SCOTTISH Health Minister Mr Michael Forsyth yesterday announced
approval for plans by Greater Glasgow Health Board to close the run-down
Stoneyetts Hospital in Moodiesburn, and transfer patients to new
pupose-built accommodation.
The announcement follows a campaign of opposition to the move by staff
unions and the local community, who claim Stoneyetts's condition has
been caused by neglect, and fear its closure would destroy the
community.
Under the plans, the 180 patients, mostly elderly or middle-aged with
senile dementia or mental illness, will be transferred to new units at
Ruchill and Gartnavel hospitals.
In a statement issued by the Scottish Office, Mr Forsyth said the new
accommodation represented a #4.7m investment by the health board which
will not only improve the quality of life for patients, but would
provide better access for them and their relatives.
Mr Forsyth continued: ''There is no doubt that the new units represent
a welcome improvement compared with the out-of-date and badly located
accommodation at Stoneyetts which has outlived its useful life.
''In future, patients will be able to enjoy a better service and
greater personal privacy in modern surroundings.''
A spokesperson for the health board, whose plans form part of its
Mental Health Strategy published in 1987, said the board welcomed Mr
Forsyth's approval of its proposal to close the ''outdated'' hospital.
However, Mr Jim Devine of the health union Cohse, said yesterday that
the campaign of opposition will continue with a meeting on Sunday of
officials from Cohse and Nupe and the 260 staff at Stoneyetts to decide
on a course of action.
Mr Devine added:''The decision today is, quite frankly, an affront to
democracy. One could not have a better environment for public care of
the elderly than at Stoneyetts.
''The only reason for the closure is the health board's substantial
cash shortfall, and we believe that the campaign of opposition has got
to continue.''
Monklands West Labour MP Mr Tom Clarke deplored Mr Forsyth's decision.
He said he was outraged by what he termed a ''ruthless decision made on
commercial not caring grounds''.
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