Eye hospital in guide dog row

Amanda Crook

September 12, 2008

| Submit Comments | Comments (12) | Previous | Next

Mark Brierley with Karen Sproston and his guide dog

A BLIND man says he was asked to leave an eye hospital because his guide dog wasn't welcome.

Mark Brierley, 27, went to Manchester Royal Eye Hospital with his partner Karen Sproston who was having an operation to remove an implant from her eye.

When the couple arrived they were not allowed on the ward because of Mark's dog, Usher.

They were put into a discharge area until Karen was taken to theatre and then Mark, from Withington, was asked to leave and go back later.

When he said he couldn't go because he didn't know the area, staff said it wasn't nice for other people to have a dog around and they took him to wait in the outpatients area, which was closed for the weekend.

Mark says he didn't know where he was and was forced to wait until a doctor came to find him.

A hospital spokesman says staff checked on him regularly.

Karen, a solicitor, plans to make a legal claim.

A spokesman for the hospital apologised for any distress caused but said staff were following trust infection control policy.

Mark, a solicitor, said: "I am disgusted that staff seemed totally unused to dealing with a visually impaired person, especially as this is the regional eye hospital, it is ridiculous. When Karen went into theatre they asked me to leave and I was stunned."

Karen who set up her own firm of solicitors, Sprostons in Withington, five years ago now plans to bring a claim against the hospital.

She said: "I was fuming when I found out what had gone on while I was in theatre. It's bad enough that anyone treats anyone with such disdain and lack of respect, and if they'd effectively segregated anyone else into a deserted corridor on the basis of race, religion or sexuality there would be an uproar.

"For this to all have happened in an eye hospital beggars belief."

A spokeswoman for Guide Dogs for the Blind Association said: "Guide dogs are allowed to accompany their owners in any part of a hospital, as they are an essential mobility aid, where there is not the risk of infection."

A spokesman for the eye hospital, who said their policy regarding guide dogs was developed with consultation with the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association, said: "Our understanding is that the staff members involved acted in accordance with trust policy."

| Submit Comments | Comments (12) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 12 and replies | View All

TracyR, Manchester (12/09/2008 at 12:29)

It was awful what happened to this guy, but an awkward few hours doesn't justify a claim.
Fight to change the system, not for compensation.
It just keeps getting worse.

lebist, Blackley (12/09/2008 at 12:39)

Two solicitors didn't have enough common sense between them to realise their dog wouldn't be allowed on a hospital ward and are now planning a compensation claim.Could they not have left the dog at home and asked a family member or friend to go with them or were they willing to treat the staff and other patients with disdain and lack of respect to secure their "rights".

Peter TT, Manchester (12/09/2008 at 16:27)

These comments are disgusting. This is half the problem. People just don't care about minorities. Disabled people are just as entitled to do exactly the same as anyone else. This guy's dog was just not any dog, but a highly trained assistance dog, and a highly intelligent mobility aid. Not only that, but such dogs are allowed by law to go into any part of a hospital, as per the comment from a guide dogs spokes person. At the end of the day, why should this guy have asked a family member or a friend to accompany him. He wants to be just as independent as you and me. The dog is there to enable him to do that, and the way in which the hospital's staff dealt with the situation was disgusting. They clearly discriminated. If someone who was gay, or black skinned was asked to leave, there would be hell to pay. As for your comments Lebist, you obviously have no idea how hard it is to have a disability. I'm very close to a person whose blind, and everyday is a challenge. After all this guy has qualified as a solicitor, and it is hard to do that in the first place. So just think about what you've said!

Oasis Blues, Manchester (12/09/2008 at 16:35)

I think its a real shame that this could happen in today's world. At the end of the day, guide dogs are not just any dog, they are highly trained mobility aids. They are allowed in many places ordinary dogs are not by law. All I will say is that this guy just obviously wanted to be treated in the same way that anyone else would be. The dog should just really be treated as an extention of a blind person. After all, the dog provides independence, something that is taken for granted by most people. But the dog provides that, and it is invaluable.

Warren01, Manchester (12/09/2008 at 17:02)

Saying they didn't have 'common sense' is just wrong - any visually impaired person has the right to use a guide dog in a hospital. It's not a pet but an intrinsic part of the person's life that allows them to go about their daily business - to me this is a basic right that we all have. Why should a blind person have to rely on family and friends when they can cope perfectly well themselves when not faced with ignorance or mis-understanding.

I think anyone who faces discrimination has the right to respond in anyway they feel appropriate so I wish them all the luck!

lebist, Blackley (13/09/2008 at 02:46)

The statement by the guide dog representative says guide dogs should be allowed in any part of a hospital where there is not a risk of infection.I would suggest that any part of a hospital should be protected from the risk of infection and in particular the wards and that allowing any dog in,be it a guide dog,guard dog or pet dog,no matter how highly trained,greatly increases that risk.

Mad Welsh Scotsman, Cadishead (13/09/2008 at 17:57)

I know it's a guide dog but even guide dogs lick their own a***. can you imagine it then spreading germs round the hospital licking everything else in sight, when everyones already kicking off about dirty hospitals. I think the staff could have dealt with this gentleman more sympathetically though. Having said that, there are some people I wouldn't let in hospitals due to personal hygiene

MrPaul, Manchester (14/09/2008 at 18:16)

Yet another example of people suing our NHS because of so called 'discrimination'. Taking away valuable funds that could be used to treat other, less fortunate people.

I am not saying that the hospital reacted in a fair way, the matter could have been dealt with in a much more appropriate manner, however, any animal (including humans here) poses an infection control risk when entering a hospital and therefore access needs to be limited. We can use alcogel on our hands when on a ward helping to minimise the risk for us, but putting that on the dogs paws would probably be seen as animal cruelty.

Im sorry, but for two obviously educated people not to realise this is rediculous. Yet another example of this countrys blame culture. Why not try to bring about change in a way that will make it better for all of us instead of trying to strip the NHS of even more cash, especially a resource as unique and valuable as Manchester's Eye Hospital.

lebist, Blackley (15/09/2008 at 13:47)

What were the hospital staff supposed to do in the situation this couple put them in?They asked him if he could come back later.When this wasn't deemed possible they then found somewhere away from other patients to wait and even popped in occasionally to check he was OK.The problem wasn't him,(I'm sure the staff at the eye hospital are well used to dealing with visually impaired people)the problem was his dog.The staff were in a no win situation.If they allowed Mark and his dog free access they would have been endangering other patients and doing what they could and did they are now being threatened with litigation.Surely with a disability like this you have to accept that 100%independence is an impossible goal and come to terms with it as even able bodied people occasionally need,and accept,a helping hand.

Oasis Blues, Manchester (15/09/2008 at 14:52)

Lebist, you obviously have no consideration for disabled people and their rights. It infuriates me to see and hear how able bodied people just brush disabled people under the carpet as if they are something that can be trodden on, and forgotten about. Well, let me tell you something ... Disabled people have just as much right to do the same as everybody else. In certain situations they need extra assistance. In terms of mobility, a blind person needs a mobility aid, and the best form of this is the guide dog. Why the hell should somebody who is blind have to ask friends or family for help to get to places. The guide dog gives amazing independence to blind people. Independence that is very often taken for granted by ignorant people, who have no interest in the plight of others. Guide dogs are well trained, not only in guiding a blind person, but also in social situations. They are well behaved animals, who do their jobs and then wait quietly whilst their owner is doing whatever they need to do. Let me ask you something. If this guy's partner had been in hospital for a couple of weeks, what would he have done to go in every night. The dog would let him do that. Anyway, I don't know what we are arguing about at the end of the day, because ultimately this action is against the law. Guide dogs are allowed by law to go into hospitals to assist their owners. So the action by the staff is nothing but clear discrimination, and it is absolutely disgusting. Lebist, just please give some consideration to disabled people and the difficulties they face everyday. Why don't you close your eyes for a bit, and see how you like it.

lebist, Blackley (15/09/2008 at 17:22)

Oasis Blue you appear to be agreeing with me to some extent when you say "in certain situations they need extra assistance"As good as guide dogs undoubtedly are there must be limitations as to what they can or should be allowed to do and this is such a situation.I don't see how the law would get around the phrase"where there is not a risk of infection"in allowing a dog into the wards but at the risk being accused of flippancy as well as uncaring and heartless might I suggest something like a sheep dip at the entrance of every hospital just in case it happens again.

Pippa, Manchester (15/09/2008 at 22:15)

I don't think a legal claim for compensation is in order here, but they should attempt to clarify the law with regards to hospitals. I understand the need for guide dogs/hearing dogs etc.,. but can quite clarly see the danger of spreading infections. However, as a previous poster has said, a lot of human visitors leave a lot to be desired with their hygiene and that also should be addressed.

()

Report

News