Mental health patients 'put at risk' at Antelope House in Southampton, report finds

Daily Echo: Antelope House. Antelope House.

CARE records went missing, medicines were not handled properly and patients were put at risk - those are just some of the findings in a scathing report after inspectors swooped unannounced on a Hampshire mental health hospital.

Drugs were “not always handled appropriately” while staff “did not always ensure that medicines were safely administered” at Antelope House, an accute psychiatric unit in Southampton.

Patients were also “at risk of not receiving appropriate treatment to meet their needs” as vital care plans and risk assessments failed to ensure their safety and welfare.

Now care providers Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust have been ordered to make immediate improvements – or face even more serious action such as fines, restrictions on new patients at the unit or even being shut down.

The Trust says it has increased resources at the unit and that an internal inspection will take place to ensure the necessary improvements have been made.

But the author of the damning report, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), has taken enforcement action – one of the most serious options available to the powerful health watchdog – and will carry out yet another unannounced inspection within weeks.

The report was released after a surprise visit in December. It followed a separate inspection in August last year in which concerns were raised about care, welfare and medicine records.

In the most recent visit to the Brintons Road site, inspectors found that the trust was failing to meet the three national standards of quality and safety. It was on one of these, the ‘care and welfare of people who use services’ category, that the formal warning was issued.

Inspectors found that although the care plans were individualised to meet the mental health needs of patients, they did not always detail the support and care each patient required for physical health.

Audits were also not carried out effectively – in one case a member of staff said it was “a mystery” when asked where a patient’s care records were.

Another patient appeared to have no care plan to explain how their oxygen levels were being monitored while medicines were found out of their packets – making it impossible to see if they had been dispensed, what for, and when they would become out of date.

Adrian Hughes, regional director for CQC in the south, said: “When reviews are undertaken it is important that that lessons are learned from issues to influence future practice.

"People are entitled to receive care and treatment in services which are safe, effective, caring, responsive to their needs, and well led.”

The inspection did reveal that some steps had been taken by the trust to improve care planning and medicine records, while staff were described as being respectful.

If further breaches are found on the next inspection, the CQC can impose fines, put a block on new patients being admitted or even close the unit. However closure is considered a last resort by the health watchdog and a spokesman said that this course of action was “highly unlikely”.

Dr Lesley Stevens, clinical director of mental health from Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, said: “Patient safety is at the heart of everything we do, and we take very seriously any concerns raised about the quality of care we provide.

“Since the CQC inspected Antelope House in August we have been working through a detailed action plan which is monitored daily.

"Many improvements have already been made, although we acknowledge that further work is required – especially around how we deliver physical health care, which is reflected in the recent notices issued by the CQC.

“In response to this we have increased resources at the hospital to make the final improvements and will be carrying out our own internal inspection to ensure standards are met before the CQC deadline at the end of January.”

More health stories

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:12am Thu 23 Jan 14

southy says...

Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS,

Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million southy
  • Score: -15

11:38am Thu 23 Jan 14

sotonboy84 says...

Did the report cover the fact that there are a number of patients (certainly not all) that refuse to leave the hospital as they have comfortable en suite rooms, constant attention, order take away every night and each time they're encouraged to move on and live alone they say they'll kill themselves and get admitted right back because of this statement? There are many that know how to work the system and they are costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds a year each. I knew somebody who worked at Antelope House and this is only scratching the surface.
Did the report cover the fact that there are a number of patients (certainly not all) that refuse to leave the hospital as they have comfortable en suite rooms, constant attention, order take away every night and each time they're encouraged to move on and live alone they say they'll kill themselves and get admitted right back because of this statement? There are many that know how to work the system and they are costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds a year each. I knew somebody who worked at Antelope House and this is only scratching the surface. sotonboy84
  • Score: 19

12:28pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS,

Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care.

The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board. Shoong
  • Score: 10

12:48pm Thu 23 Jan 14

southy says...

And we come to the point that the NHS is being bled dry by the private sector, its time that this stop, state tax payers money should only go to the state run objectives
And we come to the point that the NHS is being bled dry by the private sector, its time that this stop, state tax payers money should only go to the state run objectives southy
  • Score: -10

1:13pm Thu 23 Jan 14

southy says...

Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS,

Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care.

The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.[/p][/quote]It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account. southy
  • Score: -10

1:19pm Thu 23 Jan 14

gilbertratchet says...

southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS,

Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care.

The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.
What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.[/p][/quote]It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.[/p][/quote]What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 11

4:02pm Thu 23 Jan 14

southy says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS,

Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care.

The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.
What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.
No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.[/p][/quote]It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.[/p][/quote]What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.[/p][/quote]No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice southy
  • Score: -12

4:04pm Thu 23 Jan 14

southy says...

to be truthful Shoong do not like people pointing out the massive failiers of the right wing and things could be 100 times better than they are now
to be truthful Shoong do not like people pointing out the massive failiers of the right wing and things could be 100 times better than they are now southy
  • Score: -12

4:11pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.
What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.
No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice
Are you having a giraffe? 99% of your 'contributions' are pushing a far left agenda, either blatantly or poorly thinly veiled.

I suppose if you are capable of lying to yourself you can lie to anyone really...
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.[/p][/quote]It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.[/p][/quote]What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.[/p][/quote]No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice[/p][/quote]Are you having a giraffe? 99% of your 'contributions' are pushing a far left agenda, either blatantly or poorly thinly veiled. I suppose if you are capable of lying to yourself you can lie to anyone really... Shoong
  • Score: 12

4:13pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
to be truthful Shoong do not like people pointing out the massive failiers of the right wing and things could be 100 times better than they are now
Couldn't help yourself could you??? You didn't point anything of worth out anyway - it contributed nothing to the story.

You have got to be the most immature retiree ever...
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: to be truthful Shoong do not like people pointing out the massive failiers of the right wing and things could be 100 times better than they are now[/p][/quote]Couldn't help yourself could you??? You didn't point anything of worth out anyway - it contributed nothing to the story. You have got to be the most immature retiree ever... Shoong
  • Score: 12

4:20pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Shoong says...

Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.
What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.
No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice
Are you having a giraffe? 99% of your 'contributions' are pushing a far left agenda, either blatantly or poorly thinly veiled. I suppose if you are capable of lying to yourself you can lie to anyone really...
5. Use of the Web Site

'that you shall not use the Site to transmit any material for the purposes of publicity, promotion and/or advertising without our prior written consent.'

Do you have such written consent?
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.[/p][/quote]It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.[/p][/quote]What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.[/p][/quote]No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice[/p][/quote]Are you having a giraffe? 99% of your 'contributions' are pushing a far left agenda, either blatantly or poorly thinly veiled. I suppose if you are capable of lying to yourself you can lie to anyone really...[/p][/quote]5. Use of the Web Site 'that you shall not use the Site to transmit any material for the purposes of publicity, promotion and/or advertising without our prior written consent.' Do you have such written consent? Shoong
  • Score: 10

6:08pm Thu 23 Jan 14

gilbertratchet says...

southy wrote:
to be truthful Shoong do not like people pointing out the massive failiers of the right wing and things could be 100 times better than they are now
Yes. You could disappear from these forums and never be heard from again. That would be a vast improvement for starters. There is absolutely no reason to drag your political nonsense into this.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: to be truthful Shoong do not like people pointing out the massive failiers of the right wing and things could be 100 times better than they are now[/p][/quote]Yes. You could disappear from these forums and never be heard from again. That would be a vast improvement for starters. There is absolutely no reason to drag your political nonsense into this. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 10

6:10pm Thu 23 Jan 14

gilbertratchet says...

southy wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS,

Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million
It's an article about the standards of patient care.

The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.
It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.
What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.
No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice
Sadly, the stories are not marked "WARNING: COMMENTS CONTAIN MEANINGLESS DRIVEL FROM SOUTHY" so I don't have a choice. Stop making this place such a chore. Go away. Go outside and do something.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Echo can you please make it clear that this is a Partnership of private care and NHS, Foundation Trust status in April 2009 under the name Hampshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Board of Directors made up of 5 Executive Directors and 7 Non-Executive Directors. The Board is led by the Chair, Who wages cost the Tax payer over £ million[/p][/quote]It's an article about the standards of patient care. The article is not about how the unit is financed or about the board.[/p][/quote]It has every thing to do with how it financed, its tax payers money being wasted, and about the board the buck stops with them and they should take responsibility and be held for account.[/p][/quote]What he's saying is, stop using every single story as a soapbox for your blinkered political views. It is inappropriate.[/p][/quote]No its not and i don,t use every single story as a political only the ones that have been effected by political agenda, and this article is highly political, if he don't like it then don't read it simple as that. he as a choice[/p][/quote]Sadly, the stories are not marked "WARNING: COMMENTS CONTAIN MEANINGLESS DRIVEL FROM SOUTHY" so I don't have a choice. Stop making this place such a chore. Go away. Go outside and do something. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 6

8:13pm Thu 23 Jan 14

IronLady2010 says...

I was sectioned into this establishment a few months back. It isn't the best of places to be locked away in.

Those who are simply depressed are secured with others who want to kill people. It really hasn't been thought out.

Someone who has never committed a crime and just wants to end their life is suddenly placed among those who want to hurt people. How does this help?

I'm glad it's being investigated and I hope my records help that they missed my medication more than once.
I was sectioned into this establishment a few months back. It isn't the best of places to be locked away in. Those who are simply depressed are secured with others who want to kill people. It really hasn't been thought out. Someone who has never committed a crime and just wants to end their life is suddenly placed among those who want to hurt people. How does this help? I'm glad it's being investigated and I hope my records help that they missed my medication more than once. IronLady2010
  • Score: -100

3:35pm Mon 27 Jan 14

steps says...

No mention of the illegal drugs taken on site, or the staff having sexual relations with vulnerable patients, shambles...
No mention of the illegal drugs taken on site, or the staff having sexual relations with vulnerable patients, shambles... steps
  • Score: 5

11:49pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Pinto74 says...

I can't believe that one of our health care institutions has such serious problems and the above comments are all the public can muster - shame on all of you!!! Ironlady2010 and steps are the only ones to add anything of value here; the rest should take their views and poke them into a dark crevice. After all, these are real people with genuine problems - ANY OF US COULD FIND OURSELVES IN NEED OF MENTAL CARE AT ANY TIME!!! I mean Sotonboy84, if generalising was a name it would be your christian, middle and surname. Sure there are a very small minority that use and abuse the system - just like benefit cheats!! Do you know any of those??!! But to hijack this forum with dispersions is morally wrong. Trying to make the public believe that Antelope House is the local drop-in centre for deadbeats is just incorrect, no matter what your 'pub-gossip' conversation lead you to believe. However, this unit does have some pretty serious problems that need urgent attention, many of which would not call for increases in funding - just better organisation. I could list the many problems we have encountered since the breakdown of a family member, but instead implore all of you to encourage the trust to get a grip. Mud throwing is not the way to get our loved ones, friends and fellow countrymen the care they need and deserve. So Forget political statements and the endless pointing out that people are numpties. Use the opportunity to say something valid and maybe then people in suits might take it seriously.
I believe the facility at Basingstoke is of a much higher standard. Can't Antelope House ask them for a few pointers? If they can do it well, why can't another hospital in the SAME COUNTY do it too!!
I can't believe that one of our health care institutions has such serious problems and the above comments are all the public can muster - shame on all of you!!! Ironlady2010 and steps are the only ones to add anything of value here; the rest should take their views and poke them into a dark crevice. After all, these are real people with genuine problems - ANY OF US COULD FIND OURSELVES IN NEED OF MENTAL CARE AT ANY TIME!!! I mean Sotonboy84, if generalising was a name it would be your christian, middle and surname. Sure there are a very small minority that use and abuse the system - just like benefit cheats!! Do you know any of those??!! But to hijack this forum with dispersions is morally wrong. Trying to make the public believe that Antelope House is the local drop-in centre for deadbeats is just incorrect, no matter what your 'pub-gossip' conversation lead you to believe. However, this unit does have some pretty serious problems that need urgent attention, many of which would not call for increases in funding - just better organisation. I could list the many problems we have encountered since the breakdown of a family member, but instead implore all of you to encourage the trust to get a grip. Mud throwing is not the way to get our loved ones, friends and fellow countrymen the care they need and deserve. So Forget political statements and the endless pointing out that people are numpties. Use the opportunity to say something valid and maybe then people in suits might take it seriously. I believe the facility at Basingstoke is of a much higher standard. Can't Antelope House ask them for a few pointers? If they can do it well, why can't another hospital in the SAME COUNTY do it too!! Pinto74
  • Score: -1

8:17am Tue 4 Feb 14

Dr Martin says...

Pinto74 wrote:
I can't believe that one of our health care institutions has such serious problems and the above comments are all the public can muster - shame on all of you!!! Ironlady2010 and steps are the only ones to add anything of value here; the rest should take their views and poke them into a dark crevice. After all, these are real people with genuine problems - ANY OF US COULD FIND OURSELVES IN NEED OF MENTAL CARE AT ANY TIME!!! I mean Sotonboy84, if generalising was a name it would be your christian, middle and surname. Sure there are a very small minority that use and abuse the system - just like benefit cheats!! Do you know any of those??!! But to hijack this forum with dispersions is morally wrong. Trying to make the public believe that Antelope House is the local drop-in centre for deadbeats is just incorrect, no matter what your 'pub-gossip' conversation lead you to believe. However, this unit does have some pretty serious problems that need urgent attention, many of which would not call for increases in funding - just better organisation. I could list the many problems we have encountered since the breakdown of a family member, but instead implore all of you to encourage the trust to get a grip. Mud throwing is not the way to get our loved ones, friends and fellow countrymen the care they need and deserve. So Forget political statements and the endless pointing out that people are numpties. Use the opportunity to say something valid and maybe then people in suits might take it seriously.
I believe the facility at Basingstoke is of a much higher standard. Can't Antelope House ask them for a few pointers? If they can do it well, why can't another hospital in the SAME COUNTY do it too!!
Although Sotonboy84 was generalising, emotional blackmail is something I am sure is used by many patients up and down the country to get what they want, I am sure Antelope House is no exception.

As for Ironlady2010 and Steps statements; “Steps” I felt was trying to make a funny statement or if he/she was being serious then was guilty of “pub gossip” i.e. show us the proof? IronLady2010 sounds as though she was bitter at missing out on a bed at the Priory, not happy with a room of her own sounds like she wanted a ward to herself; I doubt this is available in the public sector. As for hoping “” I'm glad it's being investigated and I hope my records help that they missed my medication more than once”” I am querying was the medication necessary and what did she do about it apart from bleat on a public forum.
[quote][p][bold]Pinto74[/bold] wrote: I can't believe that one of our health care institutions has such serious problems and the above comments are all the public can muster - shame on all of you!!! Ironlady2010 and steps are the only ones to add anything of value here; the rest should take their views and poke them into a dark crevice. After all, these are real people with genuine problems - ANY OF US COULD FIND OURSELVES IN NEED OF MENTAL CARE AT ANY TIME!!! I mean Sotonboy84, if generalising was a name it would be your christian, middle and surname. Sure there are a very small minority that use and abuse the system - just like benefit cheats!! Do you know any of those??!! But to hijack this forum with dispersions is morally wrong. Trying to make the public believe that Antelope House is the local drop-in centre for deadbeats is just incorrect, no matter what your 'pub-gossip' conversation lead you to believe. However, this unit does have some pretty serious problems that need urgent attention, many of which would not call for increases in funding - just better organisation. I could list the many problems we have encountered since the breakdown of a family member, but instead implore all of you to encourage the trust to get a grip. Mud throwing is not the way to get our loved ones, friends and fellow countrymen the care they need and deserve. So Forget political statements and the endless pointing out that people are numpties. Use the opportunity to say something valid and maybe then people in suits might take it seriously. I believe the facility at Basingstoke is of a much higher standard. Can't Antelope House ask them for a few pointers? If they can do it well, why can't another hospital in the SAME COUNTY do it too!![/p][/quote]Although Sotonboy84 was generalising, emotional blackmail is something I am sure is used by many patients up and down the country to get what they want, I am sure Antelope House is no exception. As for Ironlady2010 and Steps statements; “Steps” I felt was trying to make a funny statement or if he/she was being serious then was guilty of “pub gossip” i.e. show us the proof? IronLady2010 sounds as though she was bitter at missing out on a bed at the Priory, not happy with a room of her own sounds like she wanted a ward to herself; I doubt this is available in the public sector. As for hoping “” I'm glad it's being investigated and I hope my records help that they missed my medication more than once”” I am querying was the medication necessary and what did she do about it apart from bleat on a public forum. Dr Martin
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree