MANCHESTER'S troubled mental health services are to be reviewed for the THIRD time in two years.
Last year the city's community mental health services were ranked the third worst in the country and a major reorganisation of care sparked a series of protests by staff and patients.
The row escalated into an all-out strike when union official Karen Reissmann, who had led the opposition, was sacked.
Campaigners continued their fight to get her reinstated with a lobby at parliament yesterday.
North west health bosses launched a review of the region's mental health services in July last year, led by John Boyington. He has now been asked to lead a separate review into services and to identify changes needed in Manchester. Manchester Primary Care Trust say it will cost up to £50,000.
Expertise
Trust spokesman Chris O'Gorman said: "We are very pleased to have the benefit of John Boyington and his team's expertise and knowledge to help us plan the next phase of improving Manchester's mental health services."
A spokeswoman added: "We are determined to ensure the city's mental health services are effective of the highest quality and meet local people's needs."
As part of the review the team will interview patients, carers, staff and other groups involved in the city's mental health services.
It will be completed by the end of June and published later in the summer.
Ms Reissmann, 41, from Hulme, who worked in mental health services for 25 years before she was sacked, led hundreds of health workers, patients and union members to Parliament yesterday.
Her union Unison has lodged a claim for unfair dismissal which is expected to be heard in the autumn.
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Cue the usual "Karen ia an Angel", "Sheila Foley is the Devil, paid too much money etc.". Manchester Mental Health can do no right.......zzzzzzzzzzz
Nice to see some good inteligent, evidence based analysis Roger.
Evening Fran,
I was using my democratic God given right to Free Speech to express my boredom at another article about a PCT trying to improve it's services being hijacked by the story of the Martyr of Hulme.
God Bless because she always had the best interests of the patients at heart. She obviously had no personal agenda of her own. Forgive me for ever doubting her.
As I said, always nice to see some good, intelligent, evidence based analysis instead of old reactionary assumptions. Of course it is correct that the freedom to speak should be protected absolutely. However, it is not God given, a non existent being cannot give anything.
Yet you've classified God as a 'being', yet one that is 'non-existent'. Surely an oxymoron, Fran? Perhaps you mean God doesn't exist any more, at present, thereby implying 'it' did at one point or another, perhaps taking a macrocosmic stance.
Is analytical, evidence-based expression the utopia we should aim for? For example, the intelligence agencies assertion that Iraq had WMDs endangering the UK was, in fact, a load of cobblers.
Either way, please clarify your position on this metaphysical proposition. (Ideally before 4.30pm as I'm about to catch an episode of Come Dine With Me.)
Mr. Manchester...
I don't see the problem with my use of the word 'being' except a pedantic one. It certainly fits this definition........
"Something, such as an object, an idea, or a symbol, that exists, is thought to exist, or is represented as existing".
If you wish substitute 'entity' or any other word you like within context, it won't change the central point anyway.
I don't believe in Utopia because I would be forever disappointed.
As for Iraq, the dossier wasn't based on evidence which sort of proves my point.