Does anyone else feel that Mary Harney should resign immediately?

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

Fair enough, but surely the person who is supposed to be setting IMO examples of good health should themselves at least try to look healthy and if not, then at least explain why they are not at all healthy.

Who says she's supposed to be setting an example? Her job is to set and oversee the implementation of health policy, not to act as a role model.

walshb wrote: »

She is the head of the health department and obesity is a massive problem in our society and yet the head of the department is chronically obese and that's why I think she should explain her position. She is NOT sending out a good message...

Again with the messages. I reiterate the question: who do you think is listening to, let alone acting on, these subliminal messages?

sovtek

walshb wrote: »

Fair enough, but surely the person who is supposed to be setting IMO examples of good health should themselves at least try to look healthy and if not, then at least explain why they are not at all healthy. She is the head of the health department and obesity is a massive problem in our society and yet the head of the department is chronically obese and that's why I think she should explain her position. She is NOT sending out a good message...

I think it's ironic but at the same time not much of a concern TBH. I think her actions speak louder than anything else.

walshb

oscarBravo wrote: »

Who says she's supposed to be setting an example? Her job is to set and oversee the implementation of health policy, not to act as a role . Again with the messages. I reiterate the question: who do you think is listening to, let alone acting on, these subliminal messages?

All I am saying is that is not very encouraging to see your HEALTH minister herself, suffering badly with health problems (obesity), and to some and IMO, many people, she is sending out a message that 'ah well sure I'm chronically obese too and I'm the y health minister, don't worry about it'....

Whether you like it or NOT, there are many impressionable people in our society and many stupid people. So don't try and tell me that nobody is looking at or listening to Harney, and her appearance is important as the acting health minister....

sovtek

walshb wrote: »

All I am saying is that is not very encouraging to see your HEALTH minister herself, suffering badly with health problems (obesity), and to some and IMO, many people, she is sending out a message that 'ah well sure I'm chronically obese too and I'm the y health minister, don't worry about it'....

Whether you like it or NOT, there are many impressionable people in our society and many stupid people. So don't try and tell me that nobody is looking at or listening to Harney, and her appearance is important as the acting health minister....

I feel sorry for anyone that wants to model themselves after Harney.

Mr.Micro

I saw a bit of Oireachtas report last night ( I am sad I know,I am trying to cut down) and the Government appears to be distancing itself from the false results for breast cancers ,saying in effect the machinery used is not faulty .Suggesting then I assume human error is to blame .Weasel words then to pin it on an individual or scapegoat.

Lads maybe Harney enjoys being fat or maybe she has a glandular condition.
Making an issue of that is barrell scraping tbh and pretty low.

As for human error,I still don't see how an incompetence by a medical person is a ministers fault.
But lets not judge anything/anyone untill the independent report comes out.
That said, the fact that the same machinery was used for the retest but with different personell tells it's own tale as to the reliability of the equipment from what I can see.

sovtek

Tristrame wrote: »

As for human error,I still don't see how an incompetence by a medical person is a ministers fault.
But lets not judge anything/anyone untill the independent report comes out.
That said, the fact that the same machinery was used for the retest but with different personell tells it's own tale as to the reliability of the equipment from what I can see.

You can't say someone is incompetent if the equipment they have to work with is out of date technology. X-ray is highly subjective. Digital imaging is far superior to x-ray and if you are warned that you are opening yourself up to litigation and false positives/negatives and you don't adhere to that then the incompetence is your own...ie Harney/Drumm.
The doctors could not decide for sure if I had a hairline fracture in both my elbows a year or so ago so they decided to be safe and treat it like so.

walshb

Tristrame wrote: »

Lads maybe Harney enjoys being fat or maybe she has a glandular condition.
Making an issue of that is barrell scraping tbh and pretty low.

As for human error,I still don't see how an incompetence by a medical person is a ministers fault.
But lets not judge anything/anyone untill the independent report comes out.
That said, the fact that the same machinery was used for the retest but with different personell tells it's own tale as to the reliability of the equipment from what I can see.

Like I said when I first posted, I don't intend on offending and certainly I don't intend on scraping a barrel. I do feel however that she is responsible for certain standards in office, as are all ministers and persons in public life.
So if the transport minister was convicted of numerous traffic offences, should we not expect him/her to be answerable and accountable??

I personally feel that Harney as such a high profile minister in such a key post should at least explain her obesity or condition. Let the people know why she as the face and head of the health department is chronically obese. Then we can make our minds up.

Does she as minister endure the same disgraceful waiting lists and agony that other chronically obese people have to endure in order to see specialists concerning their problems.

Is she on such waiting lists or does she as minister get to bypass what many in her condition cannot??

She should explain and I am not trying to sound mean or insulting.

Obesity is a serious issue in Ireland and needs serious tackling...

sovtek

walshb wrote: »

So if the transport minister was convicted of numerous traffic offences, should we not expect him/her to be answerable and accountable??

It's not illegal to be obese.

sovtek

sovtek wrote: »

You can't say someone is incompetent if the equipment they have to work with is out of date technology. X-ray is highly subjective. Digital imaging is far superior to x-ray and if you are warned that you are opening yourself up to litigation and false positives/negatives and you don't adhere to that then the incompetence is your own...ie Harney/Drumm.

So if the equipment is in perfect working order,then whats the difference between what it does today and 10 years ago ?
If that question was brought before a judge,I wouldn't like to be depending on the defence of it being the equipments fault if I was a medical practicioner.

walshb wrote:

I personally feel that Harney as such a high profile minister in such a key post should at least explain her obesity or condition. Let the people know why she as the face and head of the health department is chronically obese. Then we can make our minds up.

I've read a lot of daft things on boards but that has to be up there with the daftest tbh.

sovtek

Tristrame wrote: »

So if the equipment is in perfect working order,then whats the difference between what it does today and 10 years ago ?
If that question was brought before a judge,I wouldn't like to be depending on the defence of it being the equipments fault if I was a medical practicioner.

I've read a lot of daft things on boards but that has to be up there with the daftest tbh.

Ask the radiology department. They are the ones who warned the HSE this would happen.
If an expert in radiology testified that older out of date technology would be more likely to produce bad results then I would be very comfortable as a medical practitioner that the judge would rule in my favor.

bonkey

walshb wrote: »

So if the transport minister was convicted of numerous traffic offences, should we not expect him/her to be answerable and accountable??

Yes, but the appropriate analagy here would be more asking if the transport minister should be reprimanded because some individuals down through the transport ministry hierarchy somewhere picked up some traffic offences.

I personally feel that Harney as such a high profile minister in such a key post should at least explain her obesity or condition. Let the people know why she as the face and head of the health department is chronically obese. Then we can make our minds up.

Its none of the public's concern, to be honest. You can argue that she's not the ideal role-model to represent Health, but the job isn't about being a role-model.

Does she as minister endure the same disgraceful waiting lists and agony that other chronically obese people have to endure in order to see specialists concerning their problems.

Is she on such waiting lists or does she as minister get to bypass what many in her condition cannot??

Does she avail of public health care, and thus be subject to these restrictions in the first place?

Or are you going to take a "guilty until proven innocent" approach and assume that its her responsibility to reassure you that nothing untoward is going on?

She should explain and I am not trying to sound mean or insulting.

No, she most certainly should not explain. Public officials are not accountable to answer every question that someone or other thinks they should answer.

Obesity is a serious issue in Ireland and needs serious tackling...

Then criticise Hearney for not tackling it, or for not giving it a high-enough priority.

Of course, if Hearney did give it top priority, we'd no doubt have some punter in here complaining that she was cherry-picking what to give priority to based on personal rather than professional grounds.

Damned if you do....damned if you don't.

walshb

Tristrame wrote: »

So if the equipment is in perfect working order,then whats the difference between what it does today and 10 years ago ?
If that question was brought before a judge,I wouldn't like to be depending on the defence of it being the equipments fault if I was a medical practicioner.

I've read a lot of daft things on boards but that has to be up there with the daftest tbh.

You haven't read much then my friend. It's actually funny.
It's a bit like a big fat obese person in a gymnasium in charge of training and lecturing
the people there on how to get fit. It's laughable to be honest....

Some might not see the comparison, but I do...

Bottom line is that Harney is NOT the person physically or ministerially..

Mr.Micro

To be fair I dont think MH being obese means her intellect is impaired.Physically she might not be as fit as your average person but she may be. On another note there are apparently 713 middle management people in the HSE whose role is vague and the people who pay them do not even know what they do( probably County Councillors on the gravy train ).MH should start there to save money and get a proper and efficient service going.

walshb

Mr.Micro wrote: »

To be fair I dont think MH being obese means her intellect is impaired.Physically she might not be as fit as your average person but she may be. On another note there are apparently 713 middle management people in the HSE whose role is vague and the people who pay them do not even know what they do( probably County Councillors on the gravy train ).MH should start there to save money and get a proper and efficient service going.

I agree that her mental health is or should NOT be impaired as regards doing the job, but who knows???

I'm sure Harney is a very astute and intelligent person.

One thing is for sure and that is Harney sure can talk......

bonkey

walshb wrote: »

Some might not see the comparison, but I do...

I think the case is that most people see the comparison but disagree that its valid.

Bottom line is that Harney is NOT the person physically or ministerially..

Thats your bottom line. All it is likely to do is encourage most people not to listen to your argument against her as a minister.

sovtek

sovtek wrote: »

Ask the radiology department. They are the ones who warned the HSE this would happen.
If an expert in radiology testified that older out of date technology would be more likely to produce bad results then I would be very comfortable as a medical practitioner that the judge would rule in my favor.

You mightn't be if statistics were presented showing a record with that same machine that was much better with other practicioners.

walshb wrote:

It's a bit like a big fat obese person in a gymnasium in charge of training and lecturing
the people there on how to get fit. It's laughable to be honest....

No, what you are saying is laughable tbh were it not so obesist.
Head off to the cuckoo's nest with that or somewhere else,it's not for here period.I'm won't be tollerating it-line drawn,consider this a moderation decision.

sovtek

Tristrame wrote: »

You mightn't be if statistics were presented showing a record with that same machine that was much better with other practicioners.

I would be because my fellow practitioners had already predicted what would happen and warned the HSE.
What did the HSE do? Ignored the experts and tried to save a few bob to go towards their salaries.

Mr.Micro

I get the impression that it was one person reading the mammograms in isolation.Not necessarily the machines.This persons work was not checked I suspect,( no matter if he or she is a doctor ).All such data should be double or triple checked by different technical experts as one cannot afford to get it wrong .

sovtek

sovtek wrote: »

I would be because my fellow practitioners had already predicted what would happen and warned the HSE.
What did the HSE do? Ignored the experts and tried to save a few bob to go towards their salaries.

That would be like me saying at my dismissal hearing after I was sacked for being late that I had wrote to my boss saying I needed a company ferari to get me to work on time.

sovtek

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I get the impression that it was one person reading the mammograms in isolation.Not necessarily the machines.This persons work was not checked I suspect,( no matter if he or she is a doctor ).All such data should be double or triple checked by different technical experts as one cannot afford to get it wrong .

Then how come it happened at more than one hospital.

sovtek

Tristrame wrote: »

That would be like me saying at my dismissal hearing after I was sacked for being late that I had wrote to my boss saying I needed a company ferari to get me to work on time.

That's a pretty shaky analogy.

Why?

There were patients that had to be diagnosed 10 years ago too.
The disease isn't reacting to the length of time the machine is around in the same way a bug reacts to overuse of an antibiotic.

jasonbourme.cs

in all honesty mary harney is a joke

the womans the minister for health and she could double as jabba the hutt

it may seem a bit like an unfair comment , BUT

she cant run the health service and she clearly cant look after health aspects
of a personal nature !!

and i shudder to think about the pay raise all the government ministers are getting in at the moment , truly undeserved :mad: !

sovtek

Tristrame wrote: »

Why?

There were patients that had to be diagnosed 10 years ago too.
The disease isn't reacting to the length of time the machine is around in the same way a bug reacts to overuse of an antibiotic.

As technology gets more and more dated fewer people will be experienced with it as well ten years ago they would possibly have had to have done exploratory surgery more often as well as more x-rays are necessary therefore exposing the patient more to radiation.
You might want to read the article that Akrasia posting a link to to answer some of your own questions.

Mr.Micro

sovtek wrote: »

Then how come it happened at more than one hospital.

People are often trained badly and just left to it.Its common practice in hospitals .It would explain why such errors occur in different hospitals and results are not verified by others .

sovtek

Mr.Micro wrote: »

People are often trained badly and just left to it.Its common practice in hospitals .It would explain why such errors occur in different hospitals and results are not verified by others .

That would be a systematic problem which is my point. Therefore Harney and Drumm are responsible.

sovtek

sovtek wrote: »

As technology gets more and more dated fewer people will be experienced with it as well ten years ago they would possibly have had to have done exploratory surgery more often as well as more x-rays are necessary therefore exposing the patient more to radiation.

Ten years ago was 1997 not 1887.
I can tell you that most lumps wherever they are found in a scenario where cancer is suspected need lab analysis so minor surgery aka a biopsy in this case was always needed.
They can do blood tests also.
None of these have anything to do with the machines used for scanning other than the results of the scan may lead to the need for the biopsy.

You might want to read the article that Akrasia posting a link to to answer some of your own questions.

Akrasia didn't post a link to any article that I see on this thread.I presume you must mean his quoting of my post that contained the RTÉ report ?
That says nothing other than report what we already take as a given that consultants want new machinery.
They made no case for it though other than a ridiculous one that the older perfectly working machinery could lead to a mis diagnosis.
The problem with that though and it's a big problem is that it could also be inferred from it that some consultants today are either getting slipshod in their work because either (a) they are less competent than they used be or (b) that they are less well trained.
The latter seems to me to be implausable.

None of that logic will help me in my bid to save my job as I'm late every day because my boss didn't accede to my request for a ferrari and neither does it go anyway towards implicating a minister for an indicidual doctors incompetence.

Granted, you might have some case if the report comes back (it's due in a month) to say the machines were faulty/old and gone hard to use or something.The fact that they are regularally(daily i think) check would lead me to think that implausable also.

That would be a systematic problem which is my point. Therefore Harney and Drumm are responsible.

LoL we may sack the minister for education so if the teacher in my local school doesn't get my kids into medicine.

heyjude

Tristrame wrote: »

Lol at the logic that a minister is responsible for the incompetence of an individual radiographer.

In order for that to even begin to be the case we'd have to send Harney to med school for a few years and then have her stand over every operating table at every operation.

True, but ministers are very quick to claim credit when something is going well or there is good news, so naturally people expect them to except some of the blame when something goes wrong. They can't have it both ways.

As for firing Mary Harney to solve the problem, well I don't think it would make any difference. All the major decisions in health have been agreed by the cabinet, so its not like the other ministers would do it that differently, it should also be remembered that people weren't sorry to see the back of Micheal Martin as Minister for Health either, so changing the minister didn't sort out the mess last time, so why would it now.

If Harney resigned, which member of the current cabinet or perhaps the current government parties would do a better job in Health ?

oscarBravo

jasonbourme.cs wrote: »

in all honesty mary harney is a joke

the womans the minister for health and she could double as jabba the hutt

Enough. The next comment on Mary Harney's appearance earns a ban.