I almost agree with Gavin R Tait, but he cannot blame any one Government (Letters, December 24).
I seem to recall NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC) a few years ago paid £6 million to fast-track patients through a private hospital to meet waiting time targets. In fact NHSGGC liked the hospital so much that in 2002 it bought it – admittedly a bargain at a fraction of its cost – and called it the Golden Jubilee. All this under an earlier Scottish Executive of a different (and fetching two-tone) stripe.
Targets are a valid way of driving many commercial enterprises, but they are generally only used when workers' loyalty to their employer or to their calling is no longer sufficient motivation. It has apparently not been possible for the NHS to consult properly with clinicians and others whose efforts are supposedly to be guided by these apparently god-given principles. The result is declining morale in a health care system where staff attitudes to work and patients is vital.
The NHS, for reasons as Mr Tait says often of political interference, has lost much of the loyalty of 60 years ago. Advances in medicine and surgery have been complemented by progress in clinical skill sets of world standard, yet the NHS has been starved of the management ingenuity and independence to allow proper use of SMART targets, without which those clinical skills may not be effectively exploited.
A clinical services review is now in hand, which may open the way to greater collaboration within the NHS and with the patient, and perhaps one element can be introduced to bridge gaps: increase the patient's involvement with his/her care by all means, but the system will always be complicated to an outsider and each patient should have one single named member of NHS staff who has responsibility for their case: a guide through what is often a bewildering maze of forms and uniforms, places and faces.
A name with a face. And a telephone number.
James Sandeman,
3 Scone Place,
Newton Mearns.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article