Immigration Screening
June 30th, 2007 at 8:14 am by David FarrarDoctors Jeff Garrett and Andy Veale from Middlemore Hospital have called for potential immigrants to be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services.
For some reason, Brenden Sheehan is now an expert on all issues, and has oppossed the proposal, saying:
“The issues of obesity are a problem facing both New Zealand and the Pacific community.
“I mean, if you’re going to discriminate against people who are overweight, what’s next? Do you then discriminate against people who are blind or who are deaf or are we back to the dark old ages of discriminating against people with disabilities?”
My answer to the above, is yes, yes and yes in so far as it relates to selecting immigrants.
Sensible immigration policy is based on selecting people who will contribute more to NZ, than they will cost. There are some limited exceptions such as refugees, but generally choosing immigrants is a highly discriminatory process. Now that is not to say being overweight, or blind or deadf by itself should be an automatic barrier, but calculating likely health costs should be an essential part of the decision making process.
Of course once someone has been accepted to live in NZ, there should be no discrimination. But up until that point immigration is all about being selective.
No tag for this post.
June 30th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
I would agree partially with the only people being allowed in, being the ones who are likely to contribute more than they cost.
But with having close ties to the immigration office in London, they have quotas to meet and this means sometimes that a blind eye is passed over.
Vote:June 30th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
CAn’t you just see Labour putting up MR Sheehan in Mangere? An Ocker trade unionist to go with the all the other misfits and miscreants who go to make up Labour today – the party which forgot about the workers.
Vote:June 30th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
When is the blog coming back Mr Adolf, need a loan?
Vote:June 30th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Who cares what, or indeed whether, Brendan Sheehan thinks? Must be a slow news day.
Vote:June 30th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Sheehan’s mention of the blind and deaf is pathetic and wrong. One doesn’t become blind or deaf from doing some activity that can be avoided in the first place, eg habits like eating the wrong food, which, as we all know, could lead to health problems, including obesity.
Vote:June 30th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
Oh please, why won’t somebody think of the lepers?
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 12:41 am
I’m for it….. as long as the number of incoming muzzies isn’t effected.
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 1:04 am
ACC do a very good job of discrimination already
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 11:30 am
Maybe Mr Sheehan has a point, most of his mates on the Liarbour benches are mental retards and the poor old taxpayer has to keep them.
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 6:06 pm
Although agreeing entirely with these two eminent doctors; they could do with losing a fair amount
Vote:of weight themselves. Ho Ho Ho. Sorry Jeff and Andy…
July 1st, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Yeah…hawk…but you miss the point entirely.
Re Jeff and Andy …these boys can pay the medical bills for their lifestyle choices….mendicant immigrants wish to bludge on a successful society because their own is fucked and failed.
Glad you want to pay for it, perhaps we can organise a tax gifting certificate from various fuckwits like you.
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 9:10 pm
While I understand some Pacific Islands were former colonies of NZ and therefore maybe deserve some special treatment, this is the saddest thing I ever read:
“Our beautiful, intelligent, cherished 16-year-old daughter was recently murdered by a Samoan man. He deliberately drove into scores of innocent teens. His group of thugs had started a fight 150m down the road and took off when they were losing. When we came from England, we had to prove we were qualified professionals, with jobs to go to in professions designated as short skilled and only after the employers had tried to recruit here first. We had to prove we were in good health and (believe it or not) that we spoke English to a high standard. We had to pay a $1500 “settlement fee” to be used to teach English to immigrants. I asked MP Clayton Cosgrove how an unskilled immigrant who needs an interpreter could be in NZ. He has refused to answer. We wrote to Helen Clark. Her fanatical support for the Samoan family who had the power cut off, contrasts with not even a card to us. Jane was an innocent victim. That family carried blame. Clark has offered the flimsiest excuse.
Kiwi people are great. The government are racists, going for the Pacific vote without regard to right and wrong. We will leave NZ after the trial. Helen can get some Samoans to replace us.”
From http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1501154&objectid=10448470&pnum=3
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 9:14 pm
David, I imagine seeing as this suggestion was being linked to the Muliaga family the reporter felt they had a right to respond. They did so through their appointed family spokesperson.
What’s your problem? What is it that unsettles everyone so much about a white Australian being the spokesperson for a Samoan family? Fifty bucks says if Brenden were a Pacific Islander you’d have never said a thing.
Vote:July 1st, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Your obese smoking muzzie immigrant is a perfect fit.
Of course we’re competing with Canada for these people……maybe if we advertise more widely with pictures of wanton Western women or hint our respect for sharia law we can attract more of the 7th century muzzie religious arseholes we desperately need.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 am
In the Weekend Herald two doctors from the Counties Manukau DHB made a call for new entry restrictions on immigrants from the Pacific Islands. This was an opportunistic attempt to exploit the Folole Muliaga tragedy to gain additional funding for the DHB, best illustrated by Dr Any Veale’s claim that ‘if NZ let people in who were obese, this must be acknowledged in health funding’. But was there also another agenda at play?
Allow me to offer a critical examination of what they said and an alternate explanation of why.
Dr Jeff Garrett – who recently advocated for a pilot program of ‘passive euthanasia’ in hospitals (NZ Herald 2/12/06) – said that Pacific Island migrants were “not being screened appropriately at the border”. He and Dr Veale opined that ‘potential immigrants should be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services’.
This idea of assessing people based on their physical characteristics is hardly novel, and in fact is at the core of the philosophy better known as eugenics. Hitler was a passionate proponent of this idea, as was its’ best known practitioner Josef Mengele, the ‘Dr Death’ of the Nazi concentration camps.
Wikipedia tells us that the goals of various groups advocating eugenics have included the creation of healthier people, to save society’s resources. It goes on to say that ‘historically, eugenics has been used as a justification for coercive state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations’. Another site describes ‘nazism, apartheid and segregation’ as eugenically based schemes for social salvation.
Welcome to New Zealand Counties Manukau DHB style.
Nice try docs but I suspect your statements are more about shifting public debate away from DHB’s role in the Muliaga affair than they are about the discriminatory policies you advocate. A quick look at the DHB’s actions (and inactions) shows why.
The first DHB member to speak to the press was Dr Don Mackie, who told the Herald that it was ‘a little surprising she died so soon after the machine turned off’. Two weeks later when Dr Garrett spoke to the Sunday program it appeared the DHB had changed their mind, as Garrett pondered that ‘on reflection, Folole was likely at the terminal stages of her life’.
If indeed it was true that she was at the terminal stage, the question that begs is why was she discharged at all? This is a fundamental question so let’s have a look at the available information.
Firstly, neither Dr Mackie nor Dr Garrett was the treating doctor of Folole. Indeed I wonder if they have even read their own hospital’s records.
The family has – we have obtained copies of Folole’s hospital discharge report and it makes for interesting reading. There is no mention of her illness being at the terminal stage. A GP asked to view the report told me there was ‘nothing in the report to ring any alarm bells’.
The discharge plan provided to the Muliaga’s GP was relatively simple: discharge home with walker; follow up with community nurse; low salt diet; check weight twice weekly; follow up in Respiratory OP (outpatient service) in 6 weeks.
Hardly a sign a person may be terminally ill. Unless of course this DHB has a policy of making appointments in six week’s time for patients expected to die?
And why are patients discharged with oxygen machines not provided with a back up power source? Obviously Folole needed oxygen – the machine wouldn’t have been given to her otherwise. What then was done to ensure continuity of supply to the machine in the event of power failure or disconnection? The answer appears to be nothing.
Immediately after the tragedy the DHB said they had been “very willing” to provide patients with a letter to support their need for continuous electricity – upon request. Since then they have decided to be ‘more proactive’ and ensure patients have the letter ‘in their hands up front, rather than having to ask us for it.” Why was this simple, commonsense step not in place earlier? In this case it may well have saved a life.
Why, given the known increase in power consumption for patients using these machines, was a referral not made to an appropriate social agency for assistance? The DHB had previously arranged assistance for the family with the extra power costs: why not now? They knew she had been off work for almost 3 months prior to admission -why was a social worker not brought in to assist?
Why was only one home visit made to the Muliaga family by DHB staff in the nearly 3 weeks between her discharge and her death? I understand that the community nurse who had cared for Folole took two weeks planned leave during the month of May. Was she replaced during this time? If not, why not?
The day after Folole’s death Dr Mackie told the NZ Herald that ‘Mrs Muliaga had been treated at Middlemore Hospital for her longstanding illness and was discharged on May 11’. He went on to reveal that ‘she was suffering from heart and lung disease and her breathing difficulties were related to her obesity. She was given a home oxygen machine because of the severity of her condition.’
I wonder if Dr Mackie was aware of his own DHB’s media policy that states that any CMDHB representative speaking to the Media shall not disclose to any person any information concerning the condition or clinical history of any patient ….without the prior consent of the patient or their representative
What about the privacy laws? An agency that holds medical information ‘must not use the information for any other purpose’ without authorization from the ‘individual concerned’ or ‘the individual’s representative where the individual is unable to give their authority under this rule’. The rule applies equally to information held about persons living or dead.
Maybe it is time for the good doctors to stop casting stones at our Pacific neighbours and have a good look under their own beds. One never knows what skeletons they may there find.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:17 am
In the Weekend Herald two doctors from the Counties Manukau DHB made a call for new entry restrictions on immigrants from the Pacific Islands. This was an opportunistic attempt to exploit the Folole Muliaga tragedy to gain additional funding for the DHB, best illustrated by Dr Any Veale’s claim that ‘if NZ let people in who were obese, this must be acknowledged in health funding’. But was there also another agenda at play?
Allow me to offer a critical examination of what they said and an alternate explanation of why.
Dr Jeff Garrett – who recently advocated for a pilot program of ‘passive euthanasia’ in hospitals (NZ Herald 2/12/06) – said that Pacific Island migrants were “not being screened appropriately at the border”. He and Dr Veale opined that ‘potential immigrants should be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services’.
This idea of assessing people based on their physical characteristics is hardly novel, and in fact is at the core of the philosophy better known as eugenics. Hitler was a passionate proponent of this idea, as was its’ best known practitioner Josef Mengele, the ‘Dr Death’ of the Nazi concentration camps.
Wikipedia tells us that the goals of various groups advocating eugenics have included the creation of healthier people, to save society’s resources. It goes on to say that ‘historically, eugenics has been used as a justification for coercive state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations’. Another site describes ‘nazism, apartheid and segregation’ as eugenically based schemes for social salvation.
Welcome to New Zealand Counties Manukau DHB style.
Nice try docs but I suspect your statements are more about shifting public debate away from DHB’s role in the Muliaga affair than they are about the discriminatory policies you advocate. A quick look at the DHB’s actions (and inactions) shows why.
The first DHB member to speak to the press was Dr Don Mackie, who told the Herald that it was ‘a little surprising she died so soon after the machine turned off’. Two weeks later when Dr Garrett spoke to the Sunday program it appeared the DHB had changed their mind, as Garrett pondered that ‘on reflection, Folole was likely at the terminal stages of her life’.
If indeed it was true that she was at the terminal stage, the question that begs is why was she discharged at all? This is a fundamental question so let’s have a look at the available information.
Firstly, neither Dr Mackie nor Dr Garrett was the treating doctor of Folole. Indeed I wonder if they have even read their own hospital’s records.
The family has – we have obtained copies of Folole’s hospital discharge report and it makes for interesting reading. There is no mention of her illness being at the terminal stage. A GP asked to view the report told me there was ‘nothing in the report to ring any alarm bells’.
The discharge plan provided to the Muliaga’s GP was relatively simple: discharge home with walker; follow up with community nurse; low salt diet; check weight twice weekly; follow up in Respiratory OP (outpatient service) in 6 weeks.
Hardly a sign a person may be terminally ill. Unless of course this DHB has a policy of making appointments in six week’s time for patients expected to die?
And why are patients discharged with oxygen machines not provided with a back up power source? Obviously Folole needed oxygen – the machine wouldn’t have been given to her otherwise. What then was done to ensure continuity of supply to the machine in the event of power failure or disconnection? The answer appears to be nothing.
Immediately after the tragedy the DHB said they had been “very willing” to provide patients with a letter to support their need for continuous electricity – upon request. Since then they have decided to be ‘more proactive’ and ensure patients have the letter ‘in their hands up front, rather than having to ask us for it.” Why was this simple, commonsense step not in place earlier? In this case it may well have saved a life.
Why, given the known increase in power consumption for patients using these machines, was a referral not made to an appropriate social agency for assistance? The DHB had previously arranged assistance for the family with the extra power costs: why not now? They knew she had been off work for almost 3 months prior to admission -why was a social worker not brought in to assist?
Why was only one home visit made to the Muliaga family by DHB staff in the nearly 3 weeks between her discharge and her death? I understand that the community nurse who had cared for Folole took two weeks planned leave during the month of May. Was she replaced during this time? If not, why not?
The day after Folole’s death Dr Mackie told the NZ Herald that ‘Mrs Muliaga had been treated at Middlemore Hospital for her longstanding illness and was discharged on May 11’. He went on to reveal that ‘she was suffering from heart and lung disease and her breathing difficulties were related to her obesity. She was given a home oxygen machine because of the severity of her condition.’
I wonder if Dr Mackie was aware of his own DHB’s media policy that states that any CMDHB representative speaking to the Media shall not disclose to any person any information concerning the condition or clinical history of any patient ….without the prior consent of the patient or their representative
What about the privacy laws? An agency that holds medical information ‘must not use the information for any other purpose’ without authorization from the ‘individual concerned’ or ‘the individual’s representative where the individual is unable to give their authority under this rule’. The rule applies equally to information held about persons living or dead.
Maybe it is time for the good doctors to stop casting stones at our Pacific neighbours and have a good look under their own beds. One never knows what skeletons they may there find.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 am
In the Weekend Herald two doctors from the Counties Manukau DHB made a call for new entry restrictions on immigrants from the Pacific Islands. This was an opportunistic attempt to exploit the Folole Muliaga tragedy to gain additional funding for the DHB, best illustrated by Dr Any Veale’s claim that ‘if NZ let people in who were obese, this must be acknowledged in health funding’. But was there also another agenda at play?
Allow me to offer a critical examination of what they said and an alternate explanation of why.
Dr Jeff Garrett – who recently advocated for a pilot program of ‘passive euthanasia’ in hospitals (NZ Herald 2/12/06) – said that Pacific Island migrants were “not being screened appropriately at the border”. He and Dr Veale opined that ‘potential immigrants should be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services’.
This idea of assessing people based on their physical characteristics is hardly novel, and in fact is at the core of the philosophy better known as eugenics. Hitler was a passionate proponent of this idea, as was its’ best known practitioner Josef Mengele, the ‘Dr Death’ of the Nazi concentration camps.
Wikipedia tells us that the goals of various groups advocating eugenics have included the creation of healthier people, to save society’s resources. It goes on to say that ‘historically, eugenics has been used as a justification for coercive state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations’. Another site describes ‘nazism, apartheid and segregation’ as eugenically based schemes for social salvation.
Welcome to New Zealand Counties Manukau DHB style.
Nice try docs but I suspect your statements are more about shifting public debate away from DHB’s role in the Muliaga affair than they are about the discriminatory policies you advocate. A quick look at the DHB’s actions (and inactions) shows why.
The first DHB member to speak to the press was Dr Don Mackie, who told the Herald that it was ‘a little surprising she died so soon after the machine turned off’. Two weeks later when Dr Garrett spoke to the Sunday program it appeared the DHB had changed their mind, as Garrett pondered that ‘on reflection, Folole was likely at the terminal stages of her life’.
If indeed it was true that she was at the terminal stage, the question that begs is why was she discharged at all? This is a fundamental question so let’s have a look at the available information.
Firstly, neither Dr Mackie nor Dr Garrett was the treating doctor of Folole. Indeed I wonder if they have even read their own hospital’s records.
The family has – we have obtained copies of Folole’s hospital discharge report and it makes for interesting reading. There is no mention of her illness being at the terminal stage. A GP asked to view the report told me there was ‘nothing in the report to ring any alarm bells’.
The discharge plan provided to the Muliaga’s GP was relatively simple: discharge home with walker; follow up with community nurse; low salt diet; check weight twice weekly; follow up in Respiratory OP (outpatient service) in 6 weeks.
Hardly a sign a person may be terminally ill. Unless of course this DHB has a policy of making appointments in six week’s time for patients expected to die?
And why are patients discharged with oxygen machines not provided with a back up power source? Obviously Folole needed oxygen – the machine wouldn’t have been given to her otherwise. What then was done to ensure continuity of supply to the machine in the event of power failure or disconnection? The answer appears to be nothing.
Immediately after the tragedy the DHB said they had been “very willing” to provide patients with a letter to support their need for continuous electricity – upon request. Since then they have decided to be ‘more proactive’ and ensure patients have the letter ‘in their hands up front, rather than having to ask us for it.” Why was this simple, commonsense step not in place earlier? In this case it may well have saved a life.
Why, given the known increase in power consumption for patients using these machines, was a referral not made to an appropriate social agency for assistance? The DHB had previously arranged assistance for the family with the extra power costs: why not now? They knew she had been off work for almost 3 months prior to admission -why was a social worker not brought in to assist?
Why was only one home visit made to the Muliaga family by DHB staff in the nearly 3 weeks between her discharge and her death? I understand that the community nurse who had cared for Folole took two weeks planned leave during the month of May. Was she replaced during this time? If not, why not?
The day after Folole’s death Dr Mackie told the NZ Herald that ‘Mrs Muliaga had been treated at Middlemore Hospital for her longstanding illness and was discharged on May 11’. He went on to reveal that ‘she was suffering from heart and lung disease and her breathing difficulties were related to her obesity. She was given a home oxygen machine because of the severity of her condition.’
I wonder if Dr Mackie was aware of his own DHB’s media policy that states that any CMDHB representative speaking to the Media shall not disclose to any person any information concerning the condition or clinical history of any patient ….without the prior consent of the patient or their representative
What about the privacy laws? An agency that holds medical information ‘must not use the information for any other purpose’ without authorization from the ‘individual concerned’ or ‘the individual’s representative where the individual is unable to give their authority under this rule’. The rule applies equally to information held about persons living or dead.
Maybe it is time for the good doctors to stop casting stones at our Pacific neighbours and have a good look under their own beds. One never knows what skeletons they may there find.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 am
In the Weekend Herald two doctors from the Counties Manukau DHB made a call for new entry restrictions on immigrants from the Pacific Islands. This was an opportunistic attempt to exploit the Folole Muliaga tragedy to gain additional funding for the DHB, best illustrated by Dr Any Veale’s claim that ‘if NZ let people in who were obese, this must be acknowledged in health funding’. But was there also another agenda at play?
Allow me to offer a critical examination of what they said and an alternate explanation of why.
Dr Jeff Garrett – who recently advocated for a pilot program of ‘passive euthanasia’ in hospitals (NZ Herald 2/12/06) – said that Pacific Island migrants were “not being screened appropriately at the border”. He and Dr Veale opined that ‘potential immigrants should be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services’.
This idea of assessing people based on their physical characteristics is hardly novel, and in fact is at the core of the philosophy better known as eugenics. Hitler was a passionate proponent of this idea, as was its’ best known practitioner Josef Mengele, the ‘Dr Death’ of the Nazi concentration camps.
Wikipedia tells us that the goals of various groups advocating eugenics have included the creation of healthier people, to save society’s resources. It goes on to say that ‘historically, eugenics has been used as a justification for coercive state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations’. Another site describes ‘nazism, apartheid and segregation’ as eugenically based schemes for social salvation.
Welcome to New Zealand Counties Manukau DHB style.
Nice try docs but I suspect your statements are more about shifting public debate away from DHB’s role in the Muliaga affair than they are about the discriminatory policies you advocate. A quick look at the DHB’s actions (and inactions) shows why.
The first DHB member to speak to the press was Dr Don Mackie, who told the Herald that it was ‘a little surprising she died so soon after the machine turned off’. Two weeks later when Dr Garrett spoke to the Sunday program it appeared the DHB had changed their mind, as Garrett pondered that ‘on reflection, Folole was likely at the terminal stages of her life’.
If indeed it was true that she was at the terminal stage, the question that begs is why was she discharged at all? This is a fundamental question so let’s have a look at the available information.
Firstly, neither Dr Mackie nor Dr Garrett was the treating doctor of Folole. Indeed I wonder if they have even read their own hospital’s records.
The family has – we have obtained copies of Folole’s hospital discharge report and it makes for interesting reading. There is no mention of her illness being at the terminal stage. A GP asked to view the report told me there was ‘nothing in the report to ring any alarm bells’.
The discharge plan provided to the Muliaga’s GP was relatively simple: discharge home with walker; follow up with community nurse; low salt diet; check weight twice weekly; follow up in Respiratory OP (outpatient service) in 6 weeks.
Hardly a sign a person may be terminally ill. Unless of course this DHB has a policy of making appointments in six week’s time for patients expected to die?
And why are patients discharged with oxygen machines not provided with a back up power source? Obviously Folole needed oxygen – the machine wouldn’t have been given to her otherwise. What then was done to ensure continuity of supply to the machine in the event of power failure or disconnection? The answer appears to be nothing.
Immediately after the tragedy the DHB said they had been “very willing” to provide patients with a letter to support their need for continuous electricity – upon request. Since then they have decided to be ‘more proactive’ and ensure patients have the letter ‘in their hands up front, rather than having to ask us for it.” Why was this simple, commonsense step not in place earlier? In this case it may well have saved a life.
Why, given the known increase in power consumption for patients using these machines, was a referral not made to an appropriate social agency for assistance? The DHB had previously arranged assistance for the family with the extra power costs: why not now? They knew she had been off work for almost 3 months prior to admission -why was a social worker not brought in to assist?
Why was only one home visit made to the Muliaga family by DHB staff in the nearly 3 weeks between her discharge and her death? I understand that the community nurse who had cared for Folole took two weeks planned leave during the month of May. Was she replaced during this time? If not, why not?
The day after Folole’s death Dr Mackie told the NZ Herald that ‘Mrs Muliaga had been treated at Middlemore Hospital for her longstanding illness and was discharged on May 11’. He went on to reveal that ‘she was suffering from heart and lung disease and her breathing difficulties were related to her obesity. She was given a home oxygen machine because of the severity of her condition.’
I wonder if Dr Mackie was aware of his own DHB’s media policy that states that any CMDHB representative speaking to the Media shall not disclose to any person any information concerning the condition or clinical history of any patient ….without the prior consent of the patient or their representative
What about the privacy laws? An agency that holds medical information ‘must not use the information for any other purpose’ without authorization from the ‘individual concerned’ or ‘the individual’s representative where the individual is unable to give their authority under this rule’. The rule applies equally to information held about persons living or dead.
Maybe it is time for the good doctors to stop casting stones at our Pacific neighbours and have a good look under their own beds. One never knows what skeletons they may there find.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:30 am
Tane, I suspect the problem many have with Sheehan is he was shooting his mouth off about suing and compensation within a few hours of Mrs Muliaga dying.I also remain unsure that he is the nominated family spokesperson & not just the family member with the most to say.
Vote:I agree in principle with the immigration screening on the health burden of people wanting to settle here.I know first hand of the significant cost out of the Vote Health budget chronic illnesses cause.It is not just chronic illnesses that concern me but also the incidence of TB & HIV that immigrants may have which exposes others to risk and causes financial burden for treatment and medical care. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to factor these issues into determining eligibility to reside here. I don’t understand how some immigrants have to jump through hoops and others just cruise on in & are allowed to stay even when they commit henious crimes. Dont seem right to me.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 am
In the immediate aftermath of Folole Muliaga’s death Mercury Energy attempted to shift blame back to the family for her passing. Many of you who comment on this site apparently fell for this shameful PR exercise in spin.
Mercury CEO Doug Heffernan claimed that the company was not aware of her situation, and that repeated attempts to contact the family had been unsuccessful. The clear inference was that the family had been at fault.
Well the revelations on TVNZ tonight have proven this to be nothing but a shameful lie. It appears that not only has Dr Heffernan deceived the news media, he has also deceived the shareholder, the Kiwi public, and the world at large.
Mercury clearly knew Folole was in hospital, and they knew the family wanted to pay the bill.
They also knew on the evening of 29 May that Folole was dead.
Contrast this with the statements made by Dr Heffernan that
“A call was made from someone who was not connected with the house who said there was a funeral to organise. At that point we hadn’t made the connection between the fact that there was a funeral to happen which is not a life-threatening situation for reconnection — bearing in mind it was eight o’clock at night — and the particularly tragic circumstances.”
What a crock!
The tapes clearly show that Mercury DID know exactly what had happened, and it seems that in their haste to hide their culpability they came out and lied to all of New Zealand about it.
It is high time that Doug Heffernan, his management team, and indeed the board of Mighty River Power fell on their swords. If public confidence is ever to be regained in this company we need a brand new management and governance team running the show.
And don’t forget about the role of the contracting company – VirCom EMS – in this tawdry saga. Despite painting themselves as some poor innocent little company, the reality is somewhat different. VirCom is 80% owned by Mainpower, a company with assets of over $160 million. The other 20% is owned by none other than the guy who tries to portray himself as just the CEO – Mr Craig Shepherd.
Now if you own 1/5th of the company do you think you may well try and maximise the profits? And hey, if adding disconnection and reconnection fees helps you do this, well why not?
My family falls asleep crying for their mother every night. These bastards fall asleep counting their cash.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:58 am
Having just read the above posting I may be able to shed some light on some of the questions posed.People with terminal conditions are frequently discharged home to the love and care of family, and rightly so. By far the biggest percentage of people with a terminal condition elect to do this, choosing to spend their remaining days in the company of people they love and who love them most and not be confined to the hustle & bustle and hospital routines of a medical setting. Terminal conditions are any conditions that people can not recover from and will culminate in their dying. These conditions are not time bound. For example somebody with congestive heart failure may live with the condition for many years but it is still a terminal condition. Somebody with pancreatic cancer is likely to have a much shorter time to live. However BOTH are terminal conditions. Therefore it seems entirely appropriate that somebody could be discharged from hospital with a terminal condition. This would happen many times every single day across many settings within our hospitals. I’m unsure why the poster suggests there should have been more community follow up and without knowing the specifis of this individual case it is difficult to say with any certainty why this did not occur. Certainly community follow up is usually put in place for things like dressing requirements, intravenous medications & complicated procedures the patient is unlikely to manage themselves, however in terms of patients continued wellness/ recovery this is usually up to the patient and their family to monitor. Changes in condition are usually managed by the GP or a return visit to the hospital. I, however share concern that there was public comment from medical staff about Mrs Muliagas health & treatment to the media. Hardly the forum & not at all appropriate and the Privacy Act is very specific in this regard.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 am
In the Weekend Herald two doctors from the Counties Manukau DHB made a call for new entry restrictions on immigrants from the Pacific Islands. This was an opportunistic attempt to exploit the Folole Muliaga tragedy to gain additional funding for the DHB, best illustrated by Dr Any Veale’s claim that ‘if NZ let people in who were obese, this must be acknowledged in health funding’. But was there also another agenda at play?
Allow me to offer a critical examination of what they said and an alternate explanation of why.
Dr Jeff Garrett – who recently advocated for a pilot program of ‘passive euthanasia’ in hospitals (NZ Herald 2/12/06) – said that Pacific Island migrants were “not being screened appropriately at the border”. He and Dr Veale opined that ‘potential immigrants should be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services’.
This idea of assessing people based on their physical characteristics is hardly novel, and in fact is at the core of the philosophy better known as eugenics. Hitler was a passionate proponent of this idea, as was its’ best known practitioner Josef Mengele, the ‘Dr Death’ of the Nazi concentration camps.
Wikipedia tells us that the goals of various groups advocating eugenics have included the creation of healthier people, to save society’s resources. It goes on to say that ‘historically, eugenics has been used as a justification for coercive state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations’. Another site describes ‘nazism, apartheid and segregation’ as eugenically based schemes for social salvation.
Welcome to New Zealand Counties Manukau DHB style.
Nice try docs but I suspect your statements are more about shifting public debate away from DHB’s role in the Muliaga affair than they are about the discriminatory policies you advocate. A quick look at the DHB’s actions (and inactions) shows why.
The first DHB member to speak to the press was Dr Don Mackie, who told the Herald that it was ‘a little surprising she died so soon after the machine turned off’. Two weeks later when Dr Garrett spoke to the Sunday program it appeared the DHB had changed their mind, as Garrett pondered that ‘on reflection, Folole was likely at the terminal stages of her life’.
If indeed it was true that she was at the terminal stage, the question that begs is why was she discharged at all? This is a fundamental question so let’s have a look at the available information.
Firstly, neither Dr Mackie nor Dr Garrett was the treating doctor of Folole. Indeed I wonder if they have even read their own hospital’s records.
The family has – we have obtained copies of Folole’s hospital discharge report and it makes for interesting reading. There is no mention of her illness being at the terminal stage. A GP asked to view the report told me there was ‘nothing in the report to ring any alarm bells’.
The discharge plan provided to the Muliaga’s GP was relatively simple: discharge home with walker; follow up with community nurse; low salt diet; check weight twice weekly; follow up in Respiratory OP (outpatient service) in 6 weeks.
Hardly a sign a person may be terminally ill. Unless of course this DHB has a policy of making appointments in six week’s time for patients expected to die?
And why are patients discharged with oxygen machines not provided with a back up power source? Obviously Folole needed oxygen – the machine wouldn’t have been given to her otherwise. What then was done to ensure continuity of supply to the machine in the event of power failure or disconnection? The answer appears to be nothing.
Immediately after the tragedy the DHB said they had been “very willing” to provide patients with a letter to support their need for continuous electricity – upon request. Since then they have decided to be ‘more proactive’ and ensure patients have the letter ‘in their hands up front, rather than having to ask us for it.” Why was this simple, commonsense step not in place earlier? In this case it may well have saved a life.
Why, given the known increase in power consumption for patients using these machines, was a referral not made to an appropriate social agency for assistance? The DHB had previously arranged assistance for the family with the extra power costs: why not now? They knew she had been off work for almost 3 months prior to admission -why was a social worker not brought in to assist?
Why was only one home visit made to the Muliaga family by DHB staff in the nearly 3 weeks between her discharge and her death? I understand that the community nurse who had cared for Folole took two weeks planned leave during the month of May. Was she replaced during this time? If not, why not?
The day after Folole’s death Dr Mackie told the NZ Herald that ‘Mrs Muliaga had been treated at Middlemore Hospital for her longstanding illness and was discharged on May 11’. He went on to reveal that ‘she was suffering from heart and lung disease and her breathing difficulties were related to her obesity. She was given a home oxygen machine because of the severity of her condition.’
I wonder if Dr Mackie was aware of his own DHB’s media policy that states that any CMDHB representative speaking to the Media shall not disclose to any person any information concerning the condition or clinical history of any patient ….without the prior consent of the patient or their representative
What about the privacy laws? An agency that holds medical information ‘must not use the information for any other purpose’ without authorization from the ‘individual concerned’ or ‘the individual’s representative where the individual is unable to give their authority under this rule’. The rule applies equally to information held about persons living or dead.
Maybe it is time for the good doctors to stop casting stones at our Pacific neighbours and have a good look under their own beds. One never knows what skeletons they may there find.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 am
In the Weekend Herald two doctors from the Counties Manukau DHB made a call for new entry restrictions on immigrants from the Pacific Islands. This was an opportunistic attempt to exploit the Folole Muliaga tragedy to gain additional funding for the DHB, best illustrated by Dr Any Veale’s claim that ‘if NZ let people in who were obese, this must be acknowledged in health funding’. But was there also another agenda at play?
Allow me to offer a critical examination of what they said and an alternate explanation of why.
Dr Jeff Garrett – who recently advocated for a pilot program of ‘passive euthanasia’ in hospitals (NZ Herald 2/12/06) – said that Pacific Island migrants were “not being screened appropriately at the border”. He and Dr Veale opined that ‘potential immigrants should be screened for obesity and smoking habits because they place such a heavy burden on health services’.
This idea of assessing people based on their physical characteristics is hardly novel, and in fact is at the core of the philosophy better known as eugenics. Hitler was a passionate proponent of this idea, as was its’ best known practitioner Josef Mengele, the ‘Dr Death’ of the Nazi concentration camps.
Wikipedia tells us that the goals of various groups advocating eugenics have included the creation of healthier people, to save society’s resources. It goes on to say that ‘historically, eugenics has been used as a justification for coercive state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations’. Another site describes ‘nazism, apartheid and segregation’ as eugenically based schemes for social salvation.
Welcome to New Zealand Counties Manukau DHB style.
Nice try docs but I suspect your statements are more about shifting public debate away from DHB’s role in the Muliaga affair than they are about the discriminatory policies you advocate. A quick look at the DHB’s actions (and inactions) shows why.
The first DHB member to speak to the press was Dr Don Mackie, who told the Herald that it was ‘a little surprising she died so soon after the machine turned off’. Two weeks later when Dr Garrett spoke to the Sunday program it appeared the DHB had changed their mind, as Garrett pondered that ‘on reflection, Folole was likely at the terminal stages of her life’.
If indeed it was true that she was at the terminal stage, the question that begs is why was she discharged at all? This is a fundamental question so let’s have a look at the available information.
Firstly, neither Dr Mackie nor Dr Garrett was the treating doctor of Folole. Indeed I wonder if they have even read their own hospital’s records.
The family has – we have obtained copies of Folole’s hospital discharge report and it makes for interesting reading. There is no mention of her illness being at the terminal stage. A GP asked to view the report told me there was ‘nothing in the report to ring any alarm bells’.
The discharge plan provided to the Muliaga’s GP was relatively simple: discharge home with walker; follow up with community nurse; low salt diet; check weight twice weekly; follow up in Respiratory OP (outpatient service) in 6 weeks.
Hardly a sign a person may be terminally ill. Unless of course this DHB has a policy of making appointments in six week’s time for patients expected to die?
And why are patients discharged with oxygen machines not provided with a back up power source? Obviously Folole needed oxygen – the machine wouldn’t have been given to her otherwise. What then was done to ensure continuity of supply to the machine in the event of power failure or disconnection? The answer appears to be nothing.
Immediately after the tragedy the DHB said they had been “very willing” to provide patients with a letter to support their need for continuous electricity – upon request. Since then they have decided to be ‘more proactive’ and ensure patients have the letter ‘in their hands up front, rather than having to ask us for it.” Why was this simple, commonsense step not in place earlier? In this case it may well have saved a life.
Why, given the known increase in power consumption for patients using these machines, was a referral not made to an appropriate social agency for assistance? The DHB had previously arranged assistance for the family with the extra power costs: why not now? They knew she had been off work for almost 3 months prior to admission -why was a social worker not brought in to assist?
Why was only one home visit made to the Muliaga family by DHB staff in the nearly 3 weeks between her discharge and her death? I understand that the community nurse who had cared for Folole took two weeks planned leave during the month of May. Was she replaced during this time? If not, why not?
The day after Folole’s death Dr Mackie told the NZ Herald that ‘Mrs Muliaga had been treated at Middlemore Hospital for her longstanding illness and was discharged on May 11’. He went on to reveal that ‘she was suffering from heart and lung disease and her breathing difficulties were related to her obesity. She was given a home oxygen machine because of the severity of her condition.’
I wonder if Dr Mackie was aware of his own DHB’s media policy that states that any CMDHB representative speaking to the Media shall not disclose to any person any information concerning the condition or clinical history of any patient ….without the prior consent of the patient or their representative
What about the privacy laws? An agency that holds medical information ‘must not use the information for any other purpose’ without authorization from the ‘individual concerned’ or ‘the individual’s representative where the individual is unable to give their authority under this rule’. The rule applies equally to information held about persons living or dead.
Maybe it is time for the good doctors to stop casting stones at our Pacific neighbours and have a good look under their own beds. One never knows what skeletons they may there find.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 am
To Brendon Sheehan – try not hitting repost every six seconds. Once was enough.
While I have sympathy for the loss of a life, the fact remians that your auntie died because whe was fat and unhealthy. Did you ever talk to her about improving her diet? What about that of her fat kids? The older boy seems a nice young man, if not a little stupid, but he is so fat he won’t see 40 unless he changes his lifestyle. Of course, you can start blaming other’s now in preperation for his future ill health, diabetes, blood ciculation problems, eyesight problems, heart disease and eventual demise. Or perhaps you can get the guitars out and sing while he slowly expires from his poor lifestyle choices.
Vote:July 2nd, 2007 at 11:15 am
Mr Sheehan,
First, please learn to use the site properly before you subject us to multiple (very long) posts.
That said, it was a very interesting post for a number of reasons.
You never once, make a mention of any responsibility taken by any family member for the death. Including any by you. You raise a number of questions about the care received from the MDHB, however not once have you mentioned that you or anyone else sought answers to your questions, or raised these concerns with the DHB prior to the death.
You have not answered many questions asked by the public. Why didn’t the family call an ambulance? why didn’t they take their Mother next door and ask to plug the machine in?
You haven’t mentioned that the family has had it’s power cut off many times before, so new the system, therefore could have avoided it happening again.
Rather than go on in this regard, simply put, why weren’t you more proactive?
You happily blame all and sundry for the loss of your aunty and perhaps outside influence played a part, but the family avoiding any responsibility also played a part. Accepting and admitting that would earn you more respect than your constant drum beating about corporate nasties killing your aunty.
I am sorry for your loss. Genuinely. I am more sorry that you have chosen to use your loss as a political football, for what appears to be personal gratification.
Vote:August 20th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
I think Brenden Sheehan posted the comment several times in a bid to try to ram some factual information into some of you merkins.
The pathetic attempts to try to portray the Muliagi family as anything but victims in the power debacle is straight from the text book of side steps.
Grow up – and bring on the election. Sheehan will be getting my vote, and I know the silent majority will also speak on the day!
Vote: