The hours go by.

Stewart Fleming, a 37 year old signalman and father of two, was photographed by his wife as he waited for six hours in Medway Maritime Hospital’s A&E department. He is shown clutching a note from his doctor saying that he must be seen immediately. The photo can be seen at the head of this story in the Sun. It has a certain poignancy now, given that during the wait Mr Fleming’s organs failed one by one and he is now dead.

Squander Two writes:

Secondly, this is being reported all over the place, of course, and every report I’ve seen mentions the six-hour wait, what with it being the whole point of the story. Except the BBC’s:

An inquiry is under way into the death of a man after a two-hour delay in him being seen by an A&E unit in Kent.

I’ll print the rest, what with the BBC’s well-established reputation for stealthily editing their reports after criticism without changing the “Page last updated” bit — for lying, in other words.

Squander Two then does so, and adds some considered commentary on how the BBC could possibly have ended up describing a six hour wait as a two hour wait. His remarks are all the more damning in that they strive so hard to be fair.

Perhaps the BBC read it, as there is something rather shamefaced about the follow-up story concerning the statement on the case by the Chief Executive of the Medway NHS Foundation Trust, which does manage to mention the unadjusted times involved.

Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to The hours go by.

  1. Ron Todd says:

    IF there is a 4 hour target waiting time a 6 hour wait could be described as a two hour delay over the target time.

    The BBC like much of the public sector will consider targets more important than people.


  2. Tom says:

    What a silly concept ‘target time’ is.

    Does it mean that even if the doc is ready to see you after 2 hours, then you still have to be kept waiting another 2?

    That sounds absurd, but in Brown’s Britain many absurd things are done in the name of equality.

    “Equal waits for all’ – regardless of social position, income or seriousness of symptoms.

    On a kind of related note:

    has the BBC reported this yet?

    Labour’s boom years were down to luck, not Brown’s economic expertise, says Tony Blair



  3. Sutekh says:

    Ron Todd:
    The BBC like much of the public sector will consider targets more important than people.
    Ron Todd | 02.01.09 – 11:50 am | #
    And who do we have to thank for an NHS that now is obsessed with ludcicrous ‘targets’? Sod the patient, as long as “we don’t breach”?

    Yep, another NuLiebour brainwave…


  4. Martin says:

    Liebour want targets for 2 reasons.

    1. They can spin them to make the NHS look like a half decent organisation instead of the failed piece of shite it is.

    2. Fuckwits like the BBC can spin these statistics as facts just like the BBC lie about crime, the economy and immigration for the Government as well.


  5. JohnW says:

    “four hour target waiting time”? What’s that nonsense about? This was an emergency! The words “four hours” were not what the doctor put on his note for the A&E. Just what part of “immediately” don’t the BBC understand?


  6. Jon says:

    JohnW | 02.01.09 – 6:09 pm |

    You’re quite right, but the mindset of public employees today is meeting targets – common sense is not an option.


  7. It's all too much says:

    I wonder how a BBC editor would feel about waiting four hours plus “two” if they were suffering from a ruptured aortic aneurysm. (fatal in 5 mins) Would “four hours” be a reasonable “target” for a BBC presenter in agony from a smashed pelvis following a RTA after driving under the influence?

    Clearly the BBC follow Zanu policy an narrative on all occasions. never let reality in to illuminate the lies and deceptions