Incoming - H4H etc, coming under fire.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Incoming - H4H etc, coming under fire.
I know that it isn't always possible, and that sometimes, a charity providing agile and flexible solutions helps where a G'ment Ministry can't. But a disproportionate amount of help does seem to be coming from the private sector these days - we don't seem to have any proper diversification.
Lots of care too, is going on a particular segment of injured servicemen and women. However worthy (as are they all) and however large that single sector is, I hope the rifleman who got PTSD in Northen Ireland in 1976 doesn't fall between the cracks. I wonder if the report will also lay down fire on the RBL.
BBC News - Help for Heroes and MoD criticised by injured troops
Lots of care too, is going on a particular segment of injured servicemen and women. However worthy (as are they all) and however large that single sector is, I hope the rifleman who got PTSD in Northen Ireland in 1976 doesn't fall between the cracks. I wonder if the report will also lay down fire on the RBL.
Former Royal Marine Ben McBean, a double amputee and one of Help for Heroes' patrons, said that Help For Heroes and other military charities have been "getting cosy with the MoD".
I applaud all that RBL, single service charities and Regimental charities do, and H4H clearly caught the public imagination. However, we as a nation should be ashamed that even basic care of injured servicemen and women should rely on charity, not the Goverment, which decides to go to war, picking up the fiancial tab. I feel the same about UK air ambulance being largely charity funded.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 59
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This reports is similar to the treatment recorded in SNCO needs help it does seem that once you are out that's it join the queue and wait for help from the NHS. The MoD don't want to know you if you need ongoing treatment.
Even with with Priority treatment for veterans, this is based on clinical need. So if there is someone with the same clinical need as the veteran, the veteran should get treated first.
Any Government should hang it's head in shame when it has to use charity to build facilities that are required to treat current servicemen. To use H4H to build rehabilitation centres on Military bases is an amazing abdication of Government responsibility IMHO.
Harris Tatakis, a former corporal in the Royal Marines, received multiple injuries in an IED blast. He was discharged just over a year ago and tried to get back into his recovery centre in Plymouth after months without treatment, but says he was turned away by the MoD.
Help for Heroes is currently funding a £22m building project on the site.
He said: "I'm on the doorstep of the recovery centre and it's a shut door. Once you're discharged, they're not there for you anymore they're there for the next injured serviceman coming in."
Mr Tatakis ended up having to pay for his own twice-weekly physiotherapy sessions, but said that after a year he could no longer afford it.
Help for Heroes is currently funding a £22m building project on the site.
He said: "I'm on the doorstep of the recovery centre and it's a shut door. Once you're discharged, they're not there for you anymore they're there for the next injured serviceman coming in."
Mr Tatakis ended up having to pay for his own twice-weekly physiotherapy sessions, but said that after a year he could no longer afford it.
Any Government should hang it's head in shame when it has to use charity to build facilities that are required to treat current servicemen. To use H4H to build rehabilitation centres on Military bases is an amazing abdication of Government responsibility IMHO.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope the rifleman who got PTSD in Northen Ireland in 1976 doesn't fall between the cracks.
Note: Brendan Burns was killed in 1988 when a bomb he was transporting exploded prematurely. He was one of two men arrested after the bombing, who were later released due to lack of evidence.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heads-up
The report mentioned in the link is part of tonight's Newsnight program on BBC2 starting 2240.
The report mentioned in the link is part of tonight's Newsnight program on BBC2 starting 2240.
I think there's a danger of one common subject being diluted by too many threads here.
See SNCO needs help thread.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Given medical confidentiality the veteran will not have the information to challenge the priority.
That said, I have been treated sufficiently quickly that I do not doubt I have been seen expeditiously. Even outside my particular issue I was seen and treated within minutes by a senior registrar assisted by a houseman rather than he houseman alone.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just received personally from H4H:
That's good enough for me!
Don't believe everything you read and hear in the media!
Foldie
Help for Heroes
Dear H4H Supporter,
You may have seen the recent BBC news story about ‘Help for Heroes and MoD criticised by injured troops’, which includes a series of interviews with former Servicemen who suggest that Help for Heroes has been misled by the MOD into funding building projects that that are not available to veterans, rather than providing money for individual support.
As you can imagine, we are deeply saddened by the accusations and the misleading nature of the report and are concerned the negative press may escalate into long term damage, preventing us from providing the care we know is so desperately needed for our boys and girls.
We are constantly amazed and humbled by the overwhelming generosity and passion shown by our supporters who want to do their bit to support our wounded. Already today we have been overwhelmed by the messages of support that we have received from many of you and from boys and girls themselves. We understand that some of our supporters may be concerned by what they see in this report and want to reassure you all that we are committed to providing the very best support to the individuals who have given up so much. We will continue to ensure they get this support, not just today but for life.
Although is the responsibility of Government to provide prosthetics, H4H has been a key driver behind the scenes to ensure that the MOD and NHS deliver the best to both the serving injured and to veterans. In certain cases where we feel that support is not fast enough or the requirement is specialist we reserve the right to fund prosthetics.
H4H, together with BLESMA and COBSEO, has led in the area of prosthetics support and was behind the Murrison report. We are now confident that the provision of prosthetics is being correctly supported by Government.
In 2008, H4H identified a need for a national network of Recovery Centres to support both those who are serving and those who subsequently become veterans. We work tirelessly to ensure that this is delivered with speed, to the highest standard and at a competitive price. We believe that the four centres that H4H is creating, together with the three where the Royal British Legion are the principle operators, will give us a world-class support network for our wounded heroes, for life.
We work closely in partnership with the MOD but continue to drive the agenda and challenge the status quo. We are fiercely independent and far from getting our orders from the senior officers, we listen to the wounded themselves and then see how best we can support them. Our relationship with the MOD and Government has at times been lively, but has been instrumental in improving the provision of the support we are able to give now and in future.
The individuals who have chosen to speak out against H4H today state that they have not received the support they required from us. In each of these cases we have provided significant support, some as recently as within the last 9 months. We can only assume that, as the funding is sometimes administered by a third party, these individuals are unaware that the support they have received has come from Help for Heroes.
We are immensely proud of what we are doing at H4H, and are grateful to the generosity of the Great British public who have shown their support and helped us to change the lives of so many incredible individuals. We have committed over £121m worth of support, the largest single contribution in British military history, both directly to individuals and to provide world class facilities that would not otherwise have existed. We have championed the cause for the wounded injured and sick and we will continue to do so.
Thank you for your continued support.
Dear H4H Supporter,
You may have seen the recent BBC news story about ‘Help for Heroes and MoD criticised by injured troops’, which includes a series of interviews with former Servicemen who suggest that Help for Heroes has been misled by the MOD into funding building projects that that are not available to veterans, rather than providing money for individual support.
As you can imagine, we are deeply saddened by the accusations and the misleading nature of the report and are concerned the negative press may escalate into long term damage, preventing us from providing the care we know is so desperately needed for our boys and girls.
We are constantly amazed and humbled by the overwhelming generosity and passion shown by our supporters who want to do their bit to support our wounded. Already today we have been overwhelmed by the messages of support that we have received from many of you and from boys and girls themselves. We understand that some of our supporters may be concerned by what they see in this report and want to reassure you all that we are committed to providing the very best support to the individuals who have given up so much. We will continue to ensure they get this support, not just today but for life.
Although is the responsibility of Government to provide prosthetics, H4H has been a key driver behind the scenes to ensure that the MOD and NHS deliver the best to both the serving injured and to veterans. In certain cases where we feel that support is not fast enough or the requirement is specialist we reserve the right to fund prosthetics.
H4H, together with BLESMA and COBSEO, has led in the area of prosthetics support and was behind the Murrison report. We are now confident that the provision of prosthetics is being correctly supported by Government.
In 2008, H4H identified a need for a national network of Recovery Centres to support both those who are serving and those who subsequently become veterans. We work tirelessly to ensure that this is delivered with speed, to the highest standard and at a competitive price. We believe that the four centres that H4H is creating, together with the three where the Royal British Legion are the principle operators, will give us a world-class support network for our wounded heroes, for life.
We work closely in partnership with the MOD but continue to drive the agenda and challenge the status quo. We are fiercely independent and far from getting our orders from the senior officers, we listen to the wounded themselves and then see how best we can support them. Our relationship with the MOD and Government has at times been lively, but has been instrumental in improving the provision of the support we are able to give now and in future.
The individuals who have chosen to speak out against H4H today state that they have not received the support they required from us. In each of these cases we have provided significant support, some as recently as within the last 9 months. We can only assume that, as the funding is sometimes administered by a third party, these individuals are unaware that the support they have received has come from Help for Heroes.
We are immensely proud of what we are doing at H4H, and are grateful to the generosity of the Great British public who have shown their support and helped us to change the lives of so many incredible individuals. We have committed over £121m worth of support, the largest single contribution in British military history, both directly to individuals and to provide world class facilities that would not otherwise have existed. We have championed the cause for the wounded injured and sick and we will continue to do so.
Thank you for your continued support.
Don't believe everything you read and hear in the media!
Foldie
...and for me, Foldie. But I do still agree with earlier posters that the Government and the MoD appear to be doing way too little to live up to their moral commitment to wounded vets and active service people. It's easy for the media to be critical of H4H and to overlook all the excellent work they have done and continue to do.
Courtney
Courtney
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there is a bit of generic problem with a lot of charities that hey tend to spend money on buildings rather than people - look at the RNLI College for example
The RNLI College - home of RNLI training
I 'm sure something a bit smaller would have done just as well
The RNLI College - home of RNLI training
I 'm sure something a bit smaller would have done just as well
foldie & Courtney, I agree. A well-balanced response which has gone to all H4H supporters.
HeathrowHarry, actually I think the RNLI college is actually a smart piece of marketing. Its size and location mean that room occupancy rates are high, RNLI volunteers are allowed a discount and an element of the profits go to RNLI funds. There is room for both RNLI training and other activites, such as conferences etc. Plus it must be a fast-appreciating asset to have on the books!
HeathrowHarry, actually I think the RNLI college is actually a smart piece of marketing. Its size and location mean that room occupancy rates are high, RNLI volunteers are allowed a discount and an element of the profits go to RNLI funds. There is room for both RNLI training and other activites, such as conferences etc. Plus it must be a fast-appreciating asset to have on the books!
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Plus it must be a fast-appreciating asset to have on the books!
The RNLI College was necessary to enable the Institution to train adequately their crews to operate in an increasingly technical environment. Letting out rooms when not used by trainees is what universities due in vacation time and makes commercial sense, and is also very good marketing.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
None of the Charities appear to assist those retired veterans who now reside overseas (Non EU countries), nor does NHS. I know that this is a small group, but ZERO assistance to this small group is poor all the same.
FACILITIES for the troops is the issue here.
Buildings and medical etc personnel to staff them were previously provided by Military Hospitals until they were done away with (Politicians).
There is a Military Covenant that every service person ought to expect to provide a safety net should something horrible happen, be it appendicitis or IED.
The RBL and H4H are competing and that's silly, why have two sets of admin costs to provide essentially identical provisions? Somewhere a session of head knocking together needs to happen.
H4H are media savvy; the RBL are acting like dinosaurs. FFS can't you guys sort it out and merge the best of each and dump the rest?
I'm an RBL supporter but I have to admit we're having rings run round by H4H. That's the management we need, with the RBL core behind, our boys and girls should get the treatment they deserve.
The RBL seems to be regarded as an organisation helping WW2 veterans, and H4H the guys hurt now.... That is so wrong, so please let's get it sorted.
IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE, just dump the egos and help the poor sods.
Buildings and medical etc personnel to staff them were previously provided by Military Hospitals until they were done away with (Politicians).
There is a Military Covenant that every service person ought to expect to provide a safety net should something horrible happen, be it appendicitis or IED.
The RBL and H4H are competing and that's silly, why have two sets of admin costs to provide essentially identical provisions? Somewhere a session of head knocking together needs to happen.
H4H are media savvy; the RBL are acting like dinosaurs. FFS can't you guys sort it out and merge the best of each and dump the rest?
I'm an RBL supporter but I have to admit we're having rings run round by H4H. That's the management we need, with the RBL core behind, our boys and girls should get the treatment they deserve.
The RBL seems to be regarded as an organisation helping WW2 veterans, and H4H the guys hurt now.... That is so wrong, so please let's get it sorted.
IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE, just dump the egos and help the poor sods.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,073
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
I still cannot fathom why we do not at least have one military hospital that serves veterans too, it would make a lot of sense to have a specialist centre for the types of trauma that military casualties tend to have and could always take on NHS patients to take up any slack.. When you think what we Have squandered in the last coupe of decades for the short term savings.. Wegberg.. Aldershot... Wroughton etc.
I must admit if I was still in the Services and was wounded, the first thing I would ask for as I was been shipped home would be transfer papers to the US military.. At least they still have those facilities.
I must admit if I was still in the Services and was wounded, the first thing I would ask for as I was been shipped home would be transfer papers to the US military.. At least they still have those facilities.
Last edited by NutLoose; 10th Aug 2012 at 00:15.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
The problem seems to be, more succinctly; that serving personnel are still being cared for. However, once dismissed from the service and still needing specialist care; veterans are being denied care from the military establishment as if they have never served!
H4H seem to accept this also, leaving the veterans in limbo, with poor, indeed inadaquate NHS cover. I'm sure that those giving to Help for heroes intended that they should be helped whether still serving or not! Also large sums of charity money is being spent on building infrastucture that should have been paid for by MOD. Leaving H4H to pay for extraneous costs such as specialist prosthesis etc.
This is the crux of the matter that needs sorting out.
H4H seem to accept this also, leaving the veterans in limbo, with poor, indeed inadaquate NHS cover. I'm sure that those giving to Help for heroes intended that they should be helped whether still serving or not! Also large sums of charity money is being spent on building infrastucture that should have been paid for by MOD. Leaving H4H to pay for extraneous costs such as specialist prosthesis etc.
This is the crux of the matter that needs sorting out.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
As I drove home from work at 5.30 I listed to an R4 news piece duscussing how S Devon's NHS trust had saved money and reduced hospital admissions by centreing the care round the patient, not round the system. NHS and social services budgets are now spent together.
The only difference between a wounded service person and a wounded veteran is the name of their employer. The care needs to be patient-centred, not system-driven.
Time for some heads to be banged together. It's not hard.
The only difference between a wounded service person and a wounded veteran is the name of their employer. The care needs to be patient-centred, not system-driven.
Time for some heads to be banged together. It's not hard.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that H4H is suffering a grave injustice here.
H4H is a charity. As a charity H4H are allowed to do what they wish to, within reason of course.
If someone feels that they are not receiving the necessary medical treatment then they can not go and blame H4H. They may apportion blame to their local NHS trust or to the government, but most definitely not to a charity.
H4H does an absolutlely, bloody, wonderful job, along with all those volunteers who assist. For H4H to be able to assist as many persons as possible an infrastructure needs to be in place; an infrastructure that is going to be required for many years in to the future. This is important, as both this government, and the last government abrogated their responsibilities to the armed forces.
H4H is also a relatively young charity. Where are the criticisms of the RBL or SSAFFA or the armed forces.
To tell you the truth I am outraged and livid at such criticisms levied against H4H. In my opinion the persons doing so are scum (perhaps a bit harsh, as they will be desperate for treatment). The BBC are even worse.
H4H is a charity. As a charity H4H are allowed to do what they wish to, within reason of course.
If someone feels that they are not receiving the necessary medical treatment then they can not go and blame H4H. They may apportion blame to their local NHS trust or to the government, but most definitely not to a charity.
H4H does an absolutlely, bloody, wonderful job, along with all those volunteers who assist. For H4H to be able to assist as many persons as possible an infrastructure needs to be in place; an infrastructure that is going to be required for many years in to the future. This is important, as both this government, and the last government abrogated their responsibilities to the armed forces.
H4H is also a relatively young charity. Where are the criticisms of the RBL or SSAFFA or the armed forces.
To tell you the truth I am outraged and livid at such criticisms levied against H4H. In my opinion the persons doing so are scum (perhaps a bit harsh, as they will be desperate for treatment). The BBC are even worse.
Last edited by hval; 10th Aug 2012 at 06:37.