Issue - meetings

To receive the views of patient, service user, relative and staff representatives on proposals by Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust to reconfigure adult acute services.

The Panel received the views of patient, service user, relative and staff representatives. The following comments/observations were made by those present:

§         What reassurance could be given to the public that the proposals were safe?  Patients were vulnerable and could be at risk.  Who would check to ensure that they were taking their medication?

§         After a period of reduction, the trend of occupancy levels and delayed discharges seemed to now be upwards. 

§         No one should remain in St Ann’s who did not need to be there.  People sometimes had to stay there because they had nowhere else to go.  However, this was a partnership issue and not something that the MHT could resolve on its own.

§         A carer reported that family and friends could need to provide much of the support when patients were being treated at home.  She had found that the home treatment team could sometimes only be able to monitor medication.  There was not enough overall support provided.  Hospital was safe and food and activities were provided.  Home treatment teams did not have the time to do much with patients. The presence of a sick relative in the house could cause tension and was hard for relatives to cope with.

§         It was felt that information about the sort of work that home treatment reams undertook, their obligations and duties and the time that they were able to spend with patients would be of assistance to the review.

§         UNISON at St Ann’s stated that there had been a lot of disquiet about the proposals amongst staff.  The last reorganisation, which had taken place two years ago and involved the reduction of 20 community posts, had proven to be disastrous.  Staff viewed the current proposals as part of the Trust’s efforts to make savings ahead of its application for foundation status.  This had been stated by management. It was felt that some nurses had been pressurised to discharge patients in order to reduce occupancy levels.  It was not being said that the model of care was not good but that the pace of change was too quick and its implementation too soon.  There was a high relapse rate, some patients were living in unfit accommodation and families could have difficulty supporting relatives.   The Trust needed to plan ahead to ensure that that the necessary infrastructure was in place to support change.  The posts of Delayed Discharge Co-ordinator and Benefits Advisor had both been deleted.  Although there was now a Practical Support Team, they had not yet received specific training on benefits, which was a complex area.  Her view was the MHT had not done the necessary preparatory work for the proposed changes.

§         It was considered that a consultation event for staff had been poorly attended following late changes to the arrangements.  A lot had missed the event and UNISON felt that another event was required.

§         It was felt that proper opportunities had not yet been provided for the public to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24