I thank the Minister for his explanation. But I find at least part of it somewhat puzzling, particularly when he says that in the future there may be something of a blurring between what might be found in primary and community care, and what might be found in what we now traditionally think of as hospital services. In the relatively near future, would it not be more sensible to put health services in general in the Bill and perhaps delay the application beyond hospital into primary and community care for two, three or four years? If there is to be a blurring anyway, which I think is already happening, surely all health services should be here. We seem to be in the position where there is no possibility of any claim or request for investigation. Let us say that a community nurse, as she does the dressings on an older person’s ulcerated leg, fails to see that severe diabetes is also present. Had that happened when the same older person was in hospital for something quite different but still had an ulcerated leg that had to be dressed in the hospital, there would be reason for a claim. That is barely comprehensible, let alone fair.
NHS Redress Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Neuberger
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on NHS Redress Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c338-9GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:29:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277701
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277701
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277701