Striking doctors are being warned that the NHS will start formally collecting evidence of the harm to patients caused by their refusal to help struggling hospitals. The Telegraph has more.
Under strike protocols, hospital trusts can ask unions to allow doctors to cross picket lines and cover shifts if patient safety is compromised.
But all known requests relating to the current action have so far been rejected by the British Medical Association (BMA).
On Thursday, senior officials at NHS England wrote to the BMA – setting out steps to strengthen safety protocols and log evidence of all harm occurring when such requests are rejected.
It came as hospitals across the country came under strain, with critical incidents and black alerts declared in almost every part of the country, and A&E units repeating warnings that they could only handle “life threatening” cases.
Several hospitals issued public statements urging the public to take relatives home as soon as safely possible, in order to free up beds.
The letter is signed by Emily Lawson, the interim NHS Chief Operating Officer, Prof Sir Stephen Powis, the National Medical Director and Navina Evans, the Chief Workforce Officer.
In the letter, Prof Powis said health officials will now follow up every case where mitigations have been rejected, in order to compile a picture of the impact on services.
Hospitals have been told to specifically record all safety incidents during strikes “so that we can evidence harm and near misses which might have been avoided”.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
One more excuse for excess deaths. Their merry bag of explanations to feed the masses grows by the week. A nonstop harvest of bullsh*t. Anything but the vaccines.
Wholeheartedly agree. Last line is telling – Hospitals have been told to specifically record all safety incidents during strikes “so that we can evidence harm and near misses which might have been avoided”. What about all the ones that have occurred without strikes? Back in my day such events were covered up, excused or blamed on nurses/ancillaries/porters/anyone else but never the docs (just ask the Medical Defence Union).
There is a distinct difference between causing harm and not doing good.
At the moment, they are not doing good. When administering an unnecessary, toxic, experimental jab without full consent – that is causing harm.
These junior doctors are never doing good. They’ve signed contracts where they agreed to take over certain responsibilties in exchange for pay. They’re exactly on the level of dustmen in this respect. It’s just that their willfull neglect causes more harm much quicker than dustmen ‘strikes’ do.
There is an enormous difference between reality and perception. Whilst junior doctors are led by a left wing zealot, (Dr Laurenson is a director of an investment company), intent on bringing down the government, note: I didn’t refer to it as conservative, is the reality, the perception is that the medical profession is forever tainted. It used to be revered and its practitioners held in high esteem by all. Now, along with BR train drivers, estate agents and second-hand car salesmen, junior doctors come across as selfish and grasping, with nary a thought for Joe and Josephine Public.
It’s a far cry from the pipe-smoking, tweed suited GP who would visit to tend my ailments when I was a child over 70 years ago.
I had one like that. She was a lovely woman!
“I had one like that. She was a lovely woman!….the pipe-smoking, tweed suited GP”
😀😀😀
Yes, that was the point.
As MikeAustin already said (this was meant to be a reply but I mis-clicked) the true harms committed during lockdown etc are those I’m most interested in being accounted for.
Not just the jabs, but also the numerous incidents where petty jobsworths prevented relatives from visitiong those dying in solitude.
The theory behind strikes is that they cause no harm to the general public because competitors will take over the business of the company whose employees are currently striking. This also puts pressure on the owners of said company to come to terms with their employees. Neither of both applies to state employees working for monopoly utility organisations refusing to work. This harms the general public and is supposed to put pressure on MPs to do something about it for fear of losing votes. It is, therefore, inappropriate to call this a strike or claim it would be legitmate because strikes are.
Oops…
Unless I’m very much mistaken the wonderful Dr Vernon Coleman has stats proving that when doctors strike the mortality rate goes down.
Being an old cynic I’m also beginning to wonder whether the “powers that be” have put the doctors up for this in order to distract us from the main cause of excess deaths? But there again as I said I’m just an old cynic.