|
Christchurch Hospital League of Friends Macmillan Unit |
Christchurch Hospital
Christchurch Hospital websiteFT Focus Issue 2 2016FT Focus Issue 1 2016FT Focus Issue 3 2015FT Focus Issue 2 2015FT Focus Issue 1 2015FT Focus Issue 4 2014Christchurch Hospital Construction progress reports:-
Securing services at Christchurch - Fact sheet June 2014 Feb/Mar 2014 Jan/Feb 2014 Response from the Hospital Trust to questions raised by a local Hospital TrusteeThe Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust resubmits plans - Jan 2013Statement from The Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust - Jan 2013 Meeting of ACRA with representatives of Christchurch Hospital 3rd October 2012 Letter to WCRA from Sue Bungey, Deputy Chair of Governors and Public Governor for Christchurch and Dorset County - July 2012 Christchurch Hospital News - Securing local health services in Christchurch The Christchurch Hospital consultation has now closed www.rbch.nhs.uk 29/04/11 - Commentary on the Draft Annual Plan 2011/12 The Future of Christchurch Hospital March-April 2011 WCRA have attended a number of meetings associated with this consultation. As part of the consultative process two options have been put forward by the Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (The Trust). Option One is for all current outpatient services to remain at Christchurch. This is the option that we strongly support. As at the 5th April 2011 the Trust had received over 1,700 voting slips in favour of this option against 30 for Option Two Option Two is for all current services to move to Bournemouth except blood testing. The remainder of the site would become an old people’s village including assisted living homes and possibly key worker or other housing. What residents don’t want is yet another McCarthy and Stone style development on the site Both options include welcome proposals for a GP practice (supported by The Grove surgery), a pharmacy and NHS dental care (a new serviced has already opened near the Howard centre) on site. Under Option Two the future of the Macmillan Unit is uncertain. Again, there is in our experience a strong majority view that it should be retained at Christchurch. Neil Williams, fund raiser for the Macmillan Trust, supports this view as do local GP practices. In our view, and the view of others, any suggestion that palliative care should be turned into a home-delivered service should be strongly resisted. The Trust claims that the two options will have an identical impact upon patient care and Trust finances. It has given public assurances that they do not wish to sell the Christchurch site where they will retain the existing buildings and will not build upon the grounds at the front of the site. The Trust believes that parking problems at Bournemouth can be ameliorated (many people have complained not just about the shortage of space but also about the current level of charging) It is known that large hospitals are being put under pressure to specialise (maternity at Poole for example). The potential impact of that upon these plans is not entirely clear. A
number of changes that are
imminent are not part of this consultation. The stroke rehabilitation unit is moving to Bournemouth in autumn 2011 but with a 33% reduced capacity of 38 beds as against the current 56 beds Orthopaedic rehabilitation will become a home-delivered service at a date to be determined. Where a patient’s domestic situation is not suitable for such course of action the patient will be accommodated at either St Leonards Hospital or the Broadwater residential support centre at Tuckton. At every meeting that we attended there was a strong public feeling (including local GP practices) that home based treatment is not satisfactory and the current facility at Christchurch should remain. Many people believe such home based care will prove more expensive to run and will be affected by funding issues Janet Robson April 2011 TOP OF PAGE |