|
Hospitals are a place where we keep our patients to get medication with utmost hygiene and
technicalities so that they get recovery from the diseases that they are suffering from. But
nowadays no all hospitals are being attentive in their duties and most often they have proved their
carelessness in many things. Many patients and their family members come up with certain issues
which clearly tell about the lack of care that the hospital employees have shown on them. Thus it is
a very important matter to deal with and it is a very much punishable act made by those careless
hospital employees. The hospital authorities should take care of these issues and if they do not
then general public should start penalizing the hospitals legally and financially so that they are
compelled to take care of such issues. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This would be a good incentive to tackle superbugs.
At the moment the incentive is complicated and rewards NHS trusts for reducing cases compared with
last year. This penalises the good trusts that have very few cases and struggle to achieve a
reduction against a good record.
A penalty for each superbug victim would be straight forward and not discriminate against the NHS
trusts that have already succeeded in reducing their number of infections. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Superbugs are created by being TOO clean, so I guess if you want to punish the hospitals for being
too clean, you can try going to some nasty dirty hospital somewhere and see how you do. Clorox and
other disinfectants can kill off all but the superbugs, so they've become rampant and over
antibiotics use has broken down your immune system to these superbugs. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If you take the money away then how would you pay for equipment and food and staff, its a ridiculous
notion, it would only make matters worse |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If hospitals had to pay money everytime there is a superbug, where would the money go? It would
probably be wasted on something pointless. I agree that instead, cleaning should be more effective
and probably taken more seriously. Also, if hospitals paid money everytime there was a superbug,
there wouldn't be any money left for us to have free health care, meaning that we would probably
have to pay for it ourselves which would probably cost a lot of money. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I’m not convinced that monetary penalties would necessarily be effective or desirable in tackling
the problem. In fact, penalising hospitals in this way would be counter-productive and divert
much-needed funds away from front line patient care.
Rather than treating the symptoms, MRSA and the other ‘superbugs’ should be dealt with by
putting more money into hospital cleaning, the current lack of which is one of the major causes of
outbreaks.
To minimise the risk of financial loss, hospitals would need to screen all non-emergency patients
for MRSA etc prior to their admission and place all emergency patients in quarantine. In addition,
to further lessen the risk of ‘superbugs’ being brought into hospitals, all visitors would be
banned.
Finally, from the inevitable legal standpoint, would the onus be on the hospital to prove the
infection was contracted on their premises, or would the patient have to prove this was the case? |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
03 Jan 2008 22:27
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
