Welcome to the unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum - for discussing everything CH/Old Blue related. All pupils, parents, families, staff, Old Blues and anyone else related to CH are welcome to browse the boards, register and contribute.
No, they want to feel safe in their own country having risked their lives on its behalf.
Labour
Just like they had in Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps and the military hospitals which understood their particular problems but which have now been closed by caring sharing Labour.
"If a man speaks, and there isn't a woman to hear him, is he still wrong?"
Ever since Defence Cost Study 15 which took away all but one dedicated military hospital in the UK, and that one (RH Haslar) treats far more civilians than Servicemen (and always did), medical provision for military personnel has been inadequate. The quality standard is now 'at least as good as the NHS' which might be acceptable in peacetime provided tax payers are happy to pay for large numbers of injured military personnel on sick leave awaiting treatment but it is manifestly not acceptable when dealing with people injured on active service. I had never heard on Lynne Jones before now but I presume she is just another New Labour non-entity who was gifted her seat to meet some Blairite diversity policy, ie allowing really stupid people into Parliament! There are numerous examples of below standard treatment at the hospital in Birmingham with wounded soldiers sharing wards with civilians, some of them hostile to them as individuals, being told to remove their uniforms to 'avoid upsetting other patients' and even having their safety threatened. Whilst it may not yet have the status of 'national disgrace' the treatment of our wounded certainly appears to be heading that way.
Presumably Lynne Jones accepts that it was the Government of which she is a member that sent our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq? She appears to believe, however, that it is nothing to do with her. Can one set up a deselect Lynne Jones site on the Downing Street website or would that not be allowed? I have little enough time for New labour at the best of times but I have rarely felt such animosity as Lynne Jones' arrogant, unfeeling and downright unpleasant comments has brought out in me.
loringa wrote:Ever since Defence Cost Study 15 which took away all but one dedicated military hospital in the UK, and that one (RH Haslar) treats far more civilians than Servicemen (and always did), medical provision for military personnel has been inadequate. The quality standard is now 'at least as good as the NHS' which might be acceptable in peacetime provided tax payers are happy to pay for large numbers of injured military personnel on sick leave awaiting treatment but it is manifestly not acceptable when dealing with people injured on active service.
A totally stupid comparison. Because of "The Troubles" the Royal Belfast (or whatever it is called) got a reputation is THE best hospital worldwide in dealing with war type wounds. Yes, it is an NHS hospital but I don't expect Selly Oak to have 30 years experience and practice in dealing with gunshot and explosives wounds; it is therefore ill equipped by comparison to deal with the tytpes of wounds which we are thinkoing about. Yes, simple accidents do happen like broken legs in the mess and of course Selly Oak should be able to handle those (if it doesn't give the soldiers MSRA instead) but the real wounds are not being trreated to the best NHS standards simply because Selly Oak does not have the competent practised staff.
Given the background to this thread, what special action is being taken to protect the wounded from MRSA etc. - TB would get a police guard but do our soldiers? I doubt it.
Having more money doesn't make you happier. I have 50 million dollars
but I'm just as happy as when I had 48 million.
(Arnold Schwarzenegger!)
loringa wrote:Ever since Defence Cost Study 15 which took away all but one dedicated military hospital in the UK, and that one (RH Haslar) treats far more civilians than Servicemen (and always did), medical provision for military personnel has been inadequate. The quality standard is now 'at least as good as the NHS' which might be acceptable in peacetime provided tax payers are happy to pay for large numbers of injured military personnel on sick leave awaiting treatment but it is manifestly not acceptable when dealing with people injured on active service.
A totally stupid comparison.
Sorry, you've completely lost me; what is a stupid comparison? I wasn't comparing anything with anything, merely commenting on the post-DCS15 policy for healthcare for the Armed Forces. The policy is' at least as good as the NHS' but that really isn't adequate, not in peacetime and certainly not at the moment. I'm not sure of the point you're trying to make; mine is that medical support for the Armed Forces is inadequate; what's yours?
Labour 
