Jump to content

Royal Hospital Nurse Hoax victim takes her own life


Frederick
 Share

Recommended Posts

She may have felt keenly responsible for causing her employers deep embarrassment, for jeopardising her employers' relationship with the royal family, for making a colleague trust her and reveal confidential information, for putting a patient's health in jeopardy, for risking the wrath of the most powerful family in the land, for being the butt of jokes world-wide...

all because two prats thought it would be funny to make a call to a hospital about a sick woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 237
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Pace Chiefluvvie, I don't think there has been a lack of compassion in this thread. I am sure we all are deeply sympathetic to her families and friends as we would be in any suicide case.

It is however too early IMO to say why she took this drastic action - we just don't have the facts to make a judgenebt at this stage. I do not think we can discount the possibility that she received a reprimand from her boss however much it is denied now after the event.

I am surprised that such a prestigious hospital frequently receiving high profile patients does not have procedures in place to prevent confidential information being given out over the phone.  I would have thought it merely common sense to make sure that all staff were aware that they should never give out this information without the consent of the patient or their representative

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Clair"]She may have felt keenly responsible for causing her employers deep embarrassment, for jeopardising her employers' relationship with the royal family, for making a colleague trust her and reveal confidential information, for putting a patient's health in jeopardy, for risking the wrath of the most powerful family in the land, for being the butt of jokes world-wide...

all because two prats thought it would be funny to make a call to a hospital about a sick woman.

[/quote]

Well said Clair....

Chiefluvvie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Clair"]She may have felt keenly responsible for causing her employers deep embarrassment, for jeopardising her employers' relationship with the royal family, for making a colleague trust her and reveal confidential information, for putting a patient's health in jeopardy, for risking the wrath of the most powerful family in the land, for being the butt of jokes world-wide...

all because two prats thought it would be funny to make a call to a hospital about a sick woman.


[/quote]She may indeed. At this stage we just don't know. What we do know is that Buckingham Palace has stated they have not complained to the hospital. We do know that before the tragic events yesterday Prince Charles was able to see the funny side of the affair.

IMO it should always be a complete No-No on any hospital giving out information about a patient's condition over the phone without clear authorisation from the patient or their representative.

I am quite sure that the Queen is too considerate a person to phone anyone at 5:30 am and I am sure she have a member of her staff make the call in any case during the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably these nitwits wanted to make the royal family look stupid. Instead they made a public fool of a nurse.

If this is an example of what the press are going to be like for the rest of Catherine's pregnancy, she has my sympathy.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rabbie"]

[quote user="Clair"]She may have felt keenly responsible for... [/quote]

She may indeed. At this stage we just don't know...[/quote]

No, we don't, but I do not believe for a second that the hospital's spokesperson would mention her death AND the fact she was the victim of the hoax phone-call without a good reason.

I believe this was a very pointed admonition to the world at large that actions have consequences, however unforeseen and tragic.

At the very least, these two idiots might have considered that the person they were tricking for kicks might have lost her job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Chiefluvvie"][quote user="Clair"]She may have felt keenly responsible for causing her employers deep embarrassment, for jeopardising her employers' relationship with the royal family, for making a colleague trust her and reveal confidential information, for putting a patient's health in jeopardy, for risking the wrath of the most powerful family in the land, for being the butt of jokes world-wide...

all because two prats thought it would be funny to make a call to a hospital about a sick woman.


[/quote] Well said Clair.... Chiefluvvie[/quote]

And from me too!

That is exactly how I read the situation Clair with the little knowledge that I do have of the womans culture.

Very very sad indeed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Clarkkent"]

[quote user="Bugsy"]I spent 25 years of my life in the NHS many as fairly senior management. Anyone who seriously believes that she hadn't been taken to task by some manager in that hospital is dreaming. The whole system is based on a 'blame someone else - cover my own ar se' situation. Its just so sad.[/quote]

But this wasn't NHS - it was a private hospital. The hospital management have said that they were giving the nurse support. It may be, of course, that this is a post hoc position that they have adopted.

The real problem here is the fact that a healthy married woman of child bearing age becoming pregnant should be considered newsworthy.

[/quote]

It might be a private hospital - and a prestigious one at that. What had management said to the nurse? The Royals have not made a complaint so maybe the hospital feel the need to say that nothing had been said to the nurse which I highly doubt.

Plus do you know what the Queen actually sounds like when she is on the telephone? Perhaps as well at 05:30 she did not think of there being hoax calls at that time.

She may also have thought that she would have been disciplined (if not already) and possibly sacked meaning she would have lost her accommodation.

With the way that the radio station whipped up the event worldwide she possibly thought she was in big trouble and was also being belittled for being taken in.

She may also not have been the one to give out the information but she was the one who put the call through to the nurse that did and must have said to her 'it is the Queen on the phone' thereby giving the green light to the nurse to give the information.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not the first time this particular radio station has done this type of thing........

"Nights on 2Day FM have also been controversial. In 1997 night announcer David Rymer, host of the then Top 30 Countdown, was castigated in the media for a poorly thought-out on air stunt in which he called a top ranking HSC student, pretending to be from the Board of Studies. He told the girl her results were incorrect and that her marks had been adjusted. He played the segment to air after receiving verbal permission to do so from the girl's mother, however her father was a lawyer and took legal action. The media pounced, and Rymer was suspended until further notice. "

Source Wiki - no copyright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such a sad affair. That poor woman and her husband and children - just awful for them all. It's probably taken the gilt off the gingerbread for Kate & William too. We've had a big 'do' this morning for the Téléthon, and many of the people there came over to express their sadness about it - all French, by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]For whatever cause they made this woman look like a fool in most of the world's media. Someone will remember the Shakespeare quote about a good name being the most precious thing we have better than I do. .

Hoddy[/quote]

Who steals my purse, steals trash,

"'tis something, nothing ....

But he who filches from me my good name,

Robs me of that which not enriches him,

And makes me poor indeed.

Sorry - been busy.  My "A' level play - never forgotten this bit ...

Says it all really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rabbie"]

I am surprised that such a prestigious hospital frequently receiving high profile patients does not have procedures in place to prevent confidential information being given out over the phone.  I would have thought it merely common sense to make sure that all staff were aware that they should never give out this information without the consent of the patient or their representative[/quote]

No matter what the level of patient - last year, when my elderly aunt was in hospital, a code word was agreed between the family and the nursing staff - if this wasn't given - no-one could talk to her, or get information about her.  Not difficult. Simple system - and particularly useful for celebs / high level clients I would have thought.  If explained that must give this word, any genuine enquirer would understand the control put in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how they can call it a harmless prank that backfired at all.

I understand that the call broke the Australian Communications & Media Authority (ACMA) Commercial Radio Code of practice (2011), which states:

“A licensee must not broadcast the words of an identifiable person unless:

a)   That person has been informed in advance or a reasonable

person would be aware that the words may be broadcast

b)   In the case of words which have been recorded without the

knowledge of that person, that person has subsequently, but prior to the broadcast,

expressed consent to the broadcast of their words.”

It seems clear that the two DJs involved have broken the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="gardengirl "]... the call broke the Australian Communications & Media Authority (ACMA) Commercial Radio Code of practice (2011), which states:

“A licensee must not broadcast the words of an identifiable person unless:

a)   That person has been informed in advance or a reasonable

person would be aware that the words may be broadcast

b)   In the case of words which have been recorded without the

knowledge of that person, that person has subsequently, but prior to the broadcast,

expressed consent to the broadcast of their words.”

It seems clear that the two DJs involved have broken the rules.[/quote]

When asked if they had obtained Mrs Saldanha's permission, the station's owners (Southern Cross Austereo) answered that they "had followed procedure" and were "satisfied that that procedure was met."

The recording had been played and cleared for broadcast by their own legal people... (who presumably were completely impartial and independent...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fed up of people who say that no laws are broken so no harm is done.

That's what Starbucks, Amazon, Google, Ebay, Ikea etc and etc say and while I'm not suggesting that what they do is life-threatening I do believe it's immoral.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]I'm fed up of people who say that no laws are broken so no harm is done.

That's what Starbucks, Amazon, Google, Ebay, Ikea etc and etc say and while I'm not suggesting that what they do is life-threatening I do believe it's immoral.

Hoddy[/quote]

I totally agree with that, Hoddy. It's immoral.

Further to my post about Australian privacy laws, I'm told that they only apply to news and current affairs, so the call was therefore apparently not breaking the those laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]In a few minutes of frivolity someone ruined that for her. That she would only have taken it very badly if she had 'issues' is a rather arrogant suggestion. Only she could know what really mattered to her. It really isn't all right to humiliate someone so publicly. I'm glad my mistakes weren't newsworthy.

Hoddy[/quote]

Thank you for that Hoddy. I also thought I'd strayed on to a forum where several "suicide analysis experts" were posting.

Dreadful case which smacks of Ross and Brand again.

I'll talk to big Sis in WA in the morning to see what the reaction there is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Clair"][quote user="Rabbie"]

[quote user="Clair"]She may have felt keenly responsible for... [/quote]

She may indeed. At this stage we just don't know...[/quote]

We do know now:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/dec/08/royal-nurse-death-letter-hospital



Edited to show letter only.



[/quote] At the time I did not know.  I still think that there must have been other factors as well to make the poor woman take such drastic action.

This does not excuse the the DJs who like Brand and Ross will probably bounce back. The hospital should also take responsibilty for not having effective procedures in place to prevent this sort of stupid stunt. As Judith has said just a simple codeword before info is given out would have been sufficient. The NHS hospital where my mother was treated during her last illness had a similar system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sydney Morning Herald has some interesting information and views, including the fact that they ran a poll just after the prank call was originally broadcast, in which 61% of respondents expressed the view that the call was "childish and embarrassing".

A subsequent poll, conducted following the tragic news of Jacintha Saldanha's death, shows that 62% of respondents "always thought the call was in poor taste".

The comments on the SMH page relating to the article are revealing. Notably one from a person in France, who appears to berate the SMH for leading on this story at all. I quote:

A live feed SMH? You are better than this. There is massacre going on in

Syria. 2 wars involving our troops. A alarming lack of quality debate

amongst our leaders at home and you are running front and centre with

this rubbish. Your resources and talented journalists would be better

covering ANYTHING else.

So, if anyone considers this particular thread to be unsympathetic, in poor taste, or inappropriate, please, take a look around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having had some more time to reflect on this very tragic case there still seem to be some unanswered questions.

 Why did the hospital not provide adequate support to the two nurses? As employers they have a duty of care to all their employees. Their rush to condemn the hoaxers does suggest an attempt to divert attention from their own shortcomings both in regard to their procedures for protecting patient confidentiality and for supporting the nurses afterwards.

In contrast the australian network does seem to be providing support for the hoaxers who are described on the BBC site as being "in a very fragile state". Will those who have roundly condemned the hoaxers take any responsibilty should a further tragedy occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the UK news channels the manager (or whatever he is called) said in a statement when talking about this poor woman that she was receiving support and counseling.

I think also that the hospital could have put some system in place to stop this from happening, perhaps the password system already mentioned. Then one could argue but why? Who would dream that this would happen. Touch of the old 'in hind sight' comes to mind.

As to the two DJ's one could say how were they to know what the tragic result would be. Well perhaps they should have thought about this in general , as should the station manager, before it was broadcast.

I personally have no feelings of compassion for the two DJ's, The old saying "you reap what you sow" comes to mind or as I always like to think what goes around comes around, tomorrow, next week, next month or whatever. In this case their comeuppance has come much earlier. This may sound very hard but you know what, life is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...