
Times letters: Tying hospital funds to patient satisfaction
Write to letters@thetimes.co.uk
Sir, There is a big difference between motivation and financial incentives ('Hospitals' funds tied to patient satisfaction', news, Jun 28). Most health and other professionals are primarily motivated by wanting to make a difference in the world and have an impact in their chosen field. They are not indifferent to money, but are far more likely to be demotivated by lack of money than motivated by financial rewards.
Improved technology and better systems are vital, but the NHS is essentially a people-based service. The new NHS plan will only succeed if the people who have to implement it are personally committed to doing so — providing the extra discretionary effort and passion that money can't buy. The NHS plan of 2000 was similarly far-reaching: it enjoyed enormous support from many NHS professionals and organisations and kickstarted the major improvements of the following years.Lord CrispChief executive of NHS England and permanent secretary of the Department of Health 2000-06
Sir, It's hard to see how cutting the income of a poorly performing NHS trust will result in its treating its unfortunate patients better: the reverse is far more likely. A fairer and more intelligent policy would be to replace the managers of badly run trusts with others who have a track record of serving the public competently.Richard ParlourLincoln
Sir, Too often elaborate and expensive plans are made without any patient involvement. If the ten-year NHS plan is to be successful then patient representation on every single 'change' project should be encouraged. The patients' voice needs to be clear and loud, so as to have a real impact on future services.Professor Mabs ChowdhuryConsultant dermatologist, Cardiff
Sir, To achieve success during the 20-plus years that I was a clinical director in an NHS commissioning group, I spent my life explaining to the non-clinical managers why their initial ideas might not work for clinicians. Labour's suggestion will only work if the managers are willing clinicians who know the system; to think otherwise is folly. One need only look at what happened when the pandemic struck, and managers abandoned ship to the doctors and nurses, to realise this.Dr Shelley HaylesOxford
Sir, You report that patients will decide how much hospitals are paid by rating their treatment and that an improved NHS app will give patients more choice over who treats them and where. On the first issue there has never been a problem with staff motivation but there has been a perennial one with facilities provided (namely, operating theatres, beds and equipment) — which is hardly the responsibility of those providing the care. On the second issue there have been many studies to show that patients prefer local treatment, where any complications can be dealt with promptly by the same team and overall travel kept to a minimum.
These proposals will be ineffective and wasteful. Instead we need to eliminate inefficiency and provide adequate facilities for a professional workforce that should be trusted and not treated like difficult teenagers.Neil ThomasRet'd consultant orthopaedic surgeon, Itchen Stoke, Hants
Sir, I enjoyed Ben Macintyre's account of Anglo-Iranian relations ('Iranian distrust of the British runs deep', Jun 28) but I fear he is too accepting of some of the propagandist claims regularly made by the Islamic Republic. He omits to mention British support for the Constitutional Revolution between 1905 and 1909, particularly the role played by the extraordinary Philo-Persian Cambridge scholar and activist Edward Browne. He might also have recalled Lord Curzon's intense interest in the country. He cites British support for Reza Khan in 1921, but after the chaos of the previous ten years many Iranians welcomed the stability he brought.
Macintyre claims that Mohammad Mosaddegh was 'left-leaning'. He was certainly reformist and nationalist, but he came from an old Qajar family and had been a high functionary in the last days of the dynasty, suggesting paternalism rather than socialism. We and the Americans were certainly involved in his overthrow. But that would not have happened if substantial elements in the army, the religious establishment and the population at large had not supported the Shah. Finally, the present regime is well aware of the decline in our international influence. They shout loudly about us not because they believe we are really capable of damaging them but because it is helpful to them in rallying nationalist sentiment.Sir John JenkinsFormer British ambassador to Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia; Matfield, Kent
Sir, Ben Macintyre's article brought back memories from the late 1960s, when an Iranian student friend told me that in Iran, should someone trip over a stone, you could be sure that an Englishman had put it there.Richard AlbrightRottingdean, Brighton & Hove
Sir, As a teacher I found that gaining the trust and support of parents whose children who were a threat to good order in school was enough to resolve the problem. Jenni Russell's comment piece ('Fear of knives is destroying the social order' Jun 28) reminds us that the more young men carry knives, the more others feel forced to do so. When teenagers appear in court charged with knife crimes their parents are not obliged to attend. These are the people who have brought these young people into the world and have engaged with the responsibility of bringing them up. Owners of dangerous dogs can appear in court; why not the parents of dangerous teenagers? Then courts could demand their co-operation and support.Peter InsonEast Mersea, Essex
Sir, I was much impressed by Jenni Russell's views on the disturbance of social order by petty crimes. Perhaps two days in supervised stocks might provide an effective solution; why waste money on incarceration when the low-cost public shame and indignity of this suffered by offenders might well make them mend their ways within a very short time?Peter HardymentCobham, Surrey
Parliament's lingo
Sir, The proposed 'inclusive' makeover to parliament's 'outdated' language must be resisted ('Division bell rings for 'confusing' parliamentary terms', news, Jun 28). Such an unnecessary change is likely to be irreversible, and is yet another damning example of the Labour government's contempt for tradition and also its utmost uninterest in maintaining high standards of literacy for the future.
The perverse logic underpinning this decision will no doubt have deleterious ripple effects in the education sector further down the line. The literary canon will not be taught in schools on the grounds that the 'confusing' language in these texts 'alienates' students; resultant successive generations of university students will be less willing and able to read; and the longer-term ability for students and academics to engage critically with literature — let alone write about it elegantly — will decline and fall. Edward Gibbon will be turning in his grave.Dr Edward HowellOxford
Two-tier justice
Sir, Lord Hermer, the attorney-general, describes the claim that there exists a two-tier justice system in this country as 'offensive' (Jun 28). But there is indeed a two-tier system, as justice is available only to those eligible for legal aid and those to whom the cost of it all is immaterial. The great majority of the population comes into neither category. Lawyers are fond of repeating that justice delayed is justice denied: it is also the case that justice too-expensive-to-be-afforded is also justice denied.John Davies-HumphreysChester
Sir, Tim Davie's advice to employees to avoid conflict with friends and family over Gaza is no doubt well intentioned ('BBC staff told not to fight with family and friends over Gaza coverage', Jun 26). Given the BBC's Glastonbury coverage of Bobby Vylan's chant of 'death to the IDF', why should employees feel unable to defend their employer? If they are uncomfortable doing so, should they not seek to change the organisation from within — or alternatively consider whether they should change their employer?Andrew LeslauHenley-on-Thames, Oxon
Sir, If, as reported (Jun 27), disability benefit changes will now apply only to new claimants, it is questionable whether the same criteria should not have been applied to the imposition of VAT on school fees, thereby preventing the enforced displacement of thousands of pupils.Keith WellingsHalesowen, W Midlands
Sir, Further to your report ('Give 65-year-olds MoT 'to keep them living at home' '), as a 67-year-old who plays hockey and cricket at club and international age group level, erects the marquees for the village fête, cleans the local church using an extendable ladder and goes mountain biking on Salisbury Plain, am I allowed to question the age criteria of the proposed care home assessment?Mark BanhamBeechingstoke, Wilts
Sir, Regarding people dining alone being given a bad table (Notebook), the trick is, when entering, to ask for a table for two and order a glass of wine right away, 'While I wait for my friend'. When it comes, smile apologetically, pick up your phone and say you've just learnt that your friend can't make it and you'll be eating alone. You'll never be asked to move.Michael JohnstoneLondon NW1
Sir, Dafydd Thomas's letter (Jun 28) reminded me of a dinner party in Nashville at which I was the only one of the 12 guests who did not carry a gun. The hostess said that she advised her children when returning home late to shout up 'It's only me, Mother'. Otherwise, she said, 'I'll shoot 'em'.Averil MansfieldLondon W2
Sir, Your editorial (Jun 28) accuses the M&S Red Diamond Strawberry and Creme sandwich of 'desecrating' the legacy of the 4th Earl of Sandwich, thus perpetuating the legend that the Earl created the delicacy. The Romans, among others, might contest that claim. The first Earl of Sandwich, however, whose scorched remains, recognisable only by his clothing and medals, were washed ashore after his ship was set on fire at the Battle of Solebay in 1672, could lay claim to the dubious honour of being history's first example of a 'toasted' Sandwich.Jonathan CooteErith, Kent
Write to letters@thetimes.co.uk
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
US FDA to revise label of ADHD medications to add weight loss risk in patients younger than 6
June 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Monday that it is revising the labeling of all extended-release stimulants to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to warn about the risk of weight loss and other side effects in patients younger than six years. The FDA said that it is requiring a "limitation of use" section in the prescribing information of all extended-release stimulants to include a statement on higher rates of adverse reactions in children younger than six years. Extended-release stimulants are prescription drugs primarily used to treat ADHD as an initial therapy and come in a variety of dosage forms, including tablets, capsules and liquid suspensions. Although extended-release stimulants are not approved for children younger than 6 years, health care professionals can prescribe them "off label" to treat ADHD.


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Pandemic care home failures amount to ‘generational slaughter'
Care home failures during the pandemic amounted to 'generational slaughter', the Covid inquiry has been told. Residents of care homes were let down by politicians who lost their 'moral compass' and made 'catastrophic' decisions, such as discharging untested or Covid-positive patients into the community, lawyers for bereaved families have argued. On the opening day of the sixth module, investigating the care sector, Baroness Hallett, chairing the inquiry, heard submissions from bereaved families and others. She will hear evidence later this week from Matt Hancock, the former health secretary. Nearly 46,000 care home residents died with Covid in England and Wales between March 2020 and January 2022. According to official figures, nearly 18,500 residents in England died between March 14 and June 12 2020, accounting for around 40 per cent of deaths involving Covid during this period. One of the areas to be examined by the inquiry will be government guidance for care homes, published on April 2 2020 and considered one of the worst mistakes of the pandemic. The guidance said care homes could accept hospital patients with Covid, as well as take in hospital patients who had not been tested and look after them 'as normal' if they did not show symptoms of the virus. It meant that large numbers of untested hospital patients carried the virus into some of the most vulnerable communities in England, likely to have led to deaths. The inquiry will also examine 'do not resuscitate' notices being placed on some care home residents and visiting policies that prevented families seeing their loved ones for months. 'Complete chaos' Addressing the inquiry in his opening submissions, Pete Weatherby KC, representing Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK, quoted highly critical testimony from Alasdair Donaldson, a senior policy adviser in the Department for Health and Social Care's adult social care department, who joined at the start of the pandemic. Mr Donalson was quoted as describing 'complete chaos' after his arrival, with 'no one knowing who was doing what or where responsibility lay' and finding that 'HR was unaware of people it was employing even to the nearest thousand'. He was quoted as saying: 'My reluctant personal conclusion from what I directly witnessed is that the Civil Service I am proud to be part of catastrophically let down the people it was supposed to serve. 'All policy-makers should not shy away from the fact that they presided over something that was more than a natural disaster, inevitably exacerbated in places by a few incompetent or reckless errors.' Mr Donaldson said that mistakes by the government at the time led to the deaths of thousands, and it was perhaps the biggest failure in modern times. 'Rather, the government public health response to Covid involved a series of catastrophic policy errors, an overall system performance that was, with notable exceptions, a profound failure, perhaps the greatest governmental policy failure of modern times,' he was quoted as saying. 'This failure resulted in the unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of British citizens, including a generational slaughter within care homes, many of those victims having horrible deaths, often without the solace of their loved ones. Understanding the true causes of this failure is I believe owed to the victims, their families, to history and to the future.' 'Emotive and distressing' Mr Weatherby KC said that bereaved families had come to a similar conclusion and demanded answers. He said: 'Although the phrase 'generational slaughter' within care homes may sound hyperbolic or rather colourful language, it chimes with the experience of thousands of our families. 'We call out the callous way that family members were treated by politicians and policy makers, referring to them as bed blockers and people nearing the end regardless of the virus. This statement reflects that those in charge of policy lost their moral compass in dealing with those receiving care.' Jacqueline Carey KC, counsel to the inquiry, had earlier explained the scope of the module, warning that it would be 'emotive and distressing for many people' and quoted testimony from a care home worker who described how the virus 'spread like wildfire'. Ms Carey said the inquiry would investigate understaffing in care homes and the difficulties that faced staff working in them, who were often on minimum wage. The hearings come as The Telegraph revealed that Prof Sir Chris Whitty was responsible for government guidance believed to have triggered the spread of Covid into care homes. The Chief Medical Officer previously told the inquiry that he was 'not closely involved' in decisions behind a scheme to discharge thousands of hospital patients into care homes at the start of the pandemic. However, government emails obtained by The Telegraph showed that Sir Chris's office signed off guidance for care homes in England, advising them that they could take patients from hospitals who had not been tested. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesman said Sir Chris would 'continue to support the Covid inquiry' and that it would be 'inappropriate to pre-judge' its findings.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Coroner warns care home of ‘cultural problem' after patient's double bed fall
A coroner has told a care home it suffers from a 'cultural problem' after a patient died shortly after falling from her bed twice in the space of a week. Sonia Sore, 84, fell onto the floor at North Court Care Home in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, on October 14 2023 after the right handrail on her bed was not raised. Despite staff subsequently noting that the rails should be raised when the patient was occupying the bed, she fell out the same side in the same manner six days later after no action was taken. A bleed was then identified on Mrs Sore's brain after her condition deteriorated and she was taken to hospital. She died on November 8 2023 after receiving palliative care from the care home. Mrs Sore had been assessed as at risk of falling from her bed prior to either of the falls due to earlier health issues causing reduced mobility, with the raising of bed rails included in a management plan to address this risk. A narrative conclusion given at an inquest into her death found it was not possible to identify when the bleed on Mrs Sore's brain first started, but that it was probable the second fall on October 20 had 'made a material contribution' to her injury and death. 'The fact that the right-hand bed rail was not raised on Mrs Sore's bed meant that she was able to fall out of bed on the 20th October 2023 and this fact made a material contribution to the death,' it added. The inquest concluded Ms Sore died due to accidental causes. Her medical cause of death was given as a subdural haematoma. A nurse at the care home made an entry in Mrs Sore's notes confirming the requirement for her bed rails to be raised on October 17, but the right handrail was not raised following the note and was not raised at any point between the two falls. Darren Stewart OBE, area coroner for Suffolk, said it was apparent during the inquest that North Court Care Home had 'a less than diligent focus' on risk assessment and mitigation. He said: 'Despite risks being assessed, and mitigation measures identified, staff would regularly fail to implement the latter. 'In Mrs Sore's case this included the failure to secure the right hand side bed rail as identified in numerous risk assessments relating to mitigating her risk of falling from the bed. 'The evidence indicated that this applied in relation to the actions of multiple staff at the care home, not just a few, giving rise to the concern that this was a cultural problem at North Court Care Home.' A copy of a prevention of future deaths report were sent by the coroner to the care home's director of operations, with Mr Stewart adding: 'I believe you (and/or your organisation) have the power to take such action.' Copies were also sent to Mrs Sore's family, the Care Quality Commission, Mrs Sore's GP practice and the Chief Coroner for England and Wales.