Stop Violence on NHS Staff: Sign the petition Now

[anonymous-user]

jjlynn27 said:

You want equality in afforded protection, but do you want them to have the same rights as you do to refuse service?

Perhaps the reason no one is answering is that it's stupid fallacy. There is no quid pro quo between doing your chosen job to the best of your ability and expecting additional laws when the current ones arn't being used. Should the granny who thumps a nurse be sentenced harsher than the thug who thumps a granny? Assuming the assualt is ever reported (which it apparently rarely is making the entire issue moot), I'd rather a judge decide than 100,000 idiots with an internet connection; even ones whose expertise stretches to being friends with a doctor.

[loose cannon]

I think they should be able to refuse just like any other service, but with the exception that they should be wearing body cams to back it up for the subsequent investigation, how do private health services handle the problem, do they bury there heads in the sand to and carry on accepting abuse ?

[Astacus]

Whilst you might be justifiably cross that you may get assaulted in your line of work and you may even feel aggrieved that you can't avoid these people due to the nature of your job, it remains the case that every single individual in this country is entitled to the same level of protection from the law.

There is a growing, and in my view, distasteful, view in this country that certain groups of people are considered more righteous than others and therefore deserving of some higher level of consideration than the rest of us. This is divisive nonsense.

I repeat that it is the application of the already available laws that is the problem. If a hospital worker or an accountant is assaulted then the police should be obliged to prosecute. People who assault other people should be aware that they should suffer the consequences. Sadly, it appears that this is not the case, largely, in my opinion, because those responsible for prosecuting inherently believe some people are deserving of protection whilst others should look after themselves.

[Murph7355]

loose cannon said:

... how do private health services handle the problem, do they bury there heads in the sand to and carry on accepting abuse ?

It would be interesting to see the comparative stats on abuse in the private sector...

(If only to confirm that only nice people pay extra for private health care ).

[jjlynn27]

fblm said:

jjlynn27 said:

You want equality in afforded protection, but do you want them to have the same rights as you do to refuse service?

Perhaps the reason no one is answering is that it's stupid fallacy. There is no quid pro quo between doing your chosen job to the best of your ability and expecting additional laws when the current ones arn't being used. Should the granny who thumps a nurse be sentenced harsher than the thug who thumps a granny? Assuming the assualt is ever reported (which it apparently rarely is making the entire issue moot), I'd rather a judge decide than 100,000 idiots with an internet connection; even ones whose expertise stretches to being friends with a doctor.

It's not a fallacy at all. It's rather simple, in fact, it's so simple that even a dimwit who thinks that BBC is hiding stories on the front page should be able to get them.
Frontline staff, police, medics, pretty much anyone who doesn't have the luxury of refusing to deal with dredges of society, should have the right to additional protection.
On the positive side, you managed to type a whole post without rather idiotic 'fvck'. Well done you.

[jjlynn27]

Murph7355 said:

It would be interesting to see the comparative stats on abuse in the private sector...

(If only to confirm that only nice people pay extra for private health care ).

From a friend who left NHS for the private provider (psych); Not a single case of abuse in over six months. During his NHS tenure, it was a weekly occurrence.

[anonymous-user]

jjlynn27 said:

...it's so simple that even a dimwit who thinks that BBC is hiding stories on the front page should be able to get them.

What?

[sidicks]

jjlynn27 said:

From a friend who left NHS for the private provider (psych); Not a single case of abuse in over six months. During his NHS tenure, it was a weekly occurrence.

I'd imagine it's much more prevalent in A&E though?

[loose cannon]

jjlynn27 said:

It's not a fallacy at all. It's rather simple, in fact, it's so simple that even a dimwit who thinks that BBC is hiding stories on the front page should be able to get them.
Frontline staff, police, medics, pretty much anyone who doesn't have the luxury of refusing to deal with dredges of society, should have the right to additional protection.
On the positive side, you managed to type a whole post without rather idiotic 'fvck'. Well done you.

When I worked at sunnigdale Mercedes years ago we had a spate of pie people booking there cars in then trying to remove them from the workshop without paying , on one particular occasion the service advisor was dealing with one who was refusing to pay for a battery he had already authorised and we had fitted, it had to be removed and whilst poor old Jon
devlin stood there with the battery in his hand the pie person smacked him straight in the chops full pelt, how he didn't drop that battery on his own feet let alone the scum bags I will never no, he just stood there with dignity until we all rushed out of the wksp with leaver bars etc and they cleared off, he didn't want to press charges probably because he was to scared and the service manager didn't
Persue it which I thought was wrong but there we go, dregs of society don't just visit hospitals and police stations unfortunately

[Rovinghawk]

jjlynn27 said:

it's so simple that even a dimwit.......... should be able to get them.

And then

jjlynn27 said:

dredges of society

I'm impressed that you have the nerve to call someone a dimwit.

[jjlynn27]

sidicks said:

jjlynn27 said:

From a friend who left NHS for the private provider (psych); Not a single case of abuse in over six months. During his NHS tenure, it was a weekly occurrence.

I'd imagine it's much more prevalent in A&E though?

I honestly don't know. From what I was told the only person that said they didn't suffer abuse is someone who works as paed. But if I had to guess I'd guess that A&E is the worst too. The person who now works for private provider says that the security at his new place is fantastic and that patients are generally 'better'.

[Eric Mc]

jjlynn27 said:

You should start that. Or you could just choose to ignore ones that don't concern you.

I'll ask one more time;

Do you think that frontline medical staff should have the same rights as you do to refuse service?

Feel free to dodge for the third time.

So - the reason they are attacked is because they tend to everybody?

If an NHS member of staff is under threat from an abusive person, are they REALLY obliged to continue treating them whilst the threat exists?

I really don't think so.

And what would additional law do to protect them? If somebody launched an attack on them do you think that reminding the perpetrator of the attack the he/she has some extra legislation they should be aware of actually deter them?

More unnecessary law hardly ever cures specific problems.

[jjlynn27]

loose cannon said:

When I worked at sunnigdale Mercedes years ago we had a spate of pie people booking there cars in then trying to remove them from the workshop without paying , on one particular occasion the service advisor was dealing with one who was refusing to pay for a battery he had already authorised and we had fitted, it had to be removed and whilst poor old Jon
devlin stood there with the battery in his hand the pie person smacked him straight in the chops full pelt, how he didn't drop that battery on his own feet let alone the scum bags I will never no, he just stood there with dignity until we all rushed out of the wksp with leaver bars etc and they cleared off, he didn't want to press charges probably because he was to scared and the service manager didn't
Persue it which I thought was wrong but there we go, dregs of society don't just visit hospitals and police stations, unfortunately

I fully understand that. I guess that I'm in a lucky position that our clients are generally fantastic, and any 'misunderstanding' is dealt with quite quickly. The point is, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that workshop can refuse to deal with customers like that, while police and medics don't have that luxury. Put it this way, I would imagine that the next time the same pie people came, the workshop would refuse to deal with them. Docs/nurses/paramedics/police don't have that luxury (for the lack of the better word).

[loose cannon]

You would of thought so but money talks in the motor trade and we had a fair share of them as customers
Amongst other characters. As a workshop bod it wasn't a decision I would of ever have been involved in.

[jjlynn27]

loose cannon said:

You would of thought so but money talks in the motor trade and we had a fair share of them as customers
Amongst other characters. As a workshop bod it wasn't a decision I would of ever have been involved in.

I understand that, but especially for the owner of the shop surely it's not worth the hassle. If you have someone as a repeat 'customer' who was the hassle to deal with previously, especially for people who refuse to pay, why deal with them again?

[loose cannon]

I should imagine if it had played out today it would of probably been dealt with differently maybe,
it would of been around 1998 The garage was a franchise and there were 5 or six in the group all owned by William jacks plc, which in turn was owned by a Malaysian buisiness tycoon, it eventually fell into the hands of sytner group I believe but I left well before that, when we lost the Mercedes franchise to greenjoaks I left a couple of years after that couldn't stand the new regime

[Brave Fart]

jjlynn27 said:

Docs/nurses/paramedics/police don't have that luxury (for the lack of the better word).

Right, so is that a complete list then? How about parking wardens? Housing officers? Staff in benefits offices? Teachers? Immigration officials......my point is, you can't be prescriptive about which group gets special protection and which group doesn't. In my local hospital there are private contractors working alongside the medics (e.g in the car park, cleaners, shop staff). Do they get protection over and above accountants?
Also, there's a big sign at my GP's.....something like "aggressive behaviour is unacceptable and may result in the refusal to offer treatment." So your assertion that some public servants have no choice but to engage with citizens all the time isn't really true.
Eric Mc is right, we don't need daft petitions asking for pointless laws that couldn't be properly drafted and wouldn't work anyway.

[jjlynn27]

Brave Fart said:

jjlynn27 said:

Docs/nurses/paramedics/police don't have that luxury (for the lack of the better word).

Right, so is that a complete list then?

No.
Wherever there is empirical evidence of front line staff being abused in a course of providing service where they don't have the right to refuse service to repeat offenders. (IANAL, I'm sure lawyers could phrase that much better).

Brave Fart said:

...my point is, you can't be prescriptive about which group gets special protection and which group doesn't.

You actually can. There is a specific offence of attacking police officers in the course of their duty. The petition is to extend these same protections to NHS staff. So your assertion isn't true.

Brave Fart said:

Also, there's a big sign at my GP's.....something like "aggressive behaviour is unacceptable and may result in the refusal to offer treatment." So your assertion that some public servants have no choice but to engage with citizens all the time isn't really true.

They can refuse treatment while the patient is abusing them, obviously. Can they refuse treatment when that same abusive/violent patient comes next time? In your line of work, would you even entertain working with someone who was abusive/violent previously? I know, I wouldn't.

Brave Fart said:

Eric Mc is right, we don't need daft petitions asking for pointless laws that couldn't be properly drafted and wouldn't work anyway.

Those are your opinions, which you are trying to present as facts. As already pointed out, there is a specific offence related to attacking police officers while on duty, so the assertion that it couldn't be drafted is demonstrably wrong. You have absolutely no idea if the law would work or not. I, or anyone else for that matter, can't know either. If the new (or extending existing laws) has a chance of working, even if only by encouraging staff to report abuse, in my opinion, is well worth it.

[AMG Merc]

jjlynn27 said:

...if the new (or extending existing laws) has a chance of working, even if only by encouraging staff to report abuse, in my opinion, is well worth it.

Exactly. It amazes me some here feel sticking with current law is all that matters regadless of outcome. Short-sighted, or what?

[Rovinghawk]

AMG Merc said:

It amazes me some here feel sticking with current law is all that matters regadless of outcome. Short-sighted, or what?

What does your proposed new law expect to achieve that existing laws won't achieve?