Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    This from the catholic church, whose compassion extends to dealing sensitively with people going through serious difficulties in their lives by forcing them to do hail mary's and confess, damning people to eternal damnation for any number of reason, and extending about as much compassion to those critical of them as the Romans did to Jesus.

    Maybe he should get his own house in order before trying to attack others.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    What is the point in forcing someone to endure a inevitably slow and painful death?
    Because an ancient scripture written on accounts of word-of-mouth stories that had gone through so many generations that it was basically an elaborate game of chinese whispers implies that an all-powerful (and yet benevolent) deity would not be too pleased if anyone but him (the benevolent guy) takes away life. That is the point.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    Because an ancient scripture written on accounts of word-of-mouth stories that had gone through so many generations that it was basically an elaborate game of chinese whispers implies that an all-powerful (and yet benevolent) deity would not be too pleased if anyone but him (the benevolent guy) takes away life. That is the point.
    so......i'm guessing you're athiest? XD
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gildartz)
    so......i'm guessing you're athiest? XD
    I'm not a particularly strong atheist (I'm not a Dawkins wannabe), but I'm vehemently opposed to organised religion, and when it tries to impact on society.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    I dont need to imagine, 3 days out of 7, i'm a busy student nurse coming at the end of my long day. And as fed up as may be with one or two patients, it doesnt' ever provide an excuse for neglect- the problem is there are staff out there, not treating a patient they way they're meant to, and people are too scared to speak up or complain about them, due to hierarchy, bullying...many many reasons, plus a lot of staff aren't trained in new manual handling techniques, dignity- and get into bad habits
    Is there not a difference between neglect and acting without compassion? Neglect makes everythng sound so much more horrible.

    Sure we can train staff, etc. to treat patients in a way that is dignified and proper but, as someone else has already said, that doesn't bring true compassion to patient care. I am not talking about total neglect. I thought the article the OP posted was more about the removed and distanced manner which some patients are treated with. This, I think, results from staff feeling fed-up and it's because they are doing it as a job. We all get fed up doing our jobs sometimes. This is something that is very difficult to overcome. We cannot expect staff to be saintly machines who never tire.

    Whistleblower protection may get rid of the unacceptably poor staff but can it introduce a culture where all staff show genuine compassion? Can it prevent people from feeling fed-up and tired, wanting to go home so badly that they don't even care about their patients anymore?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ignoramus)
    BBC News article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8513802.stm

    Thought it'd be interesting to hear people's opinions on whether the NHS is compassionate enough towards its patients. This doesn't have to be wrt euthanasia, which seems to be the focus of the Archbishop's argument.
    My very first thought was that he can go **** off with his views on the NHS - he hasn't, and never will clean up **** over a 12 hour shift on a sunday. The moral historial precedent of the Catholic Church is frankly disgraceful.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    This from the catholic church, whose compassion extends to dealing sensitively with people going through serious difficulties in their lives by forcing them to do hail mary's and confess, damning people to eternal damnation for any number of reason, and extending about as much compassion to those critical of them as the Romans did to Jesus.

    Maybe he should get his own house in order before trying to attack others.
    You clearly have a big problem with organised religion. Your view of the negative parts of Catholicism has nothing to to do with the case in point. Let's go with your view and say that Catholics are doing wrong by trying to convert people. That does not mean they should stop trying to do good, e.g. by promoting a more compassionate NHS. No one is perfect, yet that doesn't mean people shouldn't try to do good, even when there are things to improve upon.

    (Original post by Phalanges)
    I'm not a particularly strong atheist (I'm not a Dawkins wannabe), but I'm vehemently opposed to organised religion, and when it tries to impact on society.
    England's society is rooted in Christianity. It's a huge part of our culture and heritage, like it or lump it and it has more than the right to put forward ideas and suggestions.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Woody.)
    You clearly have a big problem with organised religion. Your view of the negative parts of Catholicism has nothing to to do with the case in point. Let's go with your view and say that Catholics are doing wrong by trying to convert people. That does not mean they should stop trying to do good, e.g. by promoting a more compassionate NHS. No one is perfect, yet that doesn't mean people shouldn't try to do good, even when there are things to improve upon.


    England's society is rooted in Christianity. It's a huge part of our culture and heritage, like it or lump it and it has more than the right to put forward ideas and suggestions.
    The Catholic Church holds irrational belifes which in some cases - condom use and STDs for example are not compatible with the overall good health of the country. Its one thing to say 'we keep to ourselves'...and I do respect the fact that people have their own religious belifes, despite not believing them personally...however, th Catholic doctrins on sexual health for one and arguably end of life are not rooted in sense or logic, rather in belife. To me, that is active interference and coercing the rest of society to follow their views. (the Catholic archbishop not liking aborton/contraceptive advertising being a case in point) If it were up to the Catholic Church perphaps men would still be ensouled at 40 days after birth, and women after 80 days....
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wangers)
    The Catholic Church holds irrational belifes which in some cases - condom use and STDs for example are not compatible with the overall good health of the country. Its one thing to say 'we keep to ourselves'...and I do respect the fact that people have their own religious belifes, despite not believing them personally...however, th Catholic doctrins on sexual health for one and arguably end of life are not rooted in sense or logic, rather in belife. To me, that is active interference and coercing the rest of society to follow their views. (the Catholic archbishop not liking aborton/contraceptive advertising being a case in point) If it were up to the Catholic Church perphaps men would still be ensouled at 40 days after birth, and women after 80 days....

    Its also important to bare in mind, many religions have a spectrum of beliefs, from fundamental to liberal- different catholics hold different views, it's very common
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WackyJun)
    Is there not a difference between neglect and acting without compassion? Neglect makes everythng sound so much more horrible.

    Sure we can train staff, etc. to treat patients in a way that is dignified and proper but, as someone else has already said, that doesn't bring true compassion to patient care. I am not talking about total neglect. I thought the article the OP posted was more about the removed and distanced manner which some patients are treated with. This, I think, results from staff feeling fed-up and it's because they are doing it as a job. We all get fed up doing our jobs sometimes. This is something that is very difficult to overcome. We cannot expect staff to be saintly machines who never tire.

    Whistleblower protection may get rid of the unacceptably poor staff but can it introduce a culture where all staff show genuine compassion? Can it prevent people from feeling fed-up and tired, wanting to go home so badly that they don't even care about their patients anymore?
    If i do not cover a patient up when they're being washed, thats neglect. If i leave a venflon in longer than needed, and don't take it out- thats neglect. If I leave a patient waiting for the toilet, and they soil themselves- thats neglect. All of these acts are also acts which do not show care and compassion

    It's also not showing compassion by taking in the basic needs of my patients first, compassion isn't being smiley smiley and happy- its getting the job done, and meeting the needs of the patient and treating them as an individual according to their needs.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Woody.)
    You clearly have a big problem with organised religion. Your view of the negative parts of Catholicism has nothing to to do with the case in point. Let's go with your view and say that Catholics are doing wrong by trying to convert people. That does not mean they should stop trying to do good, e.g. by promoting a more compassionate NHS. No one is perfect, yet that doesn't mean people shouldn't try to do good, even when there are things to improve upon.


    England's society is rooted in Christianity. It's a huge part of our culture and heritage, like it or lump it and it has more than the right to put forward ideas and suggestions.
    Even though I am Muslim, there have been times when religion has had a negative impact on society in some shape or form. As previously pointed out, the Pope's stance against condoms and contraception may lead to a rise in Catholic teenage parents who are not capable financially nor mentally to be a parent. Heck, you can even say that Catholism led to the rise of Mussolini in Italy, so the negative impacts can be quite far reaching. The problem with quite a few religions is that they usually see things in black and white, (or the religious believers don't appreciate the different interpretations of their religion) when they should be looking at the circumstances surrounding a situation.

    Some may argue that the negative impact brought on my religion, such as 'holy' wars, outweigh the positive imapcts, such as charitable giving. But that's another argument and is quite off-topic.

    Oh, and yes, this country was established upon Christian principles but society is slowly evolving into a secular state.

    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    Its also important to bare in mind, many religions have a spectrum of beliefs, from fundamental to liberal- different catholics hold different views, it's very common
    That's true, but when the Pope says that something is wrong, then it's expected that most Catholics would believe that it's wrong too.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Woody.)
    You clearly have a big problem with organised religion. Your view of the negative parts of Catholicism has nothing to to do with the case in point. Let's go with your view and say that Catholics are doing wrong by trying to convert people. That does not mean they should stop trying to do good, e.g. by promoting a more compassionate NHS. No one is perfect, yet that doesn't mean people shouldn't try to do good, even when there are things to improve upon.


    England's society is rooted in Christianity. It's a huge part of our culture and heritage, like it or lump it and it has more than the right to put forward ideas and suggestions.
    As Wangers has said, the views that many religions hold are simply incompatible with providing the best levels of healthcare in society today. What about Jehovah's Witnesses, who refuse blood? Should they be allowed to criticise our methods in transplantation? How about (as in the original case) Catholics, who oppose the free clinics set up by the NHS that offer compassionate advice about safe sex and those with STIs? Should they be allowed to criticise our compassion?

    The justification of a right to put forward views because it always has is a very weak one. Every view should be judged on it's own merits and treated as such, no matter who presents it. If the catholic church was a huge part of our medical practice, we'd still be in the dark ages.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I think religion can have a say- they are representitives in our house of lords are they not? And they're humans too- they are more than welcome to criticise us, and offer suggestions for improvements in our care- as healthworkers, we're constantly learning and redeveloping.

    It's also important to bare in mind the catholic church represents a fair proportion of our patients, and even though each patient may have different viewsd, wishes or expressions- many consider they belong to this religion, and being aware of the main religions in this country, and their teachings, feelings about the care we deliver is important for transcultural healthcare
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    I think religion can have a say- they are representitives in our house of lords are they not? And they're humans too- they are more than welcome to criticise us, and offer suggestions for improvements in our care- as healthworkers, we're constantly learning and redeveloping.

    It's also important to bare in mind the catholic church represents a fair proportion of our patients, and even though each patient may have different viewsd, wishes or expressions- many consider they belong to this religion, and being aware of the main religions in this country, and their teachings, feelings about the care we deliver is important for transcultural healthcare
    I certainly agree in principle that everyone has a right to voice their opinion, no matter what their beliefs.

    However, the thing I don't like is that if the situation was reversed, if this was a prominent member of the health service making negative comments about the practice of the catholic church, there would be complete outrage. And if they were negative or public enough, the catholic church could completely destroy the man if they wanted to - they are one of the richest organisations in the world, after all. And yet if it occurs the other way round everyone is supposed to bow down to their wisdom.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    I certainly agree in principle that everyone has a right to voice their opinion, no matter what their beliefs.

    However, the thing I don't like is that if the situation was reversed, if this was a prominent member of the health service making negative comments about the practice of the catholic church, there would be complete outrage. And if they were negative or public enough, the catholic church could completely destroy the man if they wanted to - they are one of the richest organisations in the world, after all. And yet if it occurs the other way round everyone is supposed to bow down to their wisdom.

    If it was reversed i think it would just be a simple debate, naturally if the church was insulted- that would be another matter, but the catholic church wasn't insulting the NHS, merely highlighting an issue which the NHS is aware of :dontknow: and seeing as this month does have 'dignity day' - I see no issue with it!

    i have..now and again, watched that sunday morning show, with christians on, and there was one about a year ago with a catholic dude, and this sexual health nurse having a debate about contraception in schools, and she was speaking out about the catholic church beliefs, calling them dated and he had some good points aswell-but she was speaking out!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    I certainly agree in principle that everyone has a right to voice their opinion, no matter what their beliefs.

    However, the thing I don't like is that if the situation was reversed, if this was a prominent member of the health service making negative comments about the practice of the catholic church, there would be complete outrage. And if they were negative or public enough, the catholic church could completely destroy the man if they wanted to - they are one of the richest organisations in the world, after all. And yet if it occurs the other way round everyone is supposed to bow down to their wisdom.
    good point, I wouldn't go as far to say that the church would #destroy' the man, but if someone spoke negatively about the church, there will most likely be a greater public outcry than if the church spoke negatively about the NHS or healthcare in general.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Haven't read the article yet so just responding to some comments here.

    (Original post by WackyJun)
    Is there not a difference between neglect and acting without compassion?
    :ditto: Or without as much compassion as you would like to show to everyone at everytime.

    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    It's very easy to show compassion and care when busy, maybe just explaining a procedure a bit better, smiling at the patient, or just asking 'how are you feeling' to their relatives takes minimal time and can make a huge difference- i dont think it comes down to funding. I actually think it comes down to training- as a nursing student im lucky to have spent a lot of time with patient contact and building my skills, communication within the time restraints available with dealing with bad news, or palliative care, however other professions do not get as much focus on their learning.
    Hmm, I don't find it very easy to always show as much compassion and care as I would like when i'm busy & I don't really think this is due to training but logistics or what you think are the 'compassionate' aspects of your specific job & how long they take! :p:

    An obvious example has been preadmissions clinics which we do as FY1. So what should be a few hours of 6-9 patients being seen prior to their operation. The operational aim pretty much seems to be to: flag up any anaesthetic issues that need specialist pre-operative investigations or input & prepare the drug chart. The patients' desire seem to be to chat through every aspect of their medical and social health ever & to discuss the operation more - which essentially should have been done when the decision was made that they were for an operation i.e. when they were with the surgical specialty spR/Consultant!
    The caring/compassionate thing is to be all patient focussed & let it be driven by their ideas, concerns, expectations & all that jazz. This takes forever. My record was essentially a 'whole' working day (8 hours) of this list = on something the powers that be thought should have been done in time for me to attend my teaching (3 hours!). It was interesting in that even though it was clearly running late & each time I framed at the beginning what the purpose of the clinic was each successive patient seemed more keen on getting their doctors worth & going over everything repeatedly...
    Anyhow, that day I could do this because I'd been in early - things were sorted with the ward patients & my Consultant didn't have a theatre list. On others days I've had other commitments & had to finish this clinic on time. If I hadn't - there would have been cross Consultants & theatre lists not starting (no one there with a BCh qualified to hold a vital retractor :cool: ) & nurses going bleep mad because ward patients that I am responsible for are having chest pain/desaturating/have gone oliguric/have no IV access for their vital meds etc. all of which would have been unprofessional & perhaps neglectful if you like that word.

    Although I think I've been professional in both types of clinic I really strongly suspect that the patients I was able to give more time to would have thought me more caring and compassionate than those that I had to try & continually refocus/remind what the purpose of the clinic was.

    Another example is of relatives wanting (or nurses assuming that they do :rolleyes: ) long discussions with 'the doctor' in the middle of the night about their sick loved one. The compassionate thing is for them to have access to a doctor to discuss it with to their hearts content however long this might take. The realistic thing is in the middle of the night there might well be one ward FY1 covering ~300-400 patients. Which 'neglect' would you rather - the patients with symptoms that turn out to be MIs, massive GIs bleeds, acute pulmonary oedema etc. not being seen or families not being able to have their discussions right then?


    Oh, I should do a reflective writing piece...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elles)
    Haven't read the article yet so just responding to some comments here.



    :ditto: Or without as much compassion as you would like to show to everyone at everytime.



    Hmm, I don't find it very easy to always show as much compassion and care as I would like when i'm busy & I don't really think this is due to training but logistics or what you think are the 'compassionate' aspects of your specific job & how long they take! :p:

    An obvious example has been preadmissions clinics which we do as FY1. So what should be a few hours of 6-9 patients being seen prior to their operation. The operational aim pretty much seems to be to: flag up any anaesthetic issues that need specialist pre-operative investigations or input & prepare the drug chart. The patients' desire seem to be to chat through every aspect of their medical and social health ever & to discuss the operation more - which essentially should have been done when the decision was made that they were for an operation i.e. when they were with the surgical specialty spR/Consultant!
    The caring/compassionate thing is to be all patient focussed & let it be driven by their ideas, concerns, expectations & all that jazz. This takes forever. My record was essentially a 'whole' working day (8 hours) of this list = on something the powers that be thought should have been done in time for me to attend my teaching (3 hours!). It was interesting in that even though it was clearly running late & each time I framed at the beginning what the purpose of the clinic was each successive patient seemed more keen on getting their doctors worth & going over everything repeatedly...
    Anyhow, that day I could do this because I'd been in early - things were sorted with the ward patients & my Consultant didn't have a theatre list. On others days I've had other commitments & had to finish this clinic on time. If I hadn't - there would have been cross Consultants & theatre lists not starting (no one there with a BCh qualified to hold a vital retractor :cool: ) & nurses going bleep mad because ward patients that I am responsible for are having chest pain/desaturating/have gone oliguric/have no IV access for their vital meds etc. all of which would have been unprofessional & perhaps neglectful if you like that word.

    Although I think I've been professional in both types of clinic I really strongly suspect that the patients I was able to give more time to would have thought me more caring and compassionate than those that I had to try & continually refocus/remind what the purpose of the clinic was.
    I spent some time asissting in running a Preadmissions unit for orthopaedics during the autumn, and looking back i did find i didn't have as much time answering questions or reassuring patients as i would have liked or can spend on the ward due to the amount of patients, and the time on the list. However when doing checks, there was a box and a few lines to tick and ask about the patients state of mind, and i'd always ask them that, not as part of the whole paper work, but at the end, and i'll document it last, as it's an important aspect and not only did it help the patient relay any uncertainties or fear they may have but also relay information onto other staff to be aware of. Plus doing it at the end i found the patient had spent 5-10minutes with me already, and had gotten to know me and felt open to discussion. Even though time was short, it was the little things, like sitting down with them, if they got emotional using appropiate touch and questions, and even making those on the later list a cup of tea....naturally more time the better, but patients understand you're busy, and like i said, speaking to them it really is the little things they appreciate. I'm grateful going into nursing that my training is very heavy patient-centred and i'm managing responsibilites and time from the end of first year onwards, if im managing a bay of patients, even though i'm doing paper work, they can see me do it at the end of their bay, and i'm always around and they know i'm there if anything happens- a lot of nurses go and do it by the nurses station or staff room, but patients say they like to see someone is atleast there!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by New Username)
    I thought it was a good idea to introduce the internal market. It introduces an element of competition and thus leads to some efficiency. There is also more patient choice.
    Of course the problem I can see is that the service has a risk of being aimed at profit maximisation as opposed to patient satisfaction maximisation.
    It might have seemed like a good idea in principle but the fact remains it was a massive failure - hence it was abolished. Give 'NHS Plc' by Professor Allyson Pollock a read.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    I spent some time asissting in running a Preadmissions unit for orthopaedics during the autumn, and looking back i did find i didn't have as much time answering questions or reassuring patients as i would have liked or can spend on the ward due to the amount of patients, and the time on the list. However when doing checks, there was a box and a few lines to tick and ask about the patients state of mind, and i'd always ask them that, not as part of the whole paper work, but at the end, and i'll document it last, as it's an important aspect and not only did it help the patient relay any uncertainties or fear they may have but also relay information onto other staff to be aware of. Plus doing it at the end i found the patient had spent 5-10minutes with me already, and had gotten to know me and felt open to discussion. Even though time was short, it was the little things, like sitting down with them, if they got emotional using appropiate touch and questions, and even making those on the later list a cup of tea....naturally more time the better, but patients understand you're busy, and like i said, speaking to them it really is the little things they appreciate. I'm grateful going into nursing that my training is very heavy patient-centred and i'm managing responsibilites and time from the end of first year onwards, if im managing a bay of patients, even though i'm doing paper work, they can see me do it at the end of their bay, and i'm always around and they know i'm there if anything happens- a lot of nurses go and do it by the nurses station or staff room, but patients say they like to see someone is atleast there!
    There's quite a difference between a (student) nurse-led pre-admissions clinic consultation and a doctor-led one...

    Anyway, I suspect in many circumstances both nurses and doctors are perceived as not being as compassionate as they ought to be. But I'm not sure that extra training in being nice is the answer, nor that a Roman Catholic archbishop necessarily knows much about the grinding reality of life on the wards. I do agree about patients' spiritual needs not being met prior to death though.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 16, 2010
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.