Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…45679

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    cursai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,915 ✭✭✭cursai


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    what part of "we prefer if staff address patients by their name" causes you difficulty?

    None


  • Options
    #243
    Alun
    Registered Users Posts: 21,434 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    erica74 wrote: »
    I work in the HSE and think it's absolutely ludicrous that this is what they're worrying about.
    Aren't they allowed to worry about multiple things at once, and propose solutions to the easier problems, or are they supposed to write out a big list and start at the top working down ignoring everything else?


  • Options
    #244
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,217 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    cursai wrote: »
    Read the report. About three lines further than where you stopped which is probably four lines further than you bothered to read.


    they ask staff to be careful how they refer to people to prevent depersonalisation. What exactly do you have a problem with?


  • Options
    #245
    cursai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,915 ✭✭✭cursai


    Alun wrote: »
    Aren't they allowed to worry about multiple things at once, and propose solutions to the easier problems, or are they supposed to write out a big list and start at the top working down ignoring everything else?

    I think he means the priorities are very wrong. They need to deal with other stuff before they can discuss whether this particular thing is wrong


  • Options
    #246
    cursai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,915 ✭✭✭cursai


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    they ask staff to be careful how they refer to people to prevent depersonalisation. What exactly do you have a problem with?

    I thought you said the report had nothing to do with depersonalisation?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,217 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    cursai wrote: »
    I thought you said the report had nothing to do with depersonalisation?


    I was responding to your comment where you implied that the HSE want staff to depersonalise their interactions with patients. What exactly is your issue with what the HSE is trying to achieve here?


  • Options
    #248
    cursai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,915 ✭✭✭cursai


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    I was responding to your comment where you implied that the HSE want staff to depersonalise their interactions with patients. What exactly is your issue with what the HSE is trying to achieve here?

    OK. Em....Good luck with those English lessons pet.


  • Options
    #249
    KingofSheep
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭KingofSheep


    Alun wrote: »
    Aren't they allowed to worry about multiple things at once, and propose solutions to the easier problems, or are they supposed to write out a big list and start at the top working down ignoring everything else?

    When you have patients waiting on trolleys in corridors for hours and hours there is something wrong with the system. It just gives the impression that they are wasting resources on more trivial matters when urgent action is needed to sort out the mess that we currently have.


  • Options
    #250
    Alun
    Registered Users Posts: 21,434 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    cursai wrote: »
    I think he means the priorities are very wrong. They need to deal with other stuff before they can discuss whether this particular thing is wrong
    KingofSheep wrote: »
    When you have patients waiting on trolleys in corridors for hours and hours there is something wrong with the system. It just gives the impression that they are wasting resources on more trivial matters when urgent action is needed to sort out the mess that we currently have.
    Yes, there are other, arguably more important things that need doing, but these are orders of magnitude more difficult to fix. It would be ridiculous to suggest that the entire effort of the HSE be concentrated on fixing just one thing to the total exclusion of everything else in the mean time.

    I mean, exactly how much time and effort went in to this decision? Probably an infinitely small amount compared to what might be needed for any of the larger problems.


  • Options
    #251
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    KingofSheep wrote: »
    When you have patients waiting on trolleys in corridors for hours and hours there is something wrong with the system. It just gives the impression that they are wasting resources on more trivial matters when urgent action is needed to sort out the mess that we currently have.

    The problem in my opinion is the fact that there is an official policy document regards the use of the words luv or pet.
    It makes me die a little inside that humankind has become such utter spineless pondscum that anyone would think there needs to be some kind of regulation regarding this.
    Only some ratfaced, snivelling little git would come up with something like this. Or some ADHD, OCD ballbag that needs to regulate the folding of socks down the last milimeter.
    The problem with these people is that they have absolutely no magnificence in them.
    We are becoming a generation of people that will go crying to mammy over every tiny thing.

    giphy.gif


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,217 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    The problem in my opinion is the fact that there is an official policy document regards the use of the words luv or pet.
    It makes me die a little inside that humankind has become such utter spineless pondscum that anyone would think there needs to be some kind of regulation regarding this.
    Only some ratfaced, snivelling little git would come up with something like this. Or some ADHD, OCD ballbag that needs to regulate the folding of socks down the last milimeter.
    The problem with these people is that they have absolutely no magnificence in them.
    We are becoming a generation of people that will go crying to mammy over every tiny thing.

    giphy.gif




    Did you actually read the part of the report in question? There is no ban.


  • Options
    #253
    andekwarhola
    Registered Users Posts: 4,638 ✭✭✭andekwarhola


    Pierce Limited Gown wrote: »
    So, it's a non-story and Newstalk either got it ass-ways or deliberately misled.

    That said, it's still imperative that we exigently address the inherently oppressive narratvie of Power encapsulated in the imposturous nostrum of carer-patient dynamics.


  • Options
    #254
    KingofSheep
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭KingofSheep


    Alun wrote: »
    Yes, there are other, arguably more important things that need doing, but these are orders of magnitude more difficult to fix. It would be ridiculous to suggest that the entire effort of the HSE be concentrated on fixing just one thing to the total exclusion of everything else in the mean time.

    I mean, exactly how much time and effort went in to this decision? Probably an infinitely small amount compared to what might be needed for any of the larger problems.

    Arguably? What sane argument can be made for saying the A&E mess is only arguably more important than this Love/Dear issue?

    Most would agree that nowhere near the amount of resources would be put into the above issue when compared with what’s needed for bigger problems. But it’s the impression it gives to the public. It’s not like the HSE is covering itself in glory most of the time with the utterly unique way it appears to be run. At least be seen to have your priorities in order.


  • Options
    #255
    zell12
    Registered Users Posts: 23,714 ✭✭✭✭zell12


    NigelCarry_2102807c.jpg


  • Options
    #256
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,217 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    KingofSheep wrote: »
    Arguably? What sane argument can be made for saying the A&E mess is only arguably more important than this Love/Dear issue?

    Most would agree that nowhere near the amount of resources would be put into the above issue when compared with what’s needed for bigger problems. But it’s the impression it gives to the public. It’s not like the HSE is covering itself in glory most of the time with the utterly unique way it appears to be run. At least be seen to have your priorities in order.


    you do realise it is possible for the HSE to look at several problems at the same time?


  • Options
    #257
    Alun
    Registered Users Posts: 21,434 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    you do realise it is possible for the HSE to look at several problems at the same time?
    My point exactly, but apparently it's only the "impression" the public have that matters.


  • Options
    #258
    cloudy90210
    Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭cloudy90210


    Doesn't say they can't be called "Arsehole" does it?


  • Options
    #259
    cursai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,915 ✭✭✭cursai


    Gibberish report anyway. Made by people trying to justify their jobs as 'think' staff. Probably at least sixty people over six months to do this report.


  • Options
    #260
    cloudy90210
    Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭cloudy90210


    I do find it a bit weird when the cashier woman in Centra calls me "Pet". I'm 43 like


  • Options
    #261
    KingofSheep
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭KingofSheep


    Alun wrote: »
    My point exactly, but apparently it's only the "impression" the public have that matters.

    What impression of the HSE do you think the public has?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    Alun
    Registered Users Posts: 21,434 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    cursai wrote: »
    Gibberish report anyway. Made by people trying to justify their jobs as 'think' staff. Probably at least sixty people over six months to do this report.
    The "impression" I got was that he entire resources of the HSE were exclusively focussed on this one single issue for the last 5 years. I could be wrong of course.:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #263
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Before I get all outraged and all that, can anyone confirm from whether this is an actual ban or whether this is just a suggestion of some sort?

    I'd like to be informed before I end up being one of those permanently outraged, red-faced eejiits shouting "PC GONE MAD".


  • Options
    #264
    KingofSheep
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭KingofSheep


    Alun wrote: »
    The "impression" I got was that he entire resources of the HSE were exclusively focussed on this one single issue for the last 5 years. I could be wrong of course.:rolleyes:

    I don’t think anyone thinks that really. For what it’s worth I think it’s all a bit silly.


  • Options
    #265
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,217 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Before I get all outraged and all that, can anyone confirm from whether this is an actual ban or whether this is just a suggestion of some sort?

    I'd like to be informed before I end up being one of those permanently outraged, red-faced eejiits shouting "PC GONE MAD".


    the one line in the report that brought about the OP is highlighted in the tweet. Entirely fake news.


    https://mobile.twitter.com/colettebrowne/status/1069689822833532930


  • Options
    #266
    Old diesel
    Registered Users Posts: 5,788 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Did you actually read the part of the report in question? There is no ban.

    Yes exactly - the report talks about an issue - but doesm state an action to be taken - ie a ban.

    I understand that the logic is to use say the patients name.

    So "okay pet i will help you to the bathroom now".

    Becomes "okay Maura I will help you to the bathroom now".

    It's not a case of banning the use of "pet" or "my dear" etc - it's a case of it been considered better to use the patients name.

    I also believe the real issue here isn't calling someone "pet" but instead nurses etc referring to a patient as "the cardiac patient in bed 1".*

    When it would be better to say "Michael in bed 1"

    *how much of an issue this actually is in Ireland I'm not sure but I've seen this been mentioned in a UK context


  • Options
    #267
    Corruptedmorals
    Registered Users Posts: 4,194 ✭✭✭Corruptedmorals


    If it is brought in, I hope it is not too strict. Doctors and ward nurses should be calling patients by their name..certainly I've never heard a doctor use anything else..but the likes of an A&E nurse run off their feet or catering/cleaning staff who chat away to multitudes of patients and who have no business reading charts should have leeway.


  • Options
    #268
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    the one line in the report that brought about the OP is highlighted in the tweet. Entirely fake news.


    https://mobile.twitter.com/colettebrowne/status/1069689822833532930

    So a part of the national media got the "PC GONE MAD" brigade foaming at the mouth again and outraged over nothing? I do wish they'd stop doing that. I know that they understand how easy it is to manipulate their audience and that there's an advertising incentive to do so but it's a bit lowbrow.


  • Options
    #269
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Before I get all outraged and all that, can anyone confirm from whether this is an actual ban or whether this is just a suggestion of some sort?

    I'd like to be informed before I end up being one of those permanently outraged, red-faced eejiits shouting "PC GONE MAD".

    Well it is a bit PC gone mad. Be it just a suggestion or orders from above (clicks heels and salutes), it deserves to be slagged and the honorless p'taks who came up with this brainfart. ;)

    edit:
    I'll stick with the classic "Call me anything you like, but don't call me late for dinner"


  • Options
    #270
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,217 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    Well it is a bit PC gone mad. Be it just a suggestion or orders from above (clicks heels and salutes), it deserves to be slagged and the honorless p'taks who came up with this brainfart. ;)


    so suggesting that health care staff treat their patients as people is something to be slagged? what an interesting idea.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    so suggesting that health care staff treat their patients as people is something to be slagged? what an interesting idea.


    So we're at the stage were people suggest that calling someone pet is akin to a Gestapo office referring to an inmate via their KZ registration number? Full dehumanisation?
    Settle pettle.
    And yes, it is a brainfart and if you find this opinion risible, good. People like you are part of the problem.


Advertisement