Overview
The complainant was concerned that, on several occasions in October 2004, a hospital failed to admit him as an in-patient or to give him appropriate medical treatment.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are:
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman has no recommendations.
Overview
The complainant raised concerns about a consultant surgeon's decision not to perform the operation which he had intended to do and about staff attitudes.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are that:
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman recommends that:
The Board have accepted the recommendations and have taken steps to action them.
Overview
Mr and Mrs C complained that Mrs C's GP should have referred her to a specialist earlier. Her cancer would then have been identified earlier and her quality of life might have been better.
Specific complaint and conclusion
The complaint which has been investigated is that Mrs C experienced undue delay in referral to a specialist (not upheld).
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.
Overview
The complainant raised concerns that her mother should not have been given sedatives, that doctors should have diagnosed a stroke earlier than they did, that there were no nursing observations one night and that the clinical records were poor.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are:
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman has no recommendations.
Overview
Mr and Mrs C raised a complaint on behalf of their son, Mr A, about the failure of Grampian NHS Board (the Board) to provide him with timely orthodontic treatment. Mr and Mrs C complained that this delay resulted in their having to remortgage their home to pay for private treatment.
Specific complaint and conclusion
The complaint which has been investigated is that the Board failed to provide Mr A with timely orthodontic treatment (upheld).
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman recommends that the Board:
The Board have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.
Overview
The complainant raised concerns that Lothian NHS Board (the Board) refused to carry out a reversal of his vasectomy.
Specific complaint and conclusion
The complaint which has been investigated is that the Board refused to carry out a reversal of Mr C’s vasectomy (not upheld).
Redress and recommendation
The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.
The complainant was unhappy at the length of time it took a hospital to inform her late husband's GP of his death. She was further aggrieved that the hospital sent, some months later, an appointment card for her late husband.
The complainant's father died in August 2004. She was concerned that his cancer had not been diagnosed during a hospital admission in April 2004. She also raised a number of concerns about the care provided during his stay in August 2004; that he had been left dirty, his fluid intake was not monitored and he was thirsty and his sanitary needs were not adequately dealt with. She was also aggrieved that he was told he had cancer in a public ward and without a member of his family present.
The complaint from Mr C concerned a document produced by a social worker recording a discussion with a general practitioner (GP) relating to the complainant's son (child A).
The complainant considered that his care at a mental health and learning disabilities service (the Unit) in August 2005 was poor, did not meet his needs and put him at increased risk of suicide because staff ignored his suicidal feelings.