Some Answers Arrive - But Promote More Questions.

On 21st November 2008 we finally received the written answers to the questions that I had asked Loraine Darcy at the Healthcare Commission.

Firstly, I had asked Loraine Darcy to ascertain where Clare Gasher got her information from when she completed the Cause For Concern sheet.

Loraine Darcy's answer is that Clare Gasher decided to '...complete the Cause for Concern form after studying the documentation between yourself and the United Bristol Healthcare Trust (the Trust) which you provided when requesting an independent review.'

So - as I have said before, it seems that Clare Gasher filled in the Cause for Concern form based purely on the response to our original complaint from Graham Rich, Chief Executive at UBHT. In doing so she ignored the full content of our complaint and Hari's need for diagnosis.

Secondly I had asked Loraine Darcy if Anne Berry had been sent a copy of the Cause for Concern form.

Well - I did promise you more about Anne Berry!

Loraine Darcy's answer is that Anne Berry has not been sent a copy of the Cause for Concern form.

So -if this is the case, how had the Healthcare Commission raised concerns with Anne Berry, as she had claimed?

Thirdly, I had asked Loraine Darcy if anyone at the Healthcare Commission had asked Anne Berry to make a referral to Adult Protection.

Loraine Darcy, having discussed this with Anne Berry, confirms that nobody at the Healthcare Commission had asked Anne Berry to make a referral to Adult Protection.

So - when Anne Berry had clearly stated at the meeting, on 19th June 2008, that the Healthcare Commission had asked her to make a referral to Adult Protection she must have been lying!

However, Loraine Darcy goes on to say that Anne Berry says that '...conversations with the Healthcare Commission helped her to focus on the necessity of making a referral to Adult Protection.'
We have been given no further details of these conversations - we will be asking further questions about this!

Finally, I had asked Loraine Darcy how the Healthcare Commission review could be fair and independent in the light of the contents of the Cause for Concern form, completed by Clare Gasher who is employed by the Healthcare Commisssion.

Loraine Darcy has re-worded this question to a statement that reads; 'Considering what has happened so far you have doubts that the independent review process will be fair.'

Loraine Darcy insists that the review process will be fair and independent.

We are not convinced!

Towards the end of the letter Loraine Darcy states: '...the Healthcare Commission does have a responsibility to adhere to safeguarding procedures. However, it was clear to me when we spoke that you have quite understandably found that process distressing and I am sorry for that.'

Now then - Loraine Darcy is 'sorry' for the fact that I found the process distressing.

It seems that she is not sorry for the inaccuracies and false allegations contained within the Cause for Concern form.
It seems that she is not sorry for what staff at the Healthcare Commission have done that caused the 'distress'.

It seems that she is not sorry for the way in which they have done this.

So -her use of the word 'sorry' amounts to nothing and is not an apology.

We do not believe that safeguarding procedures require that complainants/carers are subjected to false allegations being recorded against them, by Healthcare Commission staff, to the detriment of the person on who's behalf they are complaining. If this were the case then such procedures would contravene the Disability Discrimination Act by preventing disabled people from having their complaints considered fairly and independently.

Clearly the way in which the procedures are being applied contravenes the Disability Discrimination Act.