Independent Voices - Closing children's heart surgery units? Time to rethink your NHS 'strategy' Mr Hunt
These units do a tremendously important job – let’s not forget that
By: MANUEL BARCIA 23 Jan 2013
A few days ago I took a couple of friends who were visiting us to a restaurant in Leeds.
As soon as we sat, and even before I had an opportunity to look at the menu, I noticed a small SOS-Save our Surgery booklet on my table. The reading that followed left me in disbelief and almost gave me a bad stomach ache.
Apparently, in his wisdom our Health Secretary and his escort of bureaucrats in charge of restructuring the NHS have come to the conclusion that the whole of Yorkshire and the Humber, the region with the fastest population growth in England, with around 5.3 millioninhabitants, does not really need a Children’s Heart Surgery unit. Yes, you read that right, a Children’s Heart Surgery unit. Talking about the weakest link getting the hit for the messing up of the government and the banks.
Apparently, while doing their restructuring “thinking” (and I put thinking within inverted commas, because Neanderthals would probably generate brighter and more logical ideas) Government bureaucrats did not consider the gold standards given to the Children’s Heart Surgery unit based at the Leeds General Infirmary. To them a unit that offers over 400 children heart surgeries a year would be better closed, and the parents of these children, who already have to deal with the despair of having a very ill child, would be better off travelling for hundreds of miles to the nearest units, in Newcastle, Birmingham or Liverpool.
No wonder a number of demonstrations, a Facebook page with thousands of likes, and a well-organised campaign based around the www.saveoursurgery.net site have been put in march. Its organisers are fighting the government in court and have now been granted a judicial review of their case next month.
The support that the campaign is gaining is notable. Only a few days ago the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu joined in and called for the Government to reconsider their priorities when it comes to implementing cuts. He said: “Closing the specialist heart unit at Leeds will have a devastating effect on so many people. It would be terrible news for people across Yorkshire.” Others, including MPs Andrew Jones and Hilary Benn have also joined the fight and questioned the decision of the aforementioned closure.
Of course, the LGI unit is not the only one at risk of being shut down. Three other children’s heart surgeries are penned to suffer the same fate. The unit at the world-leading Royal Brompton Hospital in London being one of them.
The tragic part of this story is, of course, that staff working at these units are now doing their very delicate jobs under pressure, and funds raised through charity efforts that could and should be spent on medical supplies and care, are instead being wasted on a judicial review, paying lawyers and legal fees.
It is time for Mr Hunt to finish this uncertainty once and for all. The LGI Children’s Heart Surgery unit does a tremendously important job for the whole of Yorkshire and the Humber, and as such it should be not only kept open, but backed as a priority by the Government. I cannot imagine of anything else that should constitute a priority over our children’s health. Let’s hope Mr Hunt and his staff eventually come to think the same.
Anne Keatley-Clarke, Chief Executive of the Children’s Heart Federation commented, “CHF, other national heart charities and the associations of medial professionals support the implementation of these standards because we believe strongly that they will ensure better quality care. This review was a long-awaited clinician led review, which started with the development of new care standards to ensure the highest quality of care and is certainly not part of a cost-cutting exercise. Whilst surgery may cease, other services are planned to continue at cardiology centres and through planned regional networks, more services should be provided even closer to home”.
Comments as at: 09:33 on 25 January 2013
This article is either deeply dishonest or woefully ill-informed. And quite possibly both.I want to expose your biggest lie, because it’s important to be clear about this; the review which concluded that England should have fewer, larger surgical centres has absolutely nothing to do with government cuts. It was first proposed by the 11 paediatric cardiac surgical centres themselves in 2006, and the Royal College of Surgeons concurred with the view a year later. The Safe and Sustainable review was set up in 2008, before any austerity measures. Sharon Cheng, who is leading the Save Our Surgery campaign, is on record as agreeing that the status quo of 10 centres is neither safe nor sustainable.The notion that fewer, larger centres is necessary to improve care is also supported by the Royal College of Nursing, the British Heart Foundation, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery and the British Congenital Cardiac Association, amongst many other national organisations. The reasoning behind this is very straightforward, most importantly surgical outcomes will be better. That means that less babies will die, and survivors will enjoy a better quality of life. This is the ‘Neanderthal logic’ that you cite. All of this is clearly laid out here: http://www.specialisedservices.nhs.uk/library/30/Safe_and_Sustainable___A_New_Vision_for_Childrens_Congenital_Heart_Services_in_England_Consultation_Document_1.pdf
Repeating the word bureaucrats over and over is childish and unhelpful. There is virtually no disagreement with the idea that England needs bigger surgical centres with more surgeons doing more operations and sharing skills. Of course, any of the surgical centres recommended for closure will disagree that they should be the one to close. These decisions were made over years of deliberation, with one of the largest public consultations in NHS history. It considered numerous factors, outlined in the above link. There are genuine concerns about the manner in which these factors were considered and weighted from those who believe that LGI should remain a paediatric heart surgical centre, none of which are alluded to in your piece.
Your article adds precisely zero value to the debate, and can fairy be summarised as disingenuous scare-mongering.