$100 bribe if out in six hours after birth
November 29th, 2007 at 11:00 am by David FarrarCapital Coast Health is now giving mothers $100 if they leave the hospital within six hours of giving birth.
Why stop there. How about $250 if they are out within one hour? Even better $500 if they don’t even come into the hospital.
Or they could even make it a competition. Have a daily pool of $2,000 and the first patient to discharge themselves gets 50%, the next one get 50% of the remainder and so on.
No tag for this post.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Come on New Zealand , this is beyond a sick joke .
SNAP ELECTION !!!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:06 am
Bizarre! A reflection of the sorry state of funding in our health services.
Anyone with half a brain (no-one in guvmt qualifies) can see that we need a paradigm shift in how our health services are funded.
Intriguing though that in the 70s hospitals were being criticised for medicalising care of mothers and babies after delivery and keeping them unecessarily in hospital for days. 30 years later the same hospitals have been criticised for discharging patients too early.
There’s more than a little damned if you do and damned if you don’t on this. How unusual in a health issue………..
This latter strategy seems a bridge too far though.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Wow, I though our helth system was ok now that David Cunliff was running the show? Obvoiously not.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Just sent a letter to the Royal New Zealand Herald asking if this is further proof of our 3rd world status and to wind up the Socialists asking how can this happen with the Gumint sitting on Billions and Billions of surplus tax dollars stolen form we taxpayers Also question whether the management of the hospital is the culprit with 2 many administrators and not enough medical staff.
Dear oh dear the wheels have fallen of the socialist trolley big time. And it can only get worse over the coming months
Cant wait.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:17 am
I really worry about getting very sick or injured in this country. I fear it’s not the injury that will kill me but the hospital.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:17 am
I love that the chairperson came out and has reassured people that if you really do need clinical supervision you won’t be kicked out. So if you need to be in hospital you are allowed to stay!
This is absolutely disgusting, and not helping Wellington Hospital’s extremely tainted reputation at the moment.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Where is the guy who is “running the show” when you need him?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:28 am
Amin Kharge Nowh to CCH: “What the f*** are you turkeys trying to do to us your masters, shaft our chances of re-election or what”
CCH to AKN: “We dont understand master, is it not good to reduce waiting lists to show the success of Labours glorious health policy”
AKN to CCH: “Yes yes that part is fine but you are obviously overfunded, give the peasants a $10 voucher and refund the other $90 to Micky. We need all the cash we can get to buy next years election”.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:36 am
The public announcement by the hospital does not add up. They say that due to shortage of midwives they need to get rid of mothers out of the hospital quickly after giving birth.
It appears that there are sufficient midwives for births but a lack of nurses for after birth support.
The funning thing is the shortage is only over the holiday period. Where are all the midwives going for Dec/Feb.
This is a group who fought to get their little union hands on this aspect of the health system. As a consequence GPs are no longer engaged in the process.
They claim to be professionals but don’t seem to openly demonstrate the characteristics of true professionals. They don’t really care about mothers and babies or they would make the system work over the holiday period.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:41 am
Even better $500 if they don’t even come into the hospital.
DPF, the idea of home births isn’t as outrageous as you are trying to make it out to be. It is relatively common in several European countries (30-40% in the Netherlands, although down from about 70%, 30 years ago). In fact, many Europeans find it strange that almost all children in NZ are born in a hospital (although increasing from .4% 20 years ago to 2% currently). With adequate prenatal monitoring the associated risks are no worse in home births when compared to hospital births. If fact, there are several advantages to home births.
That said, rushing them out of the hospital after 6 hours is probably not so desirable.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:44 am
“That said, rushing them out of the hospital after 6 hours is probably not so desirable.”
Andrew Bannister , that is the understatement of the year .
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:48 am
There are advantages to home births – my wife has done two of them and the experience was very good for us. But it shouldn’t have a financial incentive on it.
Just wait until a mother dies during a home birth, and they had knowingly taken the risk because they needed the $500. Same deal for an early discharge – the mother did not feel well, but said nothing to get the bonus.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:50 am
I really worry about getting very sick or injured in this country. I fear it’s not the injury that will kill me but the hospital.
That’s right Infused, it will. That’s all hospitals do; kill people. You’ll be lucky to get out alive. I suggest you NEVER go to hospital.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:55 am
“I suggest you NEVER go to hospital.”
Oh no Andrew Bannister , our newly opened Charity Hospital is such a lovely comforting place for many affected people in the Christchurch region .
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:55 am
I really worry about getting very sick or injured in this country. I fear it’s not the injury that will kill me but the hospital.
That’s right Infused, it will. That’s all hospitals do; kill people. You’ll be lucky to get out alive. I suggest you NEVER go to hospital.
That’s a great idea. Broken leg? – just run it off. Heart attack? – stick a fork in a power point. The only thing holding us back from more home treatment is the damned nanny state we live in.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Don’t worry, I try not to!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:57 am
I wonder if you get double money for “gapping it” early with twins?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 11:59 am
You might even get a TAB lucky dip trifecta if you pop out triplets , or a few free spins on the pokies ?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
Come on guys the cost saving and sponsorship potential is too good to overlook.. As a marketing guru I can instantly come up with some ideas to spare the mid-wives the trouble of dealing with pesky little new born babies and their endlessly needy mothers.
How about bonus fly-bys for leaving before the Obs and Gy specialist makes their round.
If you cancel your appointment with the lactose consultant you get a free liltre of calci-trim to take home with you (sponsored by meadow fresh)
If you have triplets and leave within 30minutes you could go in the draw for a brand new People mover (Toyota could surely sponsor this fantastic attention-grabbing offer).
and I’m sure the hearts and minds of all new mothers would be won by this hard-to-refuse offer…
If you cancel your six week post natal visit for you and your baby you will instantly go into the draw to win several packets of (recalled) Bindeez beads sets and a unique one-off signed (real fake) piece of art by Aunty Helen to hang in the nursery.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
There is nothing wrong with using finacial incentives to solve the overcrowding problem. There is a market price for each of these beds per day and that should be recognised. Obviously the best situation would be total privatisation of hospitals but this is a good start, what would be better however, would be charging each person after the first six hours and then reducng that six hour subsidy incrementally.
I don’t see why my tax should be subsidising those who wish to breed. Having children is an individual decision and as such those who bear children should also bear the full cost of those children. As a Classical Liberal David you should understand this and understand that unless something is done to remove such subsidisation we will continue to be yolked to backward socialist ideas such as taxation.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
It’s a vastly different experience in Auckland (At least it was 2 years ago). You are transferred out of Auckland Woman’s to Birthcare where every mother can spend 3 days with a team of midwives on hand. (More than 3 days you have to pay for, unless there is a medical reason to stay)
In that time they cover all the basics, help mother and baby bond and get used to one-another. Thereafter the midwife (our one at least) did a two or three daily visit to the house for a couple of weeks, before scaling it back to weekly for the first two or three months. (If I recall correctly that was roughly the timeframe)
So our experience has been almost exactly the opposite of what is happening there.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
yes I agree with cubit9f, and not wanting to tar all midwives with the same brush, they have forced GP’s out of births and pediatrics, to everyone’s disadvantage.
What genius came up with the voucher / bribe scheme? Must be one of those public servants/administrators/bureaucrats that any “additional” funding that Labour calims to have spent on the health system has gone into employing, while actual health care professionals that help the public of New Zealand have had to make do with no increase in funding.
They are probably also wasteing a lot more of their time on petty form filling, cutural awareness workshops/ and generally tied up with unnecesary red tape.
D4J – I have to agree with you too – snap election – it’s due.
Come on people of Wellington, protest this! This it the capital’s own hospital service here! It should be a showcase of the govenments heath policies – the sand thing is that it is. Don’t stand for it, rub their noses in it.
The sheer arogance of this govenment – it beggars belief!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
I do not think that all the problems in the health sector are caused by lack of funding. In fact, I would venture to suggest that many of the problems are caused by a severely inefficient structure, which is exacerbated by politically correct bureaucrats.
Not so long ago I had occasion to catch up with a friend who had become a health sector manager. In a discussion about issues of the day in health, it transpired that many of the issues of earlier years remained, now overlaid by stifling micro-management from the MINISTRY.
This sector requires major reform. The entire health sector in NZ is not even equivalent to many major medical groups in the US, yet we persist with 22 DHBs, political opposition to efficiency should it result in the ‘free’ public system being tainted by private sector money.
My GP visits now cost over $80 ( and soon to rise), when Our Blessed Leader was trumpeting recently how these had fallen sharply under her beneficent regime.
Any political party that has the intestinal fortitude to take on the multitude of vested interests both within and without the sector will be able to save money, improve service and most importantly assist the health status of the country.
The Wellington situation is but a carbuncle on the surface of a festering mass below the skin.
Another appalling example is that Auckland Childrens Hospital is appealing for funds to rebuild it’s cancer ward.
However, we will not be able to talk about this After the Lights Go out on 31 december and the EFB comes into force, because all thes issues will no doubt become covered by the Act.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Maynard: What genius came up with the voucher / bribe scheme?
I don’t know, but it is one that was used before.
The scheme revives similar ones used in Auckland and Waikato that were ditched in the 1990s after they failed to encourage shorter stays.
From:
Vote:http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10479021
November 29th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Adam, nobody is stupid enough to take on the entrenched interests in the medical sector. It is a guarantee of electoral oblivion – when the doctors, nurses and pharmacies come out against you then you are going to be toast in the election.
It leads exactly to the problems that we have in our health system, but I don’t see a way around it in a democracy. The problem (which is a funny way to describe it) is that most people have a lot of respect for their local GP or pharmacist. So when they get told by that person that the govt is screwing over the sector, they believe them. Screwing over the sector is usually measured based on how well the govt panders to interest groups, so we get what we vote for.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Nice post DPF, no answers, just wild exaggeration, you really are a class act.
Clearly Capital Coast Health have a shortage of staff and/or facilities and they are trying to do something about it. I don’t agree with there method but I am sure it is better than doing nothing and having to turn mothers away.
DPF, if you bothered to do even 5 seconds of research on the subject you would see that New Zealand is currently under going a baby boom and maternity services nationwide are being stretched.
My wife and I had a baby 6 weeks ago and the service provided during her pregnancy and during the birth was simply excellent. Made me proud to live in a country where 99% of the time the health system is world class.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Rovket Boy – My (not inconsiderable) taxes paid for your baby’s birth. How does it feel to have him/her born into theft?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Rocket Boy: if you don’t like it, why don’t you go away. I hear that Standard have a good line in Farrar abuse, you’d probably fit in there.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Pocket Billiards Boy:
Glad to see, right or wrong, you support the natural party of tossers.
Vote:Make sure you are in the union and you will go far.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
PaulL, I agree,
This is of course why we have reformed health so often and spent squillions to nil effect. It is the sector where governments everywhere spend endlessly to no avail because of the vested interests – doctors, nurses, patients, managers, drug companies etc.
In this regard I am always intrigued by the ‘vox pop’ comment in the mdeia about how the public want more spent on health and not tax cuts. Some years ago Gallup in the UK conducted a poll which asked would respondents support more spending on health. Overwhelmingly, the response was yes. When the question asked was would the respondents support more spending on health if this meant their taxes would increase by say Pounds 5 a week the response were very different.
Again if people here are asked do you support more spending on health the answer will be Yes. However, if it was couched in the context of a present health spend of say $14 billion (Vote Health + ACC + private Ins + co payments for GP visits and drugs) ie Over $3000 per year for every man, woman and child then we might see a different response, but then again given the welfare mentality of the majority in NZ and the huge slice of the populace dependant on H1 for benefits perhaps not.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
What about those who, through no fault of their own, can’t get out within the specified time period?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Rocket Boy, where do you live (region)?
Roark? QQ more. We all pay taxes to live in this country to provide a socially agreed upon level of service. It’s natural for circumstances to see some benefit more than others, depending on what they are doing at that stage of their lives.
You wouldn’t begrudge a pensioner their operation, would you? And at some stage in the future those children will (possibly) be paying at least partly for you as a pensioner, for the police that (generally) protect us, for the firefighters, ambulences, GPs and everything else that contributes to this society.
Come election time we can all decide if we still feel that contract is a valid one or not. (And I don’t think it is, I believe it is too high, but that doesn’t equate to it not being there at all)
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
I suppose Dr Cullen would say that funding the hospitals would be “inflationary”
Wellington Hospital is a mess! I had both my children there.
And we have Helen to thank for DHB’s
Iif Helen had ever had children herself she might not be so keen to see young mothers pushed out the door.
I bet if you are under 16 and need an abortion this Labour Government will find a bed for you!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Pita: those people are no worse off than they were before. Dragging everyone down because some cannot meet the criteria is ludicrous. Personally I wouldn’t have done it this way, but it seems a reasonable response to the problem.
Adam: More importantly, if the question put was “health spending has doubled in the last x years and no discernable improvement has occurred. Do you support further increases in spending” I suspect the answer would usually be no.
If the question was “the existing health system is stretched, and the private health system can do higher quality operations at a lower cost. ACC currently use the private health system for many operations. Do you support the government sending some people on the waiting list to private hospitals for their operation?” the answer would be yes.
In other words, none of these surveys have any useful value, because the questions asked are meaningless.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Pita, those that stay should pay. It’s about personal responsibilty. The “no fault of their own” arguement doesn’t hold water: some people let life happen to them others take control of their lives. Why should the strong be forced to support the weak?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Pascal, if a pensioner needs an operation they should make sure they have the ability to pay for it either with their own savings or through a contracted insurer. As I look after myself so should they. The same goes for fire, police and everything else you mentioned. You need to understand, as I’m sure David does, that there is no such thing as society. There are indiuviduals and there are contracts between individuals.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Pascal: I live in Christchurch.
Roack: I have also paid my share of taxes over the years as has the company I am a shareholder/owner of. It was nice to see where the money goes and get a little ‘pay back’.
Johnboy: I am not a member of any union however I am a member of the Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce, does that count?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
After considering the whole raft of user-pays initiatives (e.g. fees for use of hospital outpatients’ clinics, prescription part-charges, the creation of “Crown Health Enterprises” and the Ministry’s expectation that they would run at a profit) that was introduced in the 90s by Health Minister Jenny Shipley, I think it is extraordinarily rich that the political right are now adamant that this “cash to leave hospital early” bizzo is all due to insufficient Government funding!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
That seems like a fairly hard line stance, Roark. So all communal services should be on an opt-in, user pays basis?
I can ultimately afford to pay for private insurance and choose to do so, but the public system was there for me when we needed it for the birth of my daughter. (And at times it wasn’t – such is the roll of the dice)
However, not everyone can afford that. Part of living in a community is recognising that it extends beyond the individual. Just as, as a husband, I assume a certain amount of responsibility for my wife and her wellbeing, so we all assume a bit of responsibility for everyone else that shares this space with us, don’t we?
(Responsibility might not be the right word, but my vocabulary is not currently supplying a better alternative)
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
I have had recent (within the last three weeks) experience of a hospital stay in a public hospital followed shortly by a stay in a private hospital.
I can state without reservation that the professional medical and nursing care that I received in both was absolutely first class and the attitude and concern shown by these staff was remarkable. However, what about the state of administration between thw two facilities..
In the public hospital it is all pervasive and present to the extent that it has become the biggest and most important show in town. It suffocates the medical staff and has an overbearing prescence.
At the Private hospital the administration is efficient, in the background and seems to truly support the clinicians. It gives one confidence. It also seems very small.
Like so many public services the public health system has been focussed on management, endless lists of projects. pseudo accountability and audit.
Interestingly there seems to be little problem in recruiting people for these tasks.
It is just bloody difficult to find anyone to actually deliver the core service.
Without the bloody patients we could have the best health service in the world.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Roark – I will subscribe to your argument as long as you are not expecting my offspring to be paying through their taxes for you while you are lying in a hospital bed in your old age with some form of dibilitating illness.
I agree health should be privatised.
Everyone wants a better health care system for the purely selfish reason that if they or one of their own get sick they will be fixed efficiently in comfort and without fuck ups.
If people value their own health so highly (as they should) what is wrong with paying for it.
I just hate that fact that at the moment we have to contribute twice – through taxes and private healthcare insurance.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Roack: ‘There is no such thing as society’
It was bollocks when Margaret Thatcher said it, and it is still bollocks.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
When you have a system run by professionals, they make money by looking after their customers.
When you have a system run by bureaucrats, they save money by not looking after anyone.
Simple as that.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Rocket Boy, thanks for that. I’m glad to see that you’re getting the same level of care back in Christchurch as we did up here in Auckland. And I agree, it’s good to see that some of the taxes I’ve paid has helped you and yours out.
As your midwife would no doubt have told you, Plunkett has a scheme that allows you to purchase a car seat for something like $20, if done within a certain amount of time after the birth of your young one. It’ll last you for the first year or so, at which time you’ll upgrade to a better seat anyway. And make sure you use the Healthline, their advice is invaluable when one isn’t quite sure what to do. And remember that you can get free documentation on good developmental activities for your child. It details play-time things you can do to stimulate brain and motor development and is all availalbe through Plunkett. A last thought as well is to look at toy hire. It’s not for everyone, but it does allow you to for a reasonable budget have different toys on a weekly basis to keep them active and interested without having to splurge on things they won’t use within a few months.
The support system after birth is even better than it is during pregnancy, but it’s probably not as well advertised. Anyway, congratulations on the birth of your little one.
Welcome to sleepless nights and a few months of perpetual exhaustion, but it only gets better from here onwards
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:24 pm Vote:
November 29th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
When my son was born, we had one midwife and two nurses in attendance, all of whom were taking orders from the obstetrician. The standard of care was exceptional in every respect. My partner and I (yes, I was allowed to stay) had a private suite — not a room, a suite — to ourselves for four days and nights following the birth, and when not sleeping those four days were basically “boot camp” for new parents. There were “how to breastfeed your baby” sessions, “how to bath your baby” sessions, and on the last night the staff took baby off our hands and told us to go out to dinner by ourselves for the last time in a while. Soon after we got home, we received several thousand dollars from the government for providing the country with a new citizen.
Oh yeah, I should have mentioned — this is in Australia, of course.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Thanks Pascal, we are certainly taking advantage of the services on offer and also trying to give a little back by offering to help and making the odd donation.
Swampash, Australian care sounds very similar to New Zealand. I know there are some differences as we have friends who were living in Australia who recently moved back to New Zealand and who have a couple of small children.
Funny that the right wing Howard government paid people to have children, maybe our left wing government might consider this. However one advantage of my wife being a teacher and being in a union is that shes get 6 weeks pay after giving birth as a bonus!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
There are a few things to consider about this situations.
Firstly: It’s not new. When my kids were born back in the failed policy days of the 90’s parents were offered 50 disposable nappies if they only stayed one night.
Secondly: Having children is about as natural as having a crap although perhaps slightly more traumatic and/or painful and with much more scope for significant complications. There has always been a strong ‘home birth’ advocacy group but it became popular some years back for mothers to spend days and days in hospital after having children. Now the up side of this is the mother got some time out from the normal duties she was required to do in the man works – woman cooks and clean social environment. Ejecting healthy mothers and babies as soon as possible is not always a bad thing, however there are some things like breast feeding that can take some time to get established and with the demise of Plunket who helps woman with these things if they are sent home before they have a chance to work out how these things work.
Thirdly: Is the money given with a ‘with compliments’ slip with “brought to you by the Labour led Govt” written on it?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Rovket Boy – My (not inconsiderable) taxes paid for your baby’s birth. How does it feel to have him/her born into theft?
I don’t see why my tax should be subsidising those who wish to breed.
Roark, if everyone stopped breeding, you would end up living in a very strange and disfunctional society. Oh, and maybe Rocket boy’s own taxes paid for his baby’s birth.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
Rocket boy if you are an employer that makes you one of Trotterskis “Owning Classes”.
Vote:How can you possibly be eligible to be a labour supporter or does being married to a teacher give you associate status to the union?
November 29th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Burt – I have to disagree with you. Childbirth may be natural but it is a very dangerous process with lots that can go wrong. Thankfully most people do not have any issues.
In my book homebirths, unless they are unavoidable i.e. you live in the wops, are practised by stupid and selfish hippies. People who care more about what makes them feel good than the welfare of their child. Its almost a case for CYS in my opinion.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Joker
I would have thought that it’s a mothers right to choose and not soemthing that can be mandated by “I know best types” like you. I personally don’t think it wise given the prevelance of older mothers who tend to have more complications – but hospital….. how did the human race survice for millions of years before we had scans, hospitals etc. Must have been a lot more selfish hippie types back then eh.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
I am sure that it used to be in law that a mother (and baby) could stay 7 days after giving birth. Has this changed? Can anyone throw some light on this………….
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Johnboy: I don’t think you need to be ‘eligible’ to be a labour supporter. Things are not that black and white.
I tend to have left wing views on ‘social issues’ and right wing views on ‘business issues’. Over all I think Labour have done a good job of running this country so they get my support. If I thought National would do a better job then I would vote National, however National need to do a little more than produce a 12 minute film on ‘ambition’ to win me over.
[DPF: Could you share some of your right wing views on business issues? Do you for example support free trade and the WTO? Do you support monetary policy being targeted at keeping inflation down? Do you support lower tax rates across the board? Do you support less restrictive employment laws on businesses? Do you support a greater provate sector roll in areas such as accident insurance provision?]
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Burt: ‘how did the human race survice for millions of years before we had scans, hospitals etc’.
Burt, 1 in 10 woman used to die in child birth, now they don’t – that’s your answer.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Frankly,I am shocked at some of the responses on this thread.
We do not have a “one only” child policy, as in China. Although I am sure that will be Labia’s next step.
As it stands, at present, women in this country can have as many babies as they like and they should be sent home when physically well and support at home.
Lets face it, it’s not the baby’s fault the mother wants to breed like a rabbit. And if they stay in the ward for a couple of days, the staff should be well trained to pick up any alarm signals that the baby or mother might be at risk.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Burt
I would imagine that there were hugely higher numbers of infant and mother birth related deaths back then unfortunately.
My opinion is based on cases I am aware of personally where homebirths have resulted in unneeded ongoing health issues for the children involved.
To put it another way if you had to dangle your baby out of the window you would want a safety net underneath any parent who doesnt want that net has to have their motives questioned.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Rocketboy,
The problem is that until a party gets its hands on the levers of power they can’t do anything other than oppose or contribute to the discussion when it is appropriate. Which is infrequent.
As for doing a better job, it is hard to imagine how it could currently be done any worse.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
In my book homebirths, unless they are unavoidable i.e. you live in the wops, are practised by stupid and selfish hippies.
What book would that be? The book of ignorance? The book of self-serving stereotypes? The book of made-up-facts? Perhaps the great book of judgemental arrogance?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Rocket boy: Thank you for your candour. I have to admit as a younger fellow I voted for labour as I could not stand the dictator Muldoon. However this lot have gone so far past anything Muldoon ever did I cannot see how any intelligent person can support them. We will have to agree to differ and I will continue to rabidly attack anything you say in the scums defence!!!!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
cubit9F: They could always tell us what they are going to do, the word for it is ‘policy’.
Imagine if Graham Henry’s re-application for the All Blacks coaching job was a 12 minute film of his ambition for the All Blacks, slow mo shots of tries being scored, computer image of Ritchie lifting the world cup, Henry taking about his ‘vision’ for the team, how he has grown as a individual, how he wants the AB’s to succeed etc etc all with a Coldplay sound track. He would get laughed out of the interview. Sound familiar?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Hey why limit this to maternity hospitals.
The New Socialist “Save money to fund more bureaucrats scheme” could expand to every tenticle of the Health System!
1. Don’t turn up for your blood pressure check and go into a draw for a free mobility scooter
2. Miss your Cancer treatment and we will fund half the cost of your funeral.
3. Turn down an Angiogram and get 5 free rides in an ambulance.
4. Play truant from your court ordered psychiatric treatment and get to share a cell with Graeme Burton
The possibilities are limitless.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
roark – if, as you propose, people only have children if they can pay the full cost of having them (healthcare, education etc) themselves and not from ‘your’ tax money – what should NZ do after the inevitable decline in birth rates. Pump up immigration?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Rocketboy,
At least a DVD is more interactive than a stupid piece of card that makes empty promises. Where is the vision in that?
Vote:I would rather watch the DVD
November 29th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Max: why is a decline in birth rates a problem? It is inevitable that it will eventually happen, and since the world currently has too many people, I’m ok with it. At least house prices would come down
Rocket Boy – if Graham Henry’s interview were like that then yes. If his CV were like that, we would applaud his innovation. The election is still a long way away, we aren’t at the job interview yet. We’re still just making small talk and getting to know one another. The policy will come.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Reg – lol
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
BlairM right on Well said.
Rocket Boy Answer this If your Socialist mates are so bloody good then with all the Billions of dollars of surplus taxes why is the hospital system stuffed
Or are you one of those Socialist deniers that ignores the evidence as set out above.
Why not blame Treasury like Crazy Clark did for not telling her and Sullen Cullen that the Gumint had all that money going spare.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Sorry to be the party pooper but the voucher idea has been scrapped:
Vote:http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10479111
November 29th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
gd: It’s not stuffed, it just not 100% perfect and I’m not sure throwing a lot more tax payer dollars at it will make it perfect.
Anyway, where in the world is the hospital system ‘not stuffed’ in your humble opinion?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Miss your Cancer treatment and we will fund half the cost of your funeral.
Actually, according to infused you’re better off not going to the hospital in the first place, ’cause it’s the hospital that’ll kill ya.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
# Andrew Bannister Says:
November 29th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
“In my book homebirths, unless they are unavoidable i.e. you live in the wops, are practised by stupid and selfish hippies.
What book would that be? The book of ignorance? The book of self-serving stereotypes? The book of made-up-facts? Perhaps the great book of judgemental arrogance? ”
Before this degenerates into a home-birth or not debate, let me say that people are free to have their babies wherever they wish of course.
The problem is that zealots abound in this debate – natural birth is wonderful when all goes well. The reality is that a number of well selected births still run into significant complications that may endanger the mother’s life and the baby’s life or cerebral outcome due to birth asphyxiation. In such a case immediate access to modern medical intervention can make the difference between life or death, or alternatively, a normal baby vs a brain damaged one. Unsuspecting expectant parents are often led down the pathway of potential danger without proper informed consent as to the risks.
Andrew: you show the characteristics of a zealot – you attack with terms such as “ignorance, “self-serving”, “made-up”, “judgemental arrogance” directed at the person who voices a viewpoint opposite to your cherished belief. these terms tend reflect rather than project.
But this is very off-topic and I apologise for that.
Getting Mums out of hospital as soon as possible is a laudable goal, but offering a financial incentive is hardly helping apply best practice to such a decision. Rather it reflects financial expediency.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
…why is the hospital system stuffed
gd, can you define “stuffed”. Remember, waiting lists are not an indicator of a poor health system. In fact, a good health system creates more demand for that very system, because you keep the unwell alive for longer. That’s the irony.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Rocketboy,
Graham Henry sure as hell is not going to disclose his tactical and strategic plans to to his opposition before he a. gets the job and b. he gets to the game and knows what the opposition are likely to do.
I am sure the National party will release policy at a time of their choosing to achive the greatest stratyegic and tactical advantage with the voters. It is not about providing fodder to blog crawlers and policy prats to allow them to apply their endless wisdom to it and then falsely represent it for further political advantage.
By the way the labour party are actually playing the same game by the same rules.
Just when are we going to get some detailed policy on tax cuts?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
rightofleftcentre, Joker said In my book homebirths … are practised by stupid and selfish hippies. That IS “ignorance”, using “made-up”, “judgemental” and “self-serving stereotypes”.
Also, despite what you might think I believe, I don’t have a particularly “cherished belief” about home births and am not a home-birth zealot. However, I take issue with people who claim that home births are for “stupid and selfish hippies”. The literature does not indicate that home births are associated with a greater risk of adverse health outcomes than hospital births. I agree that the hospital provides a good safety net and would never talk someone out of a hospital birth.
BTW, I agree that this policy is
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Rocket Boy: gd: It’s not stuffed, it just not 100% perfect and I’m not sure throwing a lot more tax payer dollars at it will make it perfect.
I agree in general. There are cases where it is absolutely fantastic, as you’ve seen with the whole birthing process. There are cases where it’s damn near atrocious as well.
I’ve recounted the story a few times, but it was about a year or so into her life when our daughter fell ill. Looking at the symptoms and comparing what we saw to our Well Child book, seemed to indicate Meningicoccal disease to us. (I probably spelled that wrong)
We rushed her to our local White Cross Emergency center, where the doctor on duty thought it was Meningicoccal disease. She asked us if we wanted an ambulance and phoned Starship ahead of time to warn them that we were incoming.
We rushed to Starship. And there, despite the identified risk and warning sent ahead of time, waited from approximately 10:00pm to around 3am or 4am before we could be seen. I’m a bit futzy on the times, but it was definately more than 4 hours, although I don’t remember it as being more than 6.
You can imagine, as a parent, having only had one diagnosis indicating what is a potentially fatal disease within hours we were frantic. A nurse had done a one or two minute inspection and nobody there was willing to help, the nurses kept telling us we had to wait, we were X in the queue and would be seen too. No, they could not give us an estimate.
Eventually we were seen by a doctor. Now I can understand Triage (Worked on a medical software system before this and spent about 5 years of my life working inside a hospital) but I also believe that certain suspected cases should require an elevated form of attention.
In that case, the public system failed us badly. And I had no idea where to go to privately at the time.
So the system isn’t exactly stuffed, but there are certainly aspects of it that needs a dramatic improvement.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Pascal: How is your daughter now?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Why not take this to the logical conculsion. Why doesn’t Liarbore offer everyone $1000 to get sterilised. Problem solved, a win win situation. Of course we will need more administrators to implement this move, all good stuff for the socialists and no pesky births to clog up the health system.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
theyve actually pulled the policy now….
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
What about financial incentives to have an abortion?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Rocket Boy OK I might be a bit OTT but as one with a professional interest in governance and organisations the luckily few interactions I have had with the health service plus the info that comes out leads me to believe that the “system” is in need for a serious overhaul.
I question the governance competencies of the bulk of the ‘Boards” and the management abilities of the CEOs and senior managers.
Considering the significant budgets they have I question they have the necessary skill level.
I also believe that there needs to be a mind set change regarding the administration vs medical staff which appears to be an ongoing war zone.
I dont believe that as a stakeholder I am getting value for money In fact I would rate this as 4 out of 10.
It can be fixed but it needs capacity capability and most importantly the will and sadly I dont see any of these.
What I see are a bunch of earnest people who lack 21st century governance education both the theory and the practical stumbling around trying to find solutions.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Pascal, re your 12:10 comment that would have to be described as either learning from previous experience (or not learning in this case) OR “Repeating the failed policies of the past”. No wonder it was hastily scrapped, that would have been too big a stick to get beaten with if you live on the 9th floor. Betch H2 had a hand in it.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Well my wife had a chance to study the ceiling in a&e at Wgtn hospital for 16 hrs why waiting for her broken ankle to be attended to(ie getting a bed) then another full day and a half before the operation with plates and nuts and bolts .Maybe they want you to die of bordom,or go away .
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
“What about those who, through no fault of their own, can’t get out within the specified time period?”
I’m not sure if PaulL or Roark understood my tongue in cheek comment…In our “me too, me first” society it is conceivable that mothers or partners of mothers could demand priority attention in order to access the $100…there could be some ill feeling if they extend beyond the six hour window of opportunity.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Pita
You make a good point. Mother and new baby sitting around for 12 hours waiting for the Dr to come around and tick the “OK to leave” box….
I spent some time in Welly hospital earlier this year spending time with a sick relative, there was one chap in the same room as him who was scheduled for a shower @ 10am then was to be sent home for the long weekend @ 11:30. He was loaded onto a trolley @ 9:30am and stayed in a hallway waiting for his shower till 6pm, then it was all to hard becasue staff were not available so they sent him home without his shower for three days over a long weekend.
Disgusting! This is what our taxes are paying for and all the Labour apologists have to say is “It’s like this in other countries too”….
Well so F-ing what if we are not the worst in the world… there is still ample room for improvement and we should judge the health system on how well it functions for NZ people not how well it functions compared to some other country.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
I think this scheme was dreamed up by a deranged accountant. The accountant was trying to minimise costs, but could not comprehend that some women in that post birth situation are not in control of all their faculties. And it is those not in full control after a traumatic experience, that take advantage of the silly offer.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
How about this? No funding for health, people pay for it themselves and they can stay as short or long as they like in hospital. Now that’s a good policy!
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Roark… sorry been out for a while
Vote:declining birth rate would be a problem as we are already not ‘replacing’ ourselves with the current birthrate. Who will be the ‘workers’ (taxpayers) of the future who will pay for your super and healthcare? In fact who will be the doctors and nurses to care for the masses of elderly?
November 29th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Max: I think it is me you were replying too. I am saving for my own retirement, I don’t need people to fund it for me. If we had a proper savings regime like Australia do it wouldn’t be an issue. On doctors and nurses etc – two points:
1. People will have to work longer. This is basic math, it will happen
2. Increased automation.
The reality is that birth rates are down all over the world. Unless you are arguing that human population should increase ad-infinitum and people forced to breed, then sooner or later we should expect the population to start to decline. We need to deal with that. A slow gradual decline is better than a sharp one, so the sooner it starts the better.
What it should mean in intergenerational terms is that the wrinklies will hold all the assets (as per today), but the assets only have value when compared to what they can buy. And with fewer working age people, what you can buy might have just gotten a lot more expensive – especially if it has a lot of labour content. Things like personal nursing will get expensive – so technology will have to fill some gaps. In short, we can expect the salaries of the young to go up a lot, and the relative value of things like houses to go down. Since we all pretend to care about housing affordability for the young, this will be a good thing. Of course, when it actually happens instead of being something talked about over a chardonnay, we may find that it isn’t to our liking.
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
david: No wonder it was hastily scrapped, that would have been too big a stick to get beaten with if you live on the 9th floor. Betch H2 had a hand in it.
Wasn’t there a rather rapid disclaimer coming from the government suggesting they had no hand in this?
Vote:November 29th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
I’m glad Burt’s memory helped kick-start my own. Yes of course this isn’t new lunacy… it’s recycled lunacy. Back in the 90s when my last child was born it was a box of disposable nappies… I seem to recall another bribe as well… and a daily home visit from a nurse for, I think, a week.
The crucial issue is, surely, the responsibility for deciding who gets offered this option? If a clinician considers a mother and baby ready for discharge, then offering that mother – who may simply want to rest rather than having any clinical reason for staying longer* – an incentive to isn’t placing hers or the baby’s health at risk.
If it’s left to the mother / parents – who have no clinical training – to decide then it’s health roulette.
* Before I have a posse of angry mothers pursuing me, I don’t begrudge the hypothetical mum in my example a rest. But in a situation where we have a shortage of clinicians and facilities, it’s a reasonable way for a hospital to deal with a government’s deliberate withholding of necessary funding.
Vote:November 30th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
Every time a DHB comes up with an innovative idea that had sensible controls to protect mother and child along come a bunch of namby pamby socialists to spoil things.
THINK! If these women and children were assessed clinically as well enough to leave, with home support and remember this is either 2nd or 3rd child only, why ShOULD they be allowed to stay in hospital?
How can midwives, who religiously defend the right to home births, come out against letting these well women go… er… home?
At least one doc was FOR the $100 “Get out of this valuable hospital bed”
Vote:voucher.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Reply to gd
“I question the governance competencies of the bulk of the ‘Boards” and the management abilities of the CEOs and senior managers”.
As one dealing with this bunch of incompetent idiots I couldn’t agree more.
In health “management ability” is close to an oxymoron. I cannot believe 1% of them could get more than half their pay in the private sector.
Vote:November 30th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
so why aren’t home births being pushed more.
Even water births,, what happened to them?
Vote:November 30th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Andrew Bannister
“gd, can you define “stuffed”. Remember, waiting lists are not an indicator of a poor health system. In fact, a good health system creates more demand for that very system, because you keep the unwell alive for longer. That’s the irony”.
Absolutely. A waiting list is a requirement of an efficient health service.
Vote:Well said. I hope no-one wishes to bore me with argument on this point.
Just read a health economics 101 course please.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Good question Hinamanu
Home births are pushed where the $ are attractive. They were pushed when there was an excess of experienced midwives and GP obstetricians capable of dealing with them either for $ or professional reward. Currently there is a midwife shortage, GP obstetricians are down to around a half dozen in the entire country (thanks Dear Leader – still no family yourself Helen?) and Liarbore has realised the $ loophole it left open and has shut it down. Easier for those dedicated overworked midwives to suggest hospital care. Personally I would recommend hospital care for the very rare massive peripartum haemorrhage or other life threatening emergency that results in dead Mum at home.
Vote:November 30th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
A good friend of mind is a senior specialist. One of 4-5 in NZ in his field. Despite what he might think or recommend it is management that sets policy. Along with countless other gripes, it’s sufficiently frustrating for him to be look overseas for career opportunities.
Back to the topic at hand – I doubt that clinical assessment of ‘wellness to leave’ is free of management’s cost-reduction bias. On that basis the term bribe seem to be quite appropriate.
Vote: