SSWAHS and that "Code of Conduct" it follows.

It's a great line isn't it when an organisation can fall back on the NSW Health's "Code of Conduct" for its defence of how they manage their health services, including any complaint made about those services or senior staff of theirs.

Let's just take as an example the one mentioned in the previous post. A complainant strongly believes that there has been a systemic failure in SSWAHS. They make a complaint known to the CEO of SSWAHS on 16 November 2009 and are advised on 23 December 2009 that the matters raised would be investigated and a written response issued. We now know that either the matter was not investigated or there was nothing to report, because no written response was issued.

Okay, then - let's see what their "Code of Conduct" has to say about that.
Paragraph 1.5 Fairness in decision-making, which is on page 18 of the Code states:

• I will deal with issues, cases or complaints consistently, promptly, openly and fairly.
• Act fairly and reasonably when using any statutory or discretionary power that could affect individuals within or outside NSW Health.
• Avoid any unnecessary delay in making decisions or taking action.
• Take all reasonable steps to ensure that the information I act or decide on is factually correct and relevant.

Paragraph 1.6 Appealing Decisions, also on page 18 states:

• I will promptly inform individuals who are adversely affected by or who wish to challenge a decision, of their rights to object, appeal or obtain a review. I will also inform them how they can exercise those rights.

Hmmm! SSWAHS, do you really think that eight or more months is about being "prompt"? Do you think that not providing any response is "open" or "fair"? Or is it perhaps indicative of avoiding "any unnecessary delay in making decisions or taking action".
And, when an individual does challenge one of your decisions, when do you "promptly inform them.... of their rights to object, appeal or obtain a review"? Perhaps after they die?

SSWAHS and its broken promises...

We've had the spin doctors of SSWAHS working hard recently to disinform the revolting residents of the Southern Highlands. But the fine art of the SSWAHS media unit staff has been in evidence for a much longer time.

Allow me to demonstrate. This is a letter from the CEO of SSWAHS to a local resident who had raised some concerns related to senior administrators in SSWAHS.

"Dear .....,

RE:Complaints about Sydney South West Area Health Service Employees

I refer to your correspondence to me dated 16 November 2009 concerning a complaint about Ms .... ....., dated 16 November 2009 concerning a complaint about Dr .... ......, dated 16 November 2009 concerning a complaint about Mr ... ......

The contents of your correspondence have been noted.

I am advised that Mr Graeme Slade, Designated Senior Complaints Officer Sydney South West Area Health Service sent letters to you on 18 November 2009 and 19 November 2009 advising that your complaints were being investigated and that you would be provided with a written response upon the completion of the investigation.

If you have any questions in relation to this matter please contact Graeme Slade on 9828 5958.

Yours sincerely,
Mike Wallace
Chief Executive
23/12/09"

Reassured that Mr Graeme Slade would be diligently investigating the complaints the recipient of the letter waited ... and waited .... and waited and as of today Socrates has been advised that no written response has been forthcoming, nor has Mr Slade even bothered to contact the complainant about any aspect of those complaints made in November 2009! Perhaps Mr Slade has died, or perhaps he and Mr Wallace think that the complainant has died! That seems to be the preferred option of SSWAHS in dealing with complaints. Outlast the complainants.

It reminds me of the movie "Oh! What a Lovely War" where the British generals kept a tally of the dead and wounded and considered that they were winning because they had less casualties than the Germans.

Sorry to tell you this Mr Wallace - but your complainant is still alive ..... and waiting!

SSWAHS and its brush-off of concerns raised in the Southern Highlands

"Keep it short, make it simple, and say nothing" possibly epitomises the thinking of the senior executive members of any Area Health Service or Departmental bureaucrat. However, SSWAHS has learned to refine it to an art form. If it wasn't so serious an issue one might be tempted to stand and applaud the sort of misinformation and disinformation rolled out by the SSWAHS executive.

At any time an Executive which, having learned the hard lessons from Campbelltown Hospital, and seemingly so principled in the application of "clinical governance" would be expected to have transparency and haste to resolve any conflict they might have or generate. Not so with SSWAHS.

One patient from the Highlands who made a serious allegation of professional misconduct of a staff member was eventually contacted by a senior bureaucrat of the SSWAHS mental health service. That is, they tried to phone the patient, maybe once or twice. They then left a letter for the patient to be given it by the staff at the treating unit. The patient was so offended by the patronising approach of this bureaucrat that they failed to respond to the letter. SSWAHS carried out no investigation of the alleged misconduct while that person remained in their employment. When the staff member resigned SSWAHS then sent the patient a letter stating that since the staff member was no longer their employee they could not do anything about investigating the complaint. There was no reference of the complaint by SSWAHS to the registration board or the HCCC for their information or investigation. Some months later an advocate made a formal complaint to the HCCC about the allegation. The matter was sent to SSWAHS for investigation and comment.

The usual practice was for the SSWAHS to be required to respond to the HCCC within 60 days. At the end of the 60 days SSWAHS asked for an extension. At the end of the following 60 days SSWAHS asked for another extension. Within 14 days they were able to inform the HCCC that they could now finalise the complaint investigation.

Why, you might ask, did it take so long for them to investigate something that they had already investigated previously. Well quite simply, that 130 days was just how long it was for the patient, who had made the original complaint and allegation, to die from an inoperable lung cancer. The patient's terminal condition was well known to SSWAHS because they had been providing treatment and palliative care in Bowral Hospital and community nursing services. Unfortunately, HCCC agreed with SSWAHS that it was now too late for the matter to be resolved.

Call me a cynic.... and maybe there's a glass of hemlock waiting for me in some part of SSWAHS, but really.....! Come on SSWAHS, you certainly know a thing or two about transparency, timeliness and clinical governance.