[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]   Help@Insulin-Pumpers.org
  [Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   for subscribe/unsubscribe assistance

Re: [IPk] A big MOAN

Hi Barbara,

It seems to me that the letter assumes that Danielle is not yet started
on the pump!  The diabetes team at the hospital _must_ be prepared to
help young diabetics on the ward who use pumps, whether or not they are
trained to induct new pump users - after all, a pumper can be involved
in a road traffic accident, or get appendicitis while visiting their
area, even if pump management is at some other hospital!

So, if I were you, I'd ignore, for now, the bit about the team not
feeling able to give ongoing support, and say you assume that you were
sent a standardized letter in error, since it talks about the team
feeling inadequate to induct Danielle onto the pump when she is already
using one.

Point out that the consulant can provide evidence that conventional
treatment did not work for Danielle, and that no other treatments were
suggested.  I would say that, if it is true that alternative treatments
were available, and not offered to Danielle, you believe that the clinic
was guilty of negligence, but that I was sure that the clinic was not
negligent, and did everything possible to help Danielle, it's just that
they tried everything possible, and that didn't work, so she went on the
pump, and that did work!

I'd also say that you were sure that they had misunderstood what the
clinic staff had said, as the consultant had told you that he supported
Danielle on the pump, and the staff have told you that they are happy to
learn more about the pump.  I'd copy that to the consultant, and ask him
to reply to you, copying the trust, if you have misunderstood what was
said to you.

Best wishes,

(dm 30+, 508 2+, always out to trap lying b*strds)

In message <email @ redacted>, email @ redacted writes
>Hello everyone
>I have just got the letter out again about the funding refusal which I posted 
>earlier today and I am now very annoyed because there are things in the 
 > letter which I had obviously missed. I think I just read about the refusal
>didn't actually absorb anything else.
>Well, as part of the price of the pump, training comes with it.  Danielle's 
>Consultant was asked by me if he was prepared to still look after Danielle if 
>she was on a pump and he accepted.  His diabetes team also agreed to training 
 > on the ward if Danielle should ever be admitted. The last time I saw them
>told me that they were happy with the training and the Consultant had 
> actually told me that he was in favour of the pump for Danielle. The letter I
>received today expresses a concern that Danielle's diabetes team do not feel 
 >they have sufficient expertise to be able to initiate treatment and to provide
>ongoing support.  The letter then goes on to say that the NICE guidelines are 
>clear in that therapy should only be initiated by a trained specialist team.  
>Does this mean now that we are going to have to shift hospitals after all?  I 
 >am feeling really fed up with a system of professionals who have no experience
>of living with the disease.
>MOAN over for now.  Nightcap in a glass by my side.  Working hard at the 
>moment to keep my temper under control.
>Thanks for reading.
>Mum to my little angel who "doesn't feel diabetic anymore"
>for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact:

Pat Reynolds
email @ redacted
   "It might look a bit messy now, 
                    but just you come back in 500 years time" 
   (T. Pratchett)
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: