HSE No Longer Allowed to Refer to Patients as "Love" or "Dear"

Alun

Baybay wrote: »

Another irritant is the use of we. As in, how are we doing today?

Find that & love or hun so patronising, dismissive & depersonalising in hospitals & elsewhere.

I agree with both of those, and you can add to that using childish terms for stuff like "tummy" for abdomen or "bugs" or "germs" instead of bacteria or viruses.

Omackeral

Graces7 wrote: »

In Yorkshire it is "petal" or "flower"

k99_64 wrote: »

In Nottingham its 'duck'

In Australia it's "cunt"

Gatling

Another week , another were all so offended by two simple words used by healthcare professionals.


#getafeckinglife

stevek93

This is going to free up so many bed...

Rikand

Samuel Vimes wrote: »

No.
She finds the expression patronising and dismissive.

People like your partner are part of everything that is wrong in this world

seamus

Gracelynn Panicky Ticker wrote: »

Politically correct nonsense. A lot of elderly patients in particular would appreciate these terms. A bit of warmth and affection never hurt anybody.

I knew this would trigger the snowflakes.

It's been presented in a way that makes it sound like PC nonsense, but it's actually a quality of care initiative.

One of the problems Irish healthcare has always had is that it's traditionally been run like a school. Doctors and nurses are the teachers, patients are the children and need to just STFU and take what they're given.

The medical evidence shows that patients who feel involved in their own health provision, who feel adequately informed about what's going on and who feel like it's a collaborative effort, have better outcomes than patients who feel passive, subordinate to the staff, or uninformed about their care.

Thus, you can see how the use of words like "love" and "dear", "pet", etc, are condescending terms that are likely to make a patient feel less positive aout their care and less involved. If you are trivialised by a health provider through these words, then communication will begin to break down, and patient outcomes decline.

Of course, this is just part of an entire range of measures by the HSE to improve communications between patients and health professionals. But naturally a few snowflakes have jumped on this specific one as an example of "PC gone mad omgz my 90 year old granny loves being called dear when will these lunatics stop!!!1".

You'll also note that the use of bed numbers or illnesses to refer to patients is being discontinued. But, no way, people aren't up in arms about that. I wonder why that is....? It starts with an A, ends with your Da has a gen in the middle.

This is all about ensuring that patients feel involved in their own healthcare provision and respected as an equal by health staff. Because that results in better healthcare.

mariaalice

What about the radical idea of asking people how they would like to be addressed, Mrs, Mr, or Miss or by their first name.

seamus

mariaalice wrote: »

What about the radical idea of asking people how they would like to be addressed, Mrs, Mr, or Miss or by their first name.

This is actually a nice idea, it would certainly put the patient at ease. But you can see how it might be difficult in the midst of rounds to ensure that each patient gets called by their "preferred" title.

"Hi Peter, how are you today?"

"Doctor, my chart clearly says that I preferred to be address as Hotrod Bananahammock!"

So going for a flat approach to all patients is safer.

One eyed Jack

Omackeral wrote: »

As per Newstalk bulletin this morning, all HSE staff have been banned from using these terms. I don't really give a fiddlers myself but wondering what others think? Do you think it promotes a more professional demeanour? Do you think it strips back a bit of the caring approach and makes it more of an impersonal and rigid experience. Tell me your thoughts pet.

I’m more curious about people’s ideas of what they imagine is professionalism. For me at least, professionalism means being able to be yourself, rather than behaving like you’ve got a thermometer up your arse.

I can only hope there isn’t some jobsworth inspector following the nurses around making sure they’re adhering to this new policy. It’s introduction at a time when superbugs are rife in hospitals is typical of the kind of mindset that fiddles while Rome burns.

I would hate for anyone to think they couldn’t be themselves, I’d certainly never be so petty as to complain about pet names. They’re terms of endearment, be different if they were intended maliciously.

corner of hells

mariaalice wrote: »

What about the radical idea of asking people how they would like to be addressed, Mrs, Mr, or Miss or by their first name.

Excellent idea , I'd like to be referred to as Battalion Sergeant Major Corners of Hells.

Cockadoodledoo

It is also to stop patients being referred to e.g the one with the hip.

I hate being called Love, dear, hun, pet.... I would feel like the care is more personal if they called me by my name because then I would feel that they have taken the time to read my chart.

Would I be offended or upset if I was called the above, no.

There is no right or wrong answer here. It’s individual preference.

CinemaGuy45

Omackeral wrote: »

As per Newstalk bulletin this morning, all HSE staff have been banned from using these terms. I don't really give a fiddlers myself but wondering what others think? Do you think it promotes a more professional demeanour? Do you think it strips back a bit of the caring approach and makes it more of an impersonal and rigid experience. Tell me your thoughts pet.

Not really bothered Dear.

dr.fuzzenstein

Samuel Vimes wrote: »

No.
She finds the expression patronising and dismissive.

She's not worried about the actual level of care, so. She seems a bit thin-skinned.
Sad world we live in.

ohnonotgmail

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

She's not worried about the actual level of care, so. She seems a bit thin-skinned.
Sad world we live in.

A sad world that you live in where everything is a false dichotomy. It must be exhausting for you.

CinemaGuy45

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

A sad world that you live in where everything is a false dichotomy. It must be exhausting for you.

Calm down there love.

gerrybbadd

There also no longer allowed to use the words "Boys" and "Lads"

Come on now Lads

dr.fuzzenstein

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

A sad world that you live in where everything is a false dichotomy. It must be exhausting for you.

You keep using that word...

ohnonotgmail

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

You keep using that word...

Dont worry about it love, you will figure it out one day.

One eyed Jack

seamus wrote: »

I knew this would trigger the snowflakes.

It's been presented in a way that makes it sound like PC nonsense, but it's actually a quality of care initiative.

One of the problems Irish healthcare has always had is that it's traditionally been run like a school. Doctors and nurses are the teachers, patients are the children and need to just STFU and take what they're given.

The medical evidence shows that patients who feel involved in their own health provision, who feel adequately informed about what's going on and who feel like it's a collaborative effort, have better outcomes than patients who feel passive, subordinate to the staff, or uninformed about their care.

Thus, you can see how the use of words like "love" and "dear", "pet", etc, are condescending terms that are likely to make a patient feel less positive aout their care and less involved. If you are trivialised by a health provider through these words, then communication will begin to break down, and patient outcomes decline.

Of course, this is just part of an entire range of measures by the HSE to improve communications between patients and health professionals. But naturally a few snowflakes have jumped on this specific one as an example of "PC gone mad omgz my 90 year old granny loves being called dear when will these lunatics stop!!!1".

You'll also note that the use of bed numbers of illnesses to refer to patients is being discontinued. But, no way, people aren't up in arms about that. I wonder why that is....? It starts with an A, ends with your Da has a gen in the middle.

This is all about ensuring that patients feel involved in their own healthcare provision and respected as an equal by health staff. Because that results in better healthcare.

Long winded way of explaining the idea is entirely founded upon political correctness. It’s true that patients who feel more involved in their own healthcare experience better outcomes, so why introduce these policies then rather than allow patients to pull someone up on it themselves? If someone has an issue with their treatment, let them make a complaint, rather than introducing yet more policies which make assumptions on patients behalf?

dr.fuzzenstein

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Dont worry about it love, you will figure it out one day.

Well, it's not an either or, but more "my, my, what big, clever words you know!"
Well impressed, so I am.
I'm anaspeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused you such pericombobulation.

johnnyskeleton

The intake form should allow people to express their own terms of endearment and the overworked junior doctors should be made to learn off by heart the terms each patient likes to use.

seamus

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Long winded way of explaining the idea is entirely founded upon political correctness. It’s true that patients who feel more involved in their own healthcare experience better outcomes, so why introduce these policies then rather than allow patients to pull someone up on it themselves? If someone has an issue with their treatment, let them make a complaint, rather than introducing yet more policies which make assumptions on patients behalf?

You're right. Get confidence, stupid!

This is a "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" type of logic, OEJ.

"Patients who don't feel they can get involved in their health provision should just get involved!"

Patients are incredibly slow to complain while they're in hospital, for obvious reasons. Waiting for people to speak up for themselves doesn't work. That's the system we have now.

If someone prefers being called by a pet name or nickname while in hospital, then they should speak up and say that rather than inflicting it on the rest of us.

dr.fuzzenstein

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The intake form should allow people to express their own terms of endearment and the overworked junior doctors should be made to learn off by heart the terms each patient likes to use.

I will refuse to respond to anything but "Poopsikins"

TCM

Samuel Vimes wrote:

My partner has been in hospital for the last month , very ill. She finds being being referred to as "dear" as condescending and patronising. Good to see action being taken on it.

What's that pet?

TCM

johnnyskeleton wrote:

The intake form should allow people to express their own terms of endearment and the overworked junior doctors should be made to learn off by heart the terms each patient likes to use.

Overworked. LOL.

Yoghurt87

This is a positive step for all the reasons Seamus mentioned. And they might stop saying “Good girl” to grown women in labour while they’re at it.

dr.fuzzenstein

I think this thread shows that too many people are so far up their own hole, they are in danger of completely disappearing into it.
It's all in the attidue. I can smile, shake your hand, look you straight in the eye and say "Yes, Sir!" and mean Fcuk You. And you'll know it.

One eyed Jack

seamus wrote: »

You're right. Get confidence, stupid!

This is a "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" type of logic, OEJ.

"Patients who don't feel involved in their health provision should just get involved!"

Patients are incredibly slow to complain while they're in hospital, for obvious reasons. Waiting for people to speak up for themselves doesn't work. That's the system we have now.

If someone prefers being called by a pet name or nickname while in hospital, then they should speak up and say that rather than inflicting it on the rest of us.

You’re doing the same as the people who think these policies are a good idea. You’re making blanket assumptions that patients don’t speak up for themselves, when in my experience, they do - when something actually bothers someone to the point where they feel strongly enough about it to speak up about it, they do.

I can understand if we were speaking about children here and how they often need someone to speak for them, but this idea is treating adults like children, suggesting that they aren’t capable of saying to a nurse or a doctor “Don’t call me love, thanks, I prefer to be called by my name”. Any time I’ve ever seen policies like these introduced, it makes the people who are supposed to adhere to the policies anxious in case they use the wrong term and someone is offended.

It’s the same sort of politically correct motivations that drives policies like now referring to pregnant women or expectant mothers as ‘pregnant persons’. I personally would find it unnatural and unnecessary, as it’s generally not people’s natural way of speaking to each other.

If the idea is to break down the perceived barriers between an authoritative figure and their patients, then you have to allow for people to make their own judgement call as to how they speak to people, and how people wish to be spoken to. It’s clearly a very individual thing that shouldn’t be addressed with a blanket policy.

It would be like if my consultant had constantly corrected me every time I called him ‘doc’. I’d genuinely forget every time, and I’d only remember afterwards, but he never said anything. That’s someone I would put more trust in than someone who was pulling me up every time on their title. The patient-medical professional relationship goes both ways, and at it’s foundation is human interaction and being comfortable enough with each other that we’re not so obsessed with being petty, but rather we’re both able to speak to each other as we naturally speak to people. The idea is authenticity rather than faking the way we speak to each other as dictated by policy rather than humanity.

freshpopcorn

Samuel Vimes wrote: »

My partner has been in hospital for the last month , very ill. She finds being being referred to as "dear" as condescending and patronising.
Good to see action being taken on it.

How dare you refer to your partner as a She.
How do you know tour partner still identifies as a She?

BeerWolf

Samuel Vimes wrote: »

My partner has been in hospital for the last month , very ill. She finds being being referred to as "dear" as condescending and patronising.
Good to see action being taken on it.

How the feck is saying "dear" even remotely condescending or patronizing, unless they meant she was expensive...? :rolleyes: