Roger Mexico Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 Cope's interview with Manx Radio makes the situation a bit clearer, but also has some worrying aspects: https://www.manxradio.com/podcasts/manx-newscast/episode/manx-care-ceo-discusses-data-breach/ She doesn't make it clear if there was information missing from patient files (which might affect care) or if this was just duplicated. And she seems happy that systems were in place at the time, but if they were, they clearly failed to operate properly. Vague urgings to staff to behave better don't really seem a solution. Similarly the (Acting) Information Commissioner seems happy not even to investigate just how fallible the systems are or were. It's the attitude that's the problem here. It's obvious that the only reason that this has come out now is that they are about to send out letters to the people affected (as they are legally obliged to do) and know that the stuff is going to become public whatever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 Cope: "The incident was not investigated by the ICO". The only investigation was by the organisation, and the conclusion was that the organisation is AOK. It seems to me that an independent investigation would be preferable. Publishing a redacted report would be good, too. Learn from others mistakes, and so on. [Some years ago an ex-gov. person told me that prior to his final departure he had loaded data onto a flash drive, stuck it into his pocket and walked out of the building. This kind of thing is difficult to monitor] [You also might wonder if an organisation that needs to hire Change Coaches is competent to investigate itself] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 59 minutes ago, WTF said: so is this sarcasm upon sarcasm which is what i assumed babydoc was aiming for. No. I assumed Babydoc had misread and thought it was all March dates, which would have been okish. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 1 hour ago, Gladys said: Possibly a district nurse who held on to some some papers/notes from their rounds? It is not clear that it is full patient records. Before community/district nurses had the use of tablets or laptops they would have had to carry some sort of paper records around with them during the day and would quite possibly keep some at home. I doubt they'd go to base every morning to pick up whatever records they needed for that day, and I equally doubt those records would be returned to base at the end of the day. Not sure if community nurses in the IoM would have had laptops from 2000 - 2014? (Of course, whatever the reason, they should have been returned at the very least on leaving...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinderella Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: It won't apply here though. According to the press release, this relates to "patients seen between 2000 and 2014". I suspect an ex-employee has moved or died and a load of old stuff been found. What's interesting here is how poorly communicated all this has been - even though it's clear that a lot of extra information is widely known. As well as contacting individuals affected, there needs to be a better explanation of what happened and whether patient care could have been affected. Were the records found duplicate information or was information missing from files which could have affected care, for example. No one would blame current management for the data breach (unless there's evidence they knew earlier and did nothing) but the way the response has been the usual "Everything is fine, nothing to see here" is depressing. It might be acceptable to be this tight-lipped before the whole thing was investigated, but they've clearly had the time to do this. An example of nothing learnt … Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinderella Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 IoM authorities have a sad failure to realise that transparency is always better than secrecy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 Well, this morning I had a sneak preview of the ground floor public areas of Summerhill View. There’s parking for 50+ cars, three or 4 mini bus spaces, EV charging, but only two designated access spaces, which seemed few when you consider purpose of building and the fact many visitors will be older. It seems to include a clinic area and day care/community/social activity areas. Its nice. The buildings are round a garden courtyard and the effect of the design is that it looks like a group of Manx houses and cottages. I was there for my Covid booster. Dose 9. 3 primaries and 6 boosters. It was over 75’s and clinically vulnerable. They’ve only just started up there. Was a bit muddled. I had mine brought forward as I’m off Island for a few weeks. The vaccinator couldn’t get her head round that and called a supervisor because she thought I might be queue jumping ( despite invite, appointment and check in procedures ). She had to have it explained that in remission from Leukaemia put me in the haematologically compromised/vulnerable category. I was queue jumping, but not back until TT and I’ve got a couple weeks police court & duty advocate duties over TT. They don’t anticipate delivering beyond then. So was now or never. 111 were brilliant about offering me a slot. Didn’t want side effects if I was covering police station advice and courts. As it happens, so far, nothing. I had to park at far side of car park. Both access spaces full. Lots of older people there for boosters having to do same with chairs, walkers. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 1 hour ago, John Wright said: Well, this morning I had a sneak preview of the ground floor public areas of Summerhill View. There’s parking for 50+ cars, three or 4 mini bus spaces, EV charging, but only two designated access spaces, which seemed few when you consider purpose of building and the fact many visitors will be older. It seems to include a clinic area and day care/community/social activity areas. Its nice. The buildings are round a garden courtyard and the effect of the design is that it looks like a group of Manx houses and cottages. I was there for my Covid booster. Dose 9. 3 primaries and 6 boosters. It was over 75’s and clinically vulnerable. They’ve only just started up there. Was a bit muddled. I had mine brought forward as I’m off Island for a few weeks. The vaccinator couldn’t get her head round that and called a supervisor because she thought I might be queue jumping ( despite invite, appointment and check in procedures ). She had to have it explained that in remission from Leukaemia put me in the haematologically compromised/vulnerable category. I was queue jumping, but not back until TT and I’ve got a couple weeks police court & duty advocate duties over TT. They don’t anticipate delivering beyond then. So was now or never. 111 were brilliant about offering me a slot. Didn’t want side effects if I was covering police station advice and courts. As it happens, so far, nothing. I had to park at far side of car park. Both access spaces full. Lots of older people there for boosters having to do same with chairs, walkers. Enjoyed this, had the feel of a good Rob Callister blog post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 6 minutes ago, Mercenary said: Enjoyed this, had the feel of a good Rob Callister blog post Except I didn’t have brekkie, or a crap, or talk about Ellen. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 1 minute ago, John Wright said: Except I didn’t have brekkie, or a crap, or talk about Ellen. No work in the garden? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 Just now, Gladys said: No work in the garden? Nothing to compost 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeCurious Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/data-breach-an-isolated-incident-says-manx-care/ Chief Executive Teresa Cope says it's taken a significant amount of time to identify who was affected: Bloody hell how bad are the patient records they can't even tell who they belong to? Was this ex-employee making paper mache models out of them or shredding them for hamster bedding? Or was it the GP/consultants bad handwriting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 Today’s nonsense from IOMG via the NPM, is the re advertising for the position of Director of Public Health, previously held by Henrietta Ewart. Was this post actually filled, or is it a poisoned chalice, and nobody wants to apply, least of all relocate to the island? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 22 minutes ago, 2112 said: Was this post actually filled, From the article on Manx Radio's website, which I think you're referring to - "Since the departure of Dr Henrietta Ewart in May 2022, the role has only been filled on an interim basis by Professor Hugo Van Woerden" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 51 minutes ago, Jarndyce said: From the article on Manx Radio's website, which I think you're referring to - "Since the departure of Dr Henrietta Ewart in May 2022, the role has only been filled on an interim basis by Professor Hugo Van Woerden" I was asking whether IOMG actually made the effort to recruit a new permanent Director? Did anyone apply? Was anyone offered the job, and if so why are they not in post? I’m sure the Professor can do a good job etc, and if so, why can’t he do the job on a permanent basis? IOMGs track record on recruitment is hardly glowing, and on a position which is in the upper eschelons of the civil service, the recruitment needs to be done properly. Consider the cost of recruitment, even if it is being conducted by a recruitment agency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.