INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Why exactly do hospitals need to know...?

...on serious topics that don't fit anywhere else at present.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Jem
Posts: 973
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:37 pm

Why exactly do hospitals need to know...?

#1 Post by Jem » November 2nd, 2007, 11:06 pm

..what one's religion is? OK, I understand if someone's ill or having an operation. My partner cut his head on a door frame today - a minor injury but it bled a lot and it was obviously not one for home first aid. He went to hospital to have the wound glued. There was no question of his having to stay in overnight in fact they couldn't get rid of him quick enough.

So what was the point?



:shrug:

Lord Muck oGentry
Posts: 631
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:48 pm

#2 Post by Lord Muck oGentry » November 3rd, 2007, 12:00 am

They've been watching too much MASH and want Mulcahy Red to " put the fix in"?

squiffy
Posts: 42
Joined: September 26th, 2007, 12:22 pm

#3 Post by squiffy » November 3rd, 2007, 1:34 pm

Hi Jem Here is the answer to your question.

This isn't a snarl at anyone on the messageboard, but the anguished cry of a nurse who is completely pi**ed off.

There is in each hospital a large body of people who could not otherwise be gainfully employed. These people are called administrators, clerical support staff, clerks etc. They spend their days pushing pieces of paper and wee bits of old rubber bands around their desks.

When they get bored they ring around the wards to see if they can interrupt a nurse who is doing something pointless - say - talking to a patient, reassuring someone who is anxious about some aspect of their care, checking temperatures, blood pressures, IV administration sets, helping a patient with their personal care, cleaning up faeces - the list goes on - to ask why they have not correctly completed form J9875348-95/798347C and forwarded it, in triplicate, to seven other departments. :angry: :angry: :angry:

The administrators would have to stop doing this vital work if they had to devise different admission forms for different departments of the hospital.

One alternative to that would be to engage a firm of consultants at a reasonable cost, £2,000,000 or £3,000,000 to carry out an independent review of the pro forma used in the Accident and Emergency department and recommend that the question be omitted from the relevant admission form. The old forms could then be destroyed and new ones printed or a firm of computer consultants could be engaged to write a new programme for the Accident and Emergency department's computer system. The other alternative would be to employ more administrators, clerical support staff, clerks etc. to carry out their duties on a short term basis.

If a patient reporting to the A&E dept. were to collapse with a previously undetected condition, concussion, shock, fractured skull or some such, said patient might not be too impressed that their diagnosis had been made by the clerk, with no medical training, who booked them in and who decided that no further treatment would be required. To continue on, from this more serious than previously noticed condition, to a ward admission, said patient, who is an undisclosed atheist because there is nowhere on the form to record such a fact, might not be too struck, on regaining consciousness, to find a rc priest administering the last rites.

Of course, when the person you escorted to the hospital collapses, you won't mind filling in another form with all the same questions as the first, but including the one about religion because you know that neither you nor the person asking you all these questions again has anything better to do!

That is why hospitals need to know your religion!

You could just grin and bear it and answer the questions politely, because you can rest assured that the person asking them had nothing to do with setting them and has no power to change them. Write to your MP, or the Chief Executive of the Trust, he or she is being paid much more than anyone you will come across in the hospital to deal with precisely this question.

Are you sorry you asked? :grin:

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

#4 Post by Alan H » November 3rd, 2007, 7:38 pm

Jem: I'd lay low for a while - Matron is doing her rounds and she is in one of her moods again! :grin:

squiffy
Posts: 42
Joined: September 26th, 2007, 12:22 pm

#5 Post by squiffy » November 3rd, 2007, 8:47 pm

...and another thing...

:laughter: :laughter: :laughter: :laughter: :laughter:

Jem
Posts: 973
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:37 pm

#6 Post by Jem » November 6th, 2007, 8:29 pm

Thank you for your very full and entertaining reply, Squiffy. I'm still not clear about why they ask for your religion in the first place but I understand that it's not worth bothering to try to get it changed.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

#7 Post by Alan H » November 6th, 2007, 8:56 pm

Jem wrote:Thank you for your very full and entertaining reply, Squiffy. I'm still not clear about why they ask for your religion in the first place but I understand that it's not worth bothering to try to get it changed.
Yes, I presume it's a case of 'that's the way we've always done it'? Do you know what they do with the information?

Taking one health board, Forth Valley, they are registered with the Information Commissioner to record 'Religious or Other Beliefs Of A Similar Nature' of their patients for the purpose of 'Pastoral care', defined as 'The administration of pastoral care by a vicar or minister of religion'. It's interesting that they do not mention the use of these data for Humanist 'chaplains'. In fact, because they do not explicitly mention them, but do mention vicars and ministers of religion, I wonder if they would be breaking data protection laws if they did pass on a patients religion (or otherwise) to a Humanist chaplain!

Fia
Posts: 5480
Joined: July 6th, 2007, 8:29 pm

#8 Post by Fia » November 7th, 2007, 10:55 am

A perfectly understandable rant, Squiffy - I fully agree with you and hope you feel better for that!

Having taken my living will form (now called advance decision - available from http://www.dignityindying.org.uk) to my GP to talk it through yesterday he informed me that I do not need to state my Humanism to ensure I am not, as Squiffy says, regaining consciousness to find an rc priest administering the last rites. Death from apoplexy guaranteed!

He told me that (in our Health Board anyway) no religious persons are allowed to a patients bedside unless specifically asked and signed for by the patient. Perhaps other health boards could follow suit?

squiffy
Posts: 42
Joined: September 26th, 2007, 12:22 pm

#9 Post by squiffy » November 7th, 2007, 6:24 pm

I promise not to rant.

I thought about it and decided that it can be used for something useful. The more of us who state that we have no religion, the fewer chaplains the health service will be able to justify employing!
:idea3: :clap: :party:

I know that here in Norn Iron such a question will remain on the forms for the foreseeable future. As far as I know in the rest of the UK the fair employment legislation only covers race or ethnic origin, but here it also includes protestant or roman catholic. There is probably some poor beggar sitting in a cupboard counting patients to ensure that there is no discrimination on the grounds of religion.

DougS
Posts: 737
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 9:48 am

#10 Post by DougS » November 7th, 2007, 9:15 pm

I agree, Squiffy. People do need to take a stand on these things - make sure they do actually enter 'none' and not just put C of E (in England). It's the same when taking oaths. It irritates the hell out of me when they ask 'what is your religion?' as if having a religion was the norm.

I Am That I Am
Posts: 143
Joined: August 9th, 2007, 11:50 pm

#11 Post by I Am That I Am » November 7th, 2007, 11:43 pm

The, "What is your religion?", question isn't just confined to hospitals. I was asked the same question when registering with my GP a couple of years ago. Interestingly, the GP practice likes to advertise itself as a "Christian" one - stating it very clearly in its information sheets. This is very odd I think but I have recently learned that my doctor is a Born Again Christian. I really don't know about the rest of the doctors in the practice but the fact that they make such an issue of being Christian makes me wonder about the position of the other doctors. That they make an issue of being Christian is also interesting because I live in an area with a large number of Moslems and many GP surgeries have Moslem doctors....draw your own conclusions.

However, my GP practice appears to be a particularly good one and has won awards. As long as they take good care of their patients I don't really care too much about what they choose to believe.
AKA Mick

Zoe
Posts: 564
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 4:08 pm

#12 Post by Zoe » November 8th, 2007, 12:04 pm

I'm quite shocked at that, Mick. I don't imagine anyone wanting an abortion would bother making an appointment there.

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 9268
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

#13 Post by Maria Mac » November 8th, 2007, 11:56 pm

DougS wrote:I agree, Squiffy. People do need to take a stand on these things - make sure they do actually enter 'none' and not just put C of E (in England).
I recall my first ante natal appointment back in 1984 in London, the nurse sat opposite me at a table filling in my details. For religion she put C of E - she didn't even ask me! I corrected her but at that moment I felt very angry on behalf of people of all faiths (apart from C of E of course) as well as those of none.

User avatar
Alan C.
Posts: 10356
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 3:35 pm

#14 Post by Alan C. » November 9th, 2007, 12:25 pm

Back in January there was a bit of a furore up here. when a doctor was handing out these Parish at war over 'anti-Islam' booklet written by local doctor. He was eventually reinstated after apologizing.
Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers.

Jem
Posts: 973
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:37 pm

#15 Post by Jem » November 9th, 2007, 12:42 pm

Alan C. wrote:Back in January there was a bit of a furore up here. when a doctor was handing out these Parish at war over 'anti-Islam' booklet written by local doctor. He was eventually reinstated after apologizing.
What an arse!

User avatar
Alan C.
Posts: 10356
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 3:35 pm

#16 Post by Alan C. » November 16th, 2007, 5:27 pm

When I started to read this, I thought it was from "The Onion" Unfortunately it's not. (My bold)
Editorial by Terry Sanderson
Hospital chaplains – MPs push to make them a statutory requirement
The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Chaplaincy in the NHS – which is supported by 40 MPs from different religions – has said it will "name and shame" hospital trusts failing to provide chaplains from a required range of religions. The new grouping will attempt to force all NHS hospitals to provide a Catholic chaplain by making it a legal requirement.

The new group was formed with backing from former Conservative leader and Catholic Iain Duncan Smith, and will be chaired by shadow Health Minister, Mike Penning, an Anglican. The group will press for all major religions and denominations to be represented in hospital chaplaincies if they are present in the local population. Mr Penning said such hordes of clerics were necessary because the idea of "multi-faith" chaplains was "unsatisfactory". All these chaplains are to be employed at the NHS Trusts' expense.

Father Peter Scott, a national chaplain liaison officer and chaplain co-ordinator at Westminster Diocese, who pushed for the formation of the parliamentary committee, said: "The aim is to make chaplaincy services a statutory requirement, as it already is in prisons, the armed forces and higher education, but not in hospitals. In the NHS core principles there is nothing specific about the religious and spiritual needs of patients and staff."

This latest push follows from the publication of a report from the Theos "Christian think tank" which revealed that hospitals in dire financial straits were cutting chaplaincy services in order to save medical and nursing jobs. Since then, the pressure has been increasing from the churches for this trend to be reversed.

When it was discovered that the Worcester Royal NHS Hospital Trust had cut its chaplaincy service to save money, the churches went into overdrive. Their pressure – as usual – has paid off and the Trust has been forced to announce that chaplaincy provision for its three hospitals will be part of the budget again next year – albeit that this is only a third of the previous complement.

As the churches push to dip into the stretched funds of hospitals around the country, the Bromley Hospitals Trust has announced that it has debts of £99 million and will have to lay off hundreds of staff. Drug orders have been slashed. London NHS doctors face a reduction in the supplement they get for living in the capital. The London Evening Standard reports that a superbug vaccine that could save thousands of lives has been shelved because of a funding crisis.

Perhaps the time has come, in the face of the financial crisis within the NHS, for the churches to examine their conscience and ask what moral right they have to demand money from such a service to finance something that should be their own responsibility? Why don't they pay for the chaplains out of their own gigantic resources?

We've said it before, and we stick by it: these chaplains are parasites on a service that is there first and foremost to provide medical treatment and health care. When are we going to see the All Party Parliamentary Group for Making the Church Pay its Share?
Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers.

Post Reply