Well I must say I'm surprised by the lack of interest in the HSC meeting today. I used to tweet all of them at one time and it always provoked loads of conversation, even on fairly benign agenda topics. Today was no benign topic, yet interest was surprisingly sparse.
If the focus was on learning from events and trying to fix the risk, I'd support it. But that's not been my impression. I've been concerned by the concerted focus on attempting to change the law, when even Prof Williams says there's nothing thing wrong with the current law.
-
-
If there had been transparency when Tina died 10yrs ago we would have accepted it, what makes you bitter and angry is when over 4yrs lies were told- cover ups were in motion. We knew different and our PHSO report echoed that in March 2013.
-
Totally agree. The truth would be a fast and very cost effective way of dealing with mistakes. I'm still trying to fully understand the motivators which make this so unlikely in reality.
-
To be honest John, doctors fail a patient they are legally advised not to admit fault [unless of course it’s something they cannot deny] the same with management at trusts and it goes on from there. I don’t think things will ever change on that front.
-
I think that's exactly the reason for an individual statutory duty of candour? So that the legal advice changes (advising disclosure) and there's something more concerning than management's reaction influencing the decision to tell the truth or lie. Balance needs tipping, imho.
-
Totally agree, however if we have
#learnnotblame instead of any of them being held to account, how can there ever be any improvement? When I say held to account I don’t mean sent to prison, just suspension which will stay on their record.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.