room for more than one account . I love historical detail about the area and am especially interested in this bit - where are you going public ? How can I read it ?

Sean I appreciate your sentiments . The thing is ,this is an online forum ,this thread is a debate and we all have different views . But ,in this case ,for me ,it wasn't just a debating contest and examination of the finer points of the DPA - it involved a real person . I think the reason I brought my mother into it was because so many people seemed unable to see that just because theywere unfazed by their details being used like this ,other people may genuinely mind . Kings aren't ,technically ,breaking any laws but imo my mother's comcerns are still understandable and legitimate .

Sean - she wasn't largely unaware of the letter .She had it open ,on her lap and was talking to me about it before I'd even closed the front door . Just because she has a number of problems and concerns doesn't mean that it's fine or "small beer " for her to get landed with another one . In fact ,given her age and health ,it makes it worse .She has lost a lot of independence and what she loves most - the sense that she is contolling her own life .She doesn't like cold calls - it makes her anxious that people have her details and contact her .

pk - I told her it was just a standard letter sent to everyone and took it away as quickly as I could . I told her not to worry about it . I'm not sure if she's reassured . She has lots of other things to worry about which I think are probably occupying her more .

Killaqueen - thank you for your posts ,your research and for your interest . I'm not up to this level of debate ,but I'm very glad that you are . Not everyone is so sanguine about receiving cold calls for money - yes I know ( because I've read it ) that this letter didn't directly ask for money . But my mother wasn't interested in foresenically analysing it - she got the message ,it was about "King's College Hospital Charity ". And she certainly didn't appreciate the fine distinction that the letter was from the Chief Executive rather than the Fund raising department . She's recently had two stays in Kings ,they were both deeply unpleasant ,some of the treatment she received fell short of what I am sure are Kings high standards and has had knock on effects on her health since she left hospital . She was concerned to get this letter , wondered why she was sent it , and was anxious about where and how they got her address .She's elderly ,ill and brought up in different times . I suspect that she is not alone . People who use on line forums may be less anxious than other demographics ( if that's the right term) about their details being used and more sanguine about perceived levels of privacy .

What Mickmac and Peckham Rose said .

Thanks PR ,have PM'd you .

Well gosh, it's not unreasonable that KCH thinks that those most likely to support them are those that have made recent use of their services!! - slightly galling though that lack of joined up thinking /failure to treat patient holistically saw this particular user of their services readmitted weeks after discharge . And I think it's innappropriate to use medical records in this way .

For me it's nothing to do with Kings asking for charitable funds , I can cope with that . It's the link ( and there does seem to be one ) with being a recent inpatient and beiong contacted regarding a non medical issue . I was with my mother when she was admitted and she wasn't asked to sign any forms - and she wouldn't have known what she was signing or agreeing to unless someone had patiently gone through each question with her . And even then ,bearing in mind her physical and mental state ,I don't think she'd have known she was agreeing to Kings contacting her re fundraising . My mother is a very private person and very wary of giving her details out to people . She is unnerved by what she perceives as a " Big Brother " society ,monitoring her movements . This is just another thing to upset and worry her . My concern is with where and how Kings obtained contact details and how they selected addresses for this mailshot .

A small point - I didn't keep the letter ,was trying to make light of it and reassure mother ,but ... from memory the wording struck me as odd ( and I now think a kind of sneaky get out in case criticisms of " cold calling " raised ) something about only wanting to update people who were interested and a request for a returned form to indicate interest . Will be interested in reply from Kings fund raising dept .

As Ladymuck said they have, after all, used data from patients' medical records to send them unsolicited mailings in pursuit of charitable donations. My 90 year old mum ( recent patient ,and sorry to say did not receive very good treatment ) also got one . She was distinctly upset by it and felt vulnerable that information about her recent in patient status was being used for non medical purposes .

Although the incredibly helpful staff - sat and taught an internet virgin - made up for the price .

I can't imagine that the young ,slim ,well spoken guy asking for money on train from Peckham Rye was Andrew - but just in case I've emailed his father . Anyone come across the chap I saw - train to London Bridge - very well spoken ,dirty clothes ,addressing carriage in general ,not individuals ?

No advice - I've recently cut out the corner of my living room carpet and binned it because of similar problem . So lots of sympathy ,but... wanted to say - what a gorgeous cat !