I've been doing some
reading around our proposed new hospital. It is not my usual arena,
but recent events have highlighted some aspects that should be input
into the planning of the facility, which we can easily image should
last the Island a generation or more. Intuitively one would expect
population and demographic models to be central. The reticence of
the Minister in laying out the details of the models used is
troubling. But it is not the only area of concern.
The recently published
IPPC report is quite clear there are expected health, including
mental health impacts on small island states. The summary can be
found at
http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/IPCC_WG2AR5_SPM_Approved.pdf
. Unlike previous reports, this one explicitly identifies current
impacts are occurring
"Local changes in temperature and rainfall have altered the
distribution of some water-borne illnesses and disease vectors”. A
few other pertinent quotes are :
“The
key risks that follow, all of which are identified with high
confidence,
span sectors and regions. Each of these key risks contributes to one
or more RFCs.33
i.
Risk of death, injury, ill-health, or disrupted livelihoods in
low-lying coastal zones and small
island
developing states and other small islands, due to storm surges,
coastal flooding, and
sea-level
rise”
“Impacts
from recent climate-related extremes, such as heat waves, droughts,
floods, cyclones, and wildfires, reveal significant vulnerability and
exposure of some ecosystems and many human systems to current climate
variability (very
high confidence).
Impacts
of such climate-related extremes include alteration of ecosystems,
disruption of food production and water supply, damage to
infrastructure and settlements, morbidity and mortality, and
consequences for mental health and human well-being. For countries at
all levels of development, these impacts are consistent with a
significant lack of preparedness for current climate variability in
some sectors.”
I
have written to the health minister to ask what extent these changes,
both present and future have been considered in the planning of the
hospital.
However
I came across something else while looking for information. The
hospital managing director is of course a pivotal person on the
future of the hospital. So I did a search. A brief cv for Mrs.
Helen O'Shea is on the States web site at
http://www.gov.je/News/2012/Pages/NewHospitalManagingDirector.aspx
. I used to do a lot of technical recruitment interviewing when I
was running a rapidly growing software business. I've seen a lot of
cv's. Two things about that online piece stood out to me
immediately. While all the other positions held had accompanying
dates, the time at Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust does not.
The other is the repeated occurrence of acting or interim office for
what look like exceptionally long periods. This naturally raises the
question of why she did not become the actual chief? It might be as
straight forward as a glass ceiling effect.
Perhaps
that temporal absence is simply a stylistic choice by a content
manager. However we can infer that Mrs O'Shea was there between 2004
and 2011, rather longer than the other establishments. A very long
time to be an acting chief, so I assume some other roles and
positions were omitted. Her public profile on LinkedIn is even less
informative, listing only the current position. More useful is
zoominfo http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Helen-O%27Shea/815893917
Here we can identify that in 2006 Mrs O'Shea was director of
performance (not an executive director however).
A
bit more digging and this came up
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/local/hospital-names-boss-1-934551
from the 30th
October 2008. Mrs O'Shea it seems did not put herself forward to be
Chief Executive, despite having been acting chief for six months
according to that article. (So that clarifies one of the points
above). Perhaps it is not too surprising that she didn't pursue the
opportunity when you read this :
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/local/hospital-halts-bid-for-elite-status-1-929196
I'd say that was the right decision to make for the acting Chief, but
you have to wonder what responsibility the former director of
performance and director of operations had for being in such a
position of failing to meet standards and the public's expectations.
That
wasn't the only problem the Trust had that year. In April it was all
over the national press after a bogus nurse was in court. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1017370/Woman-walks-street-land-job-NHS-nurse-years--treating-hundreds-qualifications.html
and
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/local/robust-checks-made-on-nurses-1-925910
Whether the recruitment, appraisal and performance checks up to that
point came under Mrs O'Shea's directorial responsibility I cannot
say, but it cannot have sat comfortably given her immediate prior
title.
Did
the HR department and interviewing staff go to the bottom of those
irritating and stand out cv points? Is it coincidence that in 2012
Jersey appointed a new hospital managing director who had experience
of public glare due to a rogue or bogus nurse and a hospital failing
to meet targets? Is it possible that the hospital, knowing they
had problems with a rogue nurse, as exposed by Stuart Syvret, thought
they had found someone who could protect them and 'tidy up' from the
fall out? I have no idea. There is nothing of any substantive fact
to show Mrs O'Shea to be anything other than a professional in her
field. And yet there are those annoying coincidences and little
questions that nag away at one's confidence.
No comments:
Post a Comment