Liverpool Care Pathway – This Is What They Do...

This is what they do...

Here is the MailOnline - 

'My wife was left to die in a side room': Grieving husband’s fury over treatment of partner, 79, on hospital pathway plan

• Mary Cooper, 79, was put on the Liverpool Care Pathway - designed to allow patients to die with dignity and not have life prolonged painfully
• But husband Roy says he and his family were not informed and claim she was 'left to die in a side room'
• 
  

This is what they do...

Here is the The Telegraph -

Victims of neglect at the Alexandra Hospital

“My mother stopped wanting us to come to the hospital, not because she didn’t want to see us but because she was embarrassed, humiliated that she was lying in her own filth. She was a proud woman who didn’t want us to see her like that,” Mr Bridle said.

Mr Bridle, 68, said his mother was also left virtually deaf because staff failed to help her put in her hearing aid.

After 12 weeks at the Alexandra, she was transferred to another hospital, where she died a week later after a seizure.

This is what they do...

Here is -

THURSDAY, 23 JUNE 2011
Liverpool Care Pathway - A 'Legal' Euthanasia.

"On Thursday, mum was alert and communicative. She was off her food but able to feed herself. By next day, everything had changed disastrously. On Friday, they had moved her into a side room. She was, at best, described as confused, but she imparted to me that she didn’t like them in there; those words were her last coherent words to me in this life!"

"We subsequently discovered that my mother’s entire ongoing medication had been withdrawn, without our knowledge, and replaced with morphine, again, commenced without our knowledge. We were not even aware that this was a nurse driven hospital and that there was no doctor present at weekends.

Mum’s hearing aid was hanging out of her ear and the tube had been damaged. This would not have been at all helpful in the very necessary communication process to make her wishes clear and understood and yet it was insisted that she had assented to the morphine. Additionally, all knowledge of how this damage to her hearing aid might have occurred was denied. It was even suggested that it may have occurred in the ambulance transport to the hospital but I had to maintain that the ambulance personnel were both most particular in their care.

In the Healthcare Commission report, it is stated that, “solpadol and morphine act differently, and are effective for different types of pain.” Solpadol was  prescribed for mum’s back pain. For what, then, had the morphine been prescribed in the Dene? Explanation has been sought and demanded, but none has been offered."

This is what they do...

So many of us with similar tales to tell...

Upon discovery of the condition of the hearing aid, I made a point of informing staff that my mother would be without her hearing aid over the weekend. No-one appeared in the least interested. For information purposes, I wrote a note on the marker board in her room, therefore, to that effect. If anyone read it, or would have been interested if they had, I cannot say.

In response to the issue of mum's hearing aid, the HC (Healthcare Commission) referred the complaint back to the PCT (Primary Care Trust) to be dealt with.

The response of the PCT was to provide an apology, but no explanation, and to produce a Patient's Property form for our 'approval'.

Extract from HC letter:

My mother’s ongoing medication was withdrawn, her hearing aid was disabled, she was ‘morphed’ into a condition of utter insensibility and whatever else that was done and not done when it should have been done. 

This matter concerns my mother’s hearing aid. This I found to be hanging out of her ear with the tube pulled out and loose. This was on the Friday, the 20^th July.  When I commented upon this, the nurse replied that it must have happened on the journey to Caterham Dene, in the ambulance! If that had been the case, it must be asked why the hospital staff attending to my mother’s care had not already noticed and attempted to remedy the situation. The question of patient communication is, surely, of paramount importance, and particularly so in matters of gaining consent! Doctors and nursing staff are reduced to a profound disadvantage if they are unable to communicate effectively with the patient. Perhaps they had noticed: the tube was loose and the hearing aid was hanging out of her ear in plain view! The ambulance personnel were most particular, however, in her management and care and I am certain that, when I left my mother on the Thursday evening, her hearing aid was still in place. In any case, when I telephoned later that evening, the nurse informed me that mum had asked if I had gone home and was happy with the response that I had done so. I took the hearing aid away with me. It had been rendered useless in any case. A new tube was required. I telephoned Crawley Audiology department but they were closed until Monday. I intended going down there on the Monday to pick up a new tube. In the mean time, I made a point of informing staff that mum would be without her hearing aid until then. No-one appeared in the least interested. For information purposes, I wrote a note on the marker board in her room, therefore, to that effect. If anyone read it, or would have been interested if they had, I cannot say. 

The Patient's Property Form: