A consultant neurosurgeon begged hospital head of departments following a 44 year old man was admitted to hospital in London, but they declared an explicit ‘absolutely not’.
The man died from a brain haemorrhage after the NHS hospital chiefs reportedly informed doctors to keep working on less pressing cases, which included the removal of another patients decomposed teeth.
No doctors were made obtainable to give medical care to the man who was 44 years old, even though there had been a last ditch request from a consultant neurosurgeon; it was reported.
Trust managers for the Royal London Hospital in East London said that the medics and nurses working on cases over the weekend could not be interrupted and, that they were being paid overtime to carry out the operations to clear a patient accumulation of work which was pressing but not life threatening.
If these situations were not life threatening, could they not have held on for a duration of time, so that more important cases could have been dealt with? It’s sad that patients that are in life and death situations have to be abandoned so that someone with a tooth problem could be dealt with, could have an intern not been able to cope with this situation?
The detention in giving medical care to Mr Venturi probably played a part in his death in May, 2011, an inquest determined. Mr Venturi, from Essex, collapsed at his home on Thursday, April 14 after suffering a ruptured aneurysm in the brain.
He was taken to the Royal London Hospital the next evening when he started slurring his speech and could not stand. A brain surgeon, a radiologist and, anaesthetist were only made obtainable the next Monday.
Mr Venturi became paralysed along one side of his body and developed a blood clot from which he died a fortnight after that. Dr Roger Hunter, a locum consultant neurosurgeon on call when Mr Venturi was admitted to the hospital informed the newspaper: ‘Admittedly, most of the cases being done were urgent or semi-urgent, but all could wait. All of them were less urgent than Mark.
‘I said, “They have got to stop the list; they have to divert the resources to Mark Venturi” The managers rejected his request, he said.
The doctors asserted that controlled practices had held up the patients critical medical care and, Mr Venturi’s family has blamed Barts Health Trust of pursuing foundation trust standing, rather than dealing with his case.
Are these surgeons being rewarded on commission as to what patients gains them the most, or are they being paid by the hour and, does this additionally signify that the more skilled they are, the more they get commissioned?
It appears these days; a hospital is more like a place of worship and, you say your prayers that your loved ones come out alive since surgeons and doctors are far more engaged extracting a tooth, then doing surgery on a sick person that has to have a more severe and difficult operation to be done.
The hospital renounced the claim but have said sorry to the family for failing in Mr Venturi’s care. The trust also said the neurosurgery department had been made better and, is at the moment completely resourced.
By just making that assertion, did they not confess that they were at fault, so why bother denying the accusations in the first place?
If a person was apprehended and charged for a murder that they supposedly done and, they denied the charge, but then subsequently expressed regret to the family, would that not, on the face of it, make them look guilty?
In the past, consultants at Barts have protested about scarcity of theatre time and staff to deal with patients with haemorrhages, yet they are still bold enough to deny that they done anything inappropriate, or are they too embarrassed to admit it?