Page 3375 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I have another recent example of a family who lost someone in the Canberra Hospital, and this actually came to light in the media. I was approached about this, and although it is certainly not the same situation, similar concerns had been expressed about the way that ACT Health has been communicating with families of deceased.
In this case the family concerns included that the fact that the man waited more than a year for surgery, in which in time his condition deteriorated significantly. His elective surgery was put off on a number of occasions. He was admitted for surgery at short notice. However, a fatal error occurred during the procedure, and the coroner—I have read the coroner’s report—handed down a damning assessment of the hospital’s role in the incident, citing poor admission procedures. ACT Health failed to adequately follow up the matter with the family, with poor communication between them and the family. There was no apology; only a promise that procedures were being reviewed. Like Mr Johns’s family, it was not until the widow in question in this case went public that ACT Health actually responded to the family in any meaningful way. I will quote the widow:
I think it is disgusting, I really do. All I wanted was somebody to apologise. But they bloody won’t, so I’ll get them through the bloody pocket. The solicitor said we won’t get much, but I don’t want money. It’s the principle of the thing, I want an apology … I don’t want anybody else to suffer like he did, it’s unnecessary. If I can stop at least somebody else feeling like I feel, it’s worth it.
It is a great shame that the concerns raised in the Canberra Times on 3 August by the widow of this man were not listened to and implemented in the case of the unfortunate death of Mr Johns.
So what did go wrong? Certainly the family has raised a number of their concerns, but the substance of the motion calls on the minister—hopefully this is what we will hear today from her—for an open and honest account of what has gone wrong in this case and what changes to procedures have been made as a result. We want to know what actually has been done and put in place at the Canberra Hospital so that as we move forward we can feel confident that, if there any more fatalities, they will be dealt with appropriately.
The Johns family has made some requests of the minister, and I will just read through them: ACT Health services notify the family immediately when swine flu is suspected and/or tested for; a coordinated response across all key agencies when working with families where swine flu may have been present at the time of a loved one’s death; ACT Health services or a general practitioner provide an immediate follow-up with information to and support for the family directly affected by the swine flu-related death; an extension of that to follow up with the deceased’s networks, such as providing friends and workplaces with information on dealing with swine flu; and all emergency services and agencies alike involved to be informed and the correct protocols and recording of an exposure in personnel files to such a contagious disease.
It is a bit unclear now what the procedures are for with dealing with deaths from swine flu in the ACT. There has been a second death, unfortunately. In the case of the second death, no information has been released. There has been a change in procedures, so I guess that what we do need to know is whether there is a balance.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .