Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The NMH at St. Vincents

Options
15254565758

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,324 ✭✭✭Shebean


    I've not repeated myself and certainly not retracted anything.

    All I did there is accept the people who hired her may have had a different view to mine.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,324 ✭✭✭Shebean




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭joseywhales


    Is there something "fly off the handle" about my original post. I believe I even began asking the questions of what should be on a board. I have since learned that there are 26 members and 8 are medical. I didn't even mention anything negative about Noirin, I merely posited that medical staff are different than gardai.

    "What should the board makeup of a hospital be? I would have assumed some people with actual medical experience would be important to have any context of the problems and available tools in a medical environment? I am not so sure how doctors would operate under a police like management structure. Many of them are clinical researchers and teaching physicians and would have the ability to move easily to other high paying jobs and internationally, too much stick and little carrot won't work for them. Completely different resources to the gardai. I guess you also need a good accountant and a politician."



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    she would be 1 person amongst many on the board. There would be no "Police like management structure" just because she sits on the board.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,996 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    It still counts as experience, though I would have thought it would disqualify her on competency. Though those who rise to such ranks tend to get many bites at the cherry.


    My point is more that a board of entirely doctors, for example, would be incredibly poorly formed. It is about bringing in a range of expertise and the expertise of leading such a diverse agency, in both members and targets, as the Gardai would be relevant.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 35,072 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Leading it very poorly tbh... I did get a chuckle from the notion that Noirin would be chasing down baby-snatchers with baton drawn, or tapping away at a keyboard tracking down a Russian cybercriminal gang... sheesh! 🤣

    © 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,996 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yeah, I would suggest her policing experience is about the least relevant part of things to be honest.


    Not a choice I would have made ultimately. But there is a logic to it, and competence in previous roles seems less important than experience on boards in general for reasons I don't really get.



  • Registered Users Posts: 35,072 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    It's called "failing upwards" or, at least, sideways...

    © 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,414 ✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    Noreen O'Sullivan is an excellent choice if you want dishonest board members who are incompetent and good at smear campaigns. I suppose the other board members will get any penalty points quashed too?

    Only in Ireland would this nonsense be accepted.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,729 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    I see in the headlines of the London Times Irish edition that the HSE has stopped the building work on the new NMH at St Vincent's on the basis that it is unhappy with the governance rules of SVH group owners of the site. The paper is pay-for-view locked and the 3 main Irish papers don't seem to have run a similar story so I can't confirm the LT report. There's nothing mentioned by RTE yet either. I saw this news on the Dun Laoghaire Together for Choice and Equality F/B page



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,569 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Well delayed the start of the work to be strictly accurate, not a brick laid yet AFAIK.



  • Registered Users Posts: 35,072 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    There shouldn't be, either, until all of the questions over ownership and governance are definitively settled once and for all.

    © 1982 Sinclair Research Ltd



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,729 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    According to a live discussion programme on RTE right now, there is what seemed to be a settlement between the SVHG board and the Dept of Health over membership of the new SVHG board [an alternative three members] and the lease of the new NMH building to the state for either 100 or 200 years reported on in todays Irish Times. However the RTE host has also mentioned that Dr Boylan has objected to what has been reported, saying the NMH situation hasn't changed. The Labour Party member on the RTE discussion group has just made similar objections to the way the NMH is proposed to be managed, saying its time that the religious and vested parties should get out of the proposed new NMH completely. I haven't got a link to the I/T article as I want to get a print copy of it to read what the actual article has in it before I post any statement on what is actually in the I/T article.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,603 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    So the new arrangement is the NMH will remain under St Vincent's while the State leases the building and St Vincent's has less people on the board. So this was devised as the old arrangement was fine and the scandal was a fake issue?



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,729 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    It looks like the new proposal is an attempt by the Govt to distract the public with the extended lease to convince people that the actual owners [the nuns] will not have any continuing behind-the-scenes connections with either SVHG and or the site apparently handed over to SVHG. Dr Boylan has made it plain that the situation will stay fouled up until the site is completely free of any vestige of RC ethical control [overt or covert] and the Labour party seem to have taken the same position. I believe its more lies and a smoke and mirror job again by the RC church with the assent of the Govt coalition. The lies of mother church are coming home to roost with the sisters. Coincidentally the public is distracted with how the state {the Govt and the HSE] are handling the Covid-19 situation, all eyes taken off the activities over ethical control of the NMH site on the SVHG property.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,720 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    The debate has become philosophical, from a practical sense, there is no issues (related to the land at least, people can still argue about location etc. but it's a million miles better than Holles Street). The question is whether the philosophical debate is worth pursuing for the delays it will cause.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Just wish they would bloody just get on with it , ignore all the naysayers and wackos ,and just build it already.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,847 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    I see photos on the online news of people with placards with "nuns out" which I think is nonsense. By all means have a placard saying "build it somewhere else" but you can't arbitrarily just put them off land they own. You can potentially try to CPO it. But demanding that they be put off land they own is stupid.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,569 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf




  • Registered Users Posts: 15,121 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    We have reached endgame on this story, it will go ahead next week.

    Nobody is arguing that we don't need a new hospital.

    However, turn the clock back 10 years and Connolly Hospital was in pole position.

    Since then we have shoehorned the Children's Hospital into a restricted site off the SCR and now we are building and staffing the new NMH on the St Vincent's Campus.

    Were these good decisions and who really made them?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,569 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    There is a thread OP but surprisingly hasn't attracted any traffic since last year




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭sam t smith


    Storm in a teacup. We can’t let a few malcontents derail the project.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,415 ✭✭✭MrMusician18


    Those malcontents have been getting a lot of air time this week.. The "why can't they gift the land to the state". The obvious answer is they don't want to and why should they. The State is free to go build its hospital somewhere else if they want to pander to Peter boylan et al.



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 76,524 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Well that's another anomaly with this platform. I merged the thread with the one last posted in October but thought your thread title was more relevant so merged the earlier thread into yours. That has resulted in your OP appearing at the top of the first page, but not in the relevant time slot in the thread. I'm therefore quoting it here for info



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,121 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    As I said earlier this is now a done deal and will go ahead during the next week.

    The battle is over and nobody is saying we don't need a new hospital.

    Instead of attacking the motives of those who oppose the Elm Park site why not ask ourselves why the NMH and the Children's Hospital were not co-located with the Connolly Hospital on the 50acres owned by the state with plenty of room for expansion?



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,415 ✭✭✭MrMusician18


    NCH was colocated at James on the basis of the report that determined it was the best place for it for the best clinical outcomes.

    It is planned to relocate the rotunda to James Connolly memorial hospital.

    I am genuinely curious as to the motives because those that don't want the hospital built on the leased site will ensure that women will have to put up with substandard facilities in holles st. If you care about women you'd want it built asap.

    This is medical politics mixed with a healthy dose of the usual suspects itching for another campaign.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    It just goes to show how the South Dublin mafia that runs Irelands media can make anything into a national story.

    No one outside of the hack pack and Ivan Baciks twitter followers could give a **** about this non story but there it is, front and centre in the media.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,270 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    With war in Europe, massive inflation, and a broken NI Executive the repeal jumpers realize they are not that relevant anymore and are trying to make themselves relevant again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    Most people give birth in the nearest non private hospital , theres not much choice involved. Abortion is now legal in Ireland. I presume if a womans life is in danger she will be allowed to get an abortion. My theory is maybe 10 per cent of people in Ireland are actually Catholics, the rest go along with it because most schools are still owned by the Catholic Church. More people in small towns, in rural areas go to mass most people in dublin don't bother going. I don't know if medical procedures are decisions will be effected by the fact the hospital is on land owned by the Nuns



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,912 Mod ✭✭✭✭shesty


    It's not just about abortion.

    I have 3 kids.I want no more.I have considered getting my tubes tied.So I don't have to fill my body with hormonal drugs to prevent conception, but I have control over my own fertility.

    To my knowledge - I cannot get that done at the public Dublin maternity hospital I attended, without jumping through the hoops of several GP appointments to confirm that is ACTUALLY what I want, before they might refer me.If I had had a C section, I could have got it done because the medical staff "were in there anyway" so to speak, but I didn't have one.It won't be done as a stand alone procedure coz, ya know....it's contraception.I can get it done privately in the Beacon by the same consultant who saw me through my three pregnancies in the public hospital, mind you....

    My GPs solution was "your husband should get a vasectomy, that is a far easier procedure to get done".He did, but...it's my body. Why can't I have control over my own fertility?

    It's not just abortion, but we don't bother talking about the other stuff.



Advertisement