SSWAHS and its 2011 New Year resolutions!

Socrates stumbled across these two New Year resolutions that SSWAHS Executive have decided to make at their final meeting of 2010.

SSWAHS will resolve to improve its complaints handling procedures.

• SSWAHS will not wait until the complainant dies before they respond to their complaint, or
• If death does not intervene early enough, SSWAHS will not ignore responding to a complainant for more than 12 months (in the earnest hope that the complainant will die in the interim), and/or
• SSWAHS will ensure that even the most visually impaired will be able to see the transparency with which the organisation deals with complaints, and
• SSWAHS will ensure that someone in their organisation dealing with complaints actually speaks with the complainant during the investigation process to ensure the accuracy and clarification of their complaint, and
• SSWAHS will follow their own protocols from NSW Health in dealing with serious complaints made against their staff.

SSWAHS Executive will ensure that they remember the presence of the Bowral Health Services.

• SSWAH Executive will be come more aware of the southern-most dot on their jurisdiction, namely, the location of Bowral and the Southern Highlands, and
• SSWAHS will begin to use the "Liverpool to Bowral" tagline after they have provided their Executive level staff with maps of the Southern Highlands and clear driving directions to Bowral (some of the less intelligent and visually impaired among the Executive have been given tuition on reading the very large RTA signs indicating where to leave the F5 motorway), and
• SSWAHS Executive will continue to remind themselves when the gravy (money) train comes to SSWAHS, that Bowral and the Southern Highlands needs a new hospital to cater for the enlarging, and aging, population within the region, and
• SSWAHS Executive will improve the hospital and community health services rather than run them to extinction, and
• SSWAHS Executive will remember that if they can't take the time to visit their health services in the Southern Highlands for which they have a responsibility, it's equally problematic for the aged, the ill and the infirm in the Southern Highlands to have to make the trip north to Campbelltown or Liverpool for the services they say we, in the Highlands, need. If we need them, perhaps we should be provided them, - locally, and
• SSWAHS Executive will remember that besides being their client/consumers, the people of the Southern Highlands are also voters (and the natives are restless).

Yes, it is a bit of fun. Socrates's poke in the eye of the SSWAHS Executive as they begin their backslapping for their survival of another 12 months! Who knows what will happen with the proposed Local Health Networks, and where exactly will the Bowral Health Services be fitting into the "big picture" of the re-branded SSWAHS in the New Year. One thing is more certain in 2011 - there will be a change of State government in March! Hopefully that change will see a shakeup in the current moribund SSWAHS Executive in respect of what it has done to, but not provided for, the Bowral Health Services and the people of the NSW Southern Highlands.

January 1st is the start of a new decade. Hopefully it will also be the start of a new deal for the people of the Southern Highlands.

SSWAHS and its allies - Part 3

Socrates had hoped that the brother of the adversarial blogger would have attempted to advise his brother against inflaming further the situation he has already ignited with his misdirected and salacious remarks forwarded to Socrates and to another blogger's site. I'm told that the person who moderates the other blog has decided to no longer re-publish my postings, and has allowed to be published the defamatory and denigrating comments previously forwarded to it by the blogger, Paul C.

Today, Paul C launched another attack amounting to bullying and harassment of others. To suggest that this can be validated by stating it is done in the presence of a mental illness or alcoholism is hardly sustainable when the same person has already indicated in his blog that very soon he will have been alcohol free for 18 months and, presumably, also mentally well. As Socrates has no intention of being accused of causing any deterioration of this person's mental state, the following is simply a cut and paste of the blogger's own posting.

Monday, 20 December 2010

he is at it again

The local male psych nurse, who was sacked by the Area Health Service last year for some very strange and very unprofessional behaviour, is involved again in posting material about me and others on the internet.

One of the reasons that this does not really bother me too much is that I know that the two blogs he is involved with will probably never have more than a dozen people in the whole world ever bother to read any of the rubbish they post.

I know over the last four years I have at times posted some pretty insane stuff on this blog but I believe this can often be explained by the fact that I suffer from episodes of bipolar schizoaffective disorder and alcoholism. When I become sober and mentally well again I have often gone back and deleted some of more insane stuff I have posted.

What excuse or explanation can this disgraced male psych nurse have for his very strange, bizarre involvement in two internet blogs?

What is posted on these two blogs is often written in this pompous, grandiose style. It is as though the writer believes he is writing for thousands of readers. If these two blogs become any more grandiose the people involved will probably start to believe that their rambling nonsense is going to bring about something like a Royal Commission into SSWAHS (the Area Health Service) LOL.

I have family members and friends who believe this male psych nurse is mentally unwell. If they are right, I suppose he should probably be pitied. It is a strange situation when someone who used to somehow function as a mental health professional is himself very psychologically flawed and has little or no insight into this truth.

Oh well, I can only wait and see what will appear next on either of the two blogs that this sad, troubled man is involved with.

Posted by Paul C at 3:50 PM; and Posted by Paul C at 6:46 PM - 2 comments

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have read everything posted on the "Shalwyn" and "Socrates" blogs you are referring to.

Little do you know that they have rocked the very foundations of SSWAHS (the Sydney South West Area Health Service).

I am certain that every morning the first thing the premier, the health minister, the ombudsman, the SSWAHS bosses and many others read is the "Socrates" and "Shalwyn" blogs.

Also, how dare you describe my uncle, who is the finest mental health clinician to ever work in the Southern Highlands, as a sad, troubled, psychologically flawed man. You are defaming a true giant in mental health!

Yours,

Jimmy O'Tool,
forensic patient,
D (Psychiatric) Ward,
Long Bay Jail.

20 December 2010 6:46 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well said, Jimmy!

I have been a client of your dear uncle.

He truly is as you say, a giant in mental health.

Just prior to my recent hospitalization I had my medication adjusted and reduced and I then wrote many threatening letters to the Nobel committee demanding they award the next Nobel prize for medicine to your dear uncle. I still believe this was reasonable, rational behaviour.

Martha O'Springer,
Locked Ward, Waratah House,
Campbelltown.

20 December 2010 7:20 PM

SSWAHS and its allies - Part 2

Socrates has been "warned off" by the brother of the blogger mentioned in the previous post. This is another person who also thought Socrates' blog was "sad".

"That's not bizarre or crazy. Sounds like a lot of fun actually. For an example of bizarre and crazy, you only have to visit:
http://sswahsandbowralhealth.blogspot.com/
but I wouldn't visit it too much, it's way too sad and pathetic. Give my regards to Willie. Tell him I love the reworking of "Friend of Mine" he did for Brokeback Mountain."

1 December 2010 2:07 PM

When the world's media is currently preoccupied with governments and government agencies being kept accountable (Wikileaks), one would think a simple blog like mine is in keeping with world trends.

If other bloggers can publish comments that can be deemed to be controversial or defamatory surely they can expect to be challenged by their readers. I accept the comments of the brother of the blogger mentioned in my previous posting - but I don't have to engage in any dialogue with them and I choose not to.

I suggest to the blogger's brother that, rather than encouraging his brother to publish derogatory and statements about others, he might consider the laws against vilification and defamation and caution his brother from publishing more of the same.

I have studiously avoided naming the blogger or his brother as I, unlike them, prefer to have nothing to do with either. They both seem to have a perception that Socrates has multiple personalities. In fact, Socrates has one personality but a number of informants who have corroborated the documentation provided in regard to the failure of the SSWAHS Executive to deal with a number of serious complaints made against some of their senior staff members. Complaints which are still to be reported upon by SSWAHS to the complainant. Yes, this is indeed a sad state of affairs when a statutory authority has failed to deliver that which it promises in it's own documentation.

I have no doubt that this blog entry will be scrutinised by the other blogger and his brother. What happens next will be up to them. If both, or either, wish to demonize Socrates (or any others known to him) then they will have to be aware of the consequence of their actions.

SSWAHS has its ally - or some might suggest: "With friends like this who needs enemies"

Socrates has had a short break but now it's back to business. There was one interesting interlude which arrived as a form of comment from a fellow blogger who thought that the information in this blog was "A very sad case". The following is their opening gambit:

"I have been a client of the local mental health service on and off since 1994.

"About two years ago, there was a front page article in a local newspaper that was highly critical of the local mental health service. I stated on this blog that I was one of the people that spoke about my problems with the local mental health service to the journalist who wrote the article."

Below is what the same person stated about the local mental health service on the 23 October 2008 about the time that the blogger refers to in the comment above.

"Another day when I had every opportunity to drink but I didn't. I have the house to myself. I have money and I am feeling a bit stressed with this article coming out in the paper. BTW: the journalist wanted my full name to go into the article. This would not have worried me but some of my family did not want this, which is fair enough. I feel stressed wondering who is talking to this journalist and what they are saying.

Also, I feel stressed worrying that (while I feel nothing about most of the useless clowns that work there) there are three people who work there that are OK and have treated me all right.

Since 1994, there have been a lot of times when either no-one who worked there or maybe only one staff member had any time for me .......... but now, when the article is written there are three working there that are OK. The journo has promised that she will not "hang me out to dry" and she will show me the last draft before the thing is in print.

To repeat myself, I hope the article causes maximum discomfort and embarrassment to most of the people there who have in various ways treated me like shit but I feel bad about helping with this article when three people that work there have treated me OK.

If I was a nicer or better person I would think more of Harry, Alan and Gillian and I would have said "no" to any involvement but as it turns out I could not resist the chance for a bit of pay-back against the majority of BMH (Bowral Mental Health), who I think really deserve it: AND as it turns out, I am not the only one they have done the wrong thing by."

"What happened quite a few times since 1994, was that a local shrink could schedule me to a place like CRC for 4 weeks, but they could discharge me after a week and then I'd come back to this area, still mentally unwell and usually receive zero follow up, support or supervision from the &%$#@S that have worked in the local mental health team.

They are obviously not to blame for everything but on a number of occasions they were a factor in me running around this area (longer than I had to be) off my head, getting into legal trouble and putting some members of my family through hell.

"I hope I can get to November 29 without drinking again; that will mean one year, 365 days, with only three days drinking A 99+% success rate. 2008 will be the most sober year since I was 16. I also will have achieved this without being in jail or rehab ....... and I also did it without "swapping the witch for the bitch" ie: I have not used or abused valium, xanax, pot or any other drug this year."

Socrates simply makes the point that a person affected by a chronic substance abuse may not have the best attitude about the persons who provide health and support to those so affected. The comments from the blogger posting the quoted text from 23 October 2008 would suggest that they have had little interest in taking responsibility for their actions, preferring instead to lay the blame upon the clinical staff that they were so anxious that their action "causes maximum discomfort and embarrassment to most of the people there who have in various ways treated me like shit but I feel bad about helping with this article when three people that work there have treated me OK.

"If I was a nicer or better person I would think more of Harry, Alan and Gillian and I would have said "no" to any involvement but as it turns out I could not resist the chance for a bit of pay-back against the majority of BMH (Bowral Mental Health), who I think really deserve it."

Now, Socrates does think that this is more than a bit sad!

SSWAHS - Dr Victor Storm and security at mental health facilities

Further to the previous post Socrates notes that carers and family members are also asking the same questions. In this report Mr Stevens is stating the obvious - persons with a severe mental illness admitted as involuntary patients under the NSW Mental Health Act (2007) are so admitted because they have been deemed by a psychiatric Registrar or psychiatrist, employed by SSWAHS, to be so mentally impaired that they are not able to make rational decisions.

For SSWAHS staff to make decisions without taking into account their clinical responsibilities and duty of care for the patient is worrying. Equally worrying is that Carers had a significant input into the changes made to the NSW Mental Health Act 2007 to enshrine in it the role of the Carer or other significant person in the Care Plan devised for the person in their care. How is it that Mr Stevens and other Carers are not having a say into the actual and proposed care of their relatives?

Is SSWAHS and its Area Mental Health Directors ignoring the intent of the NSW Act when it comes to listening to the family members and other Carers? And if Dr Angelo Virgona believes that the record of the Liverpool Hospital Mental Health Unit is no worse than any other mental health unit I wonder if that statement was any consolation to Mr Stevens and any other Carer who had a relative "flee" from Liverpool and any other SSWAHS Mental Health facility?

Mental health unit security worries relative

ANNE TARASOV

17 Jun, 2009 05:00 AM
Liverpool City Champion Newspaper

MARK Stevens has seen several patients flee from the high-dependency mental health unit at Liverpool hospital.

The Cabramatta resident, who has a relative that has needed to stay at the unit several times, said he is concerned about the procedures in the unit.

``A lot of the patients are `scheduled', which means they have been brought to the unit against their will, because they're a danger to themselves and others,'' Mr Stevens said.

``But the exits in the unit aren't properly patrolled and it's really easy for them to just run out, without anyone noticing.

``I was standing near an exit speaking to a nurse about the condition of my relative when a female patient ran up to us, pushed us both aside and ran out of the exit, down the corridor and out of the hospital. And who knows when they brought her back. It's just so easy for them to run off. It's really dangerous.''

Mr Stevens said they many of the patients are also let out on leave too early and escape from staff and relatives asked to supervise them.

``My relative has been let out on leave a few times, and they will be with three other patients and only one female nurse watching over them and one time, my relative managed to get away.''

Sydney South West Area Health Services Director of Clinical Services in Mental Health Dr Angelo Virgona said the unit was not designed to be a jail.

``In keeping with the spirit of the Mental Health Act we're not aiming to be too restrictive of our patients. ``We aim to create the best therapeutic environment for people to recover from their illness, so it can't be too restrictive.

``But we upgraded our exits in 2008 and now we have another layer of security so it's even more difficult to flee.

``There is no way to guarantee that patients will never leave the unit,'' Dr Virgona said. ``But we don't have more patients leaving than any other mental health unit.''