So whilst we're still waiting for responses from Loraine Darcy and Stafford Lightman- and for the papers to be sent to the Healthcare Commission by the trust, so that the independent review can actually go ahead, let's tidy up another lose end.
I wrote earlier about the numerous inaccuracies in the letter from Graham Rich, Chief Executive UBHT/University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which was sent to us on April 7th 2008 in response to our original complaint.
These numerous inaccuracies could spawn a lengthy document in their correction but let's start with the most obvious one.
As I have said before, we had been led to believe that whilst Hari's endocrine outpatient care could be transferred to an adult clinic, her inpatient care would need to continue at the children's hospital. All this appeared to change suddenly when the mental capacity act came into force just prior to Hari's outpatient appointment at the children's hospital in November 2007. After the appointment we were taken to see a ward at the adult hospital with a view to Hari being admitted there in the future.
In his letter, Graham Rich refers to this and states: '...I believe that you were not happy about contemplating admissions for Hari to an adult ward and you therefore found it difficult to enter into these discussions.'
We have to wonder exactly which discussions he was referring to.
Between the appointment with Liz Crowne and Stafford Lightman and going to see the ward, we were taken to another room by the ward Sister and Judith Armstrong, Modern Matron. (Maybe I should point out here that Judith Armstrong had followed us into the appointment with the doctors, without having the decency to ask if this was acceptable to us!)
Anyway, once we were in the other room with Judith Armstrong and the ward Sister, they wanted me to answer questions regarding Hari being admitted to an adult hospital. At this point I couldn't answer the questions as we hadn't yet seen the ward. How could I point out the potential problems on a ward we hadn't seen?
After being shown around the ward, by the ward Sister, we were left waiting for Judith Armstrong to put in an appearance. Finally she arrived - only to disappear again! Obviously she was far too busy to give us any of her time!
As it was lunchtime and Hari needed to have something to eat, it became necessary for us to leave before Judith Armstrong came back- if she ever did!
We felt that as Hari had a further appointment at the Liz Crowne /Stafford Lightmen joint clinic in May 2008, we could raise our concerns at that appointment. We realised that they could contact us sooner if they wanted to. They did not do so.
Graham Rich also states in his letter: '...Dr. Crowne agreed that she would bring Hari back to the next joint clinic in January 2008 for further discussions about Hari's future care.' He then claims that this plan was overtaken by Hari being admitted on 15th January 2008.
Now then-prior to Hari's admission in January we had received no notification of the May appointment being brought forward to January. In fact when Hari was admitted we were told that Liz Crowne was on holiday - if she wasn't there she certainly couldn't be seeing Hari in clinic!
So events regarding the January appointment were not overtaken by Hari's admission - there had been no January appointment.
The only way that Hari's admission changed events was that some people chose to abuse the admission, whilst she was ill, in order to enforce her eviction from paediatrics; without considering the very real problems and risks that this would involve.
The January appointment didn't exist and the May appointment at the joint clinic had effectively been cancelled. The appointment during the week after her discharge from the children's hospital had a firmly pre-set agenda - which focused on the fact that Hari's eviction had already been ordered.