Nhs Bureaucracy And Vaccines

[Ridgewalk]

21 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

I cannot find any  job title called "Health Protection Vaccinator" linked with the current NHS  and Government documentation.

 

It concerns me that information surrounding vaccination should be current, up to date and sourced and should be free from amongst  other things, exaggeration. This can all too often lead to knee jerk reaction that makes an already difficult job of immunizing and protecting our population impossible.  The aftermath of MMR  is still with us.

 

The documentation below  is current as of date of posting and also contains links to the role of Vaccinator Immuniser etc.

 

NHS - Covid-19 Vaccination e-learning for Healthcare (2021)

 

Government- COVID-19 vaccination programme (Dec 31 2020)

 

Public Health England COVID-19 vaccinator competency assessment tool/9 (Dec 31 2020)

 

 

 

What are you suggesting  that I'm exaggerating Annie ?

[Ridgewalk]

20 hours ago, RollingJ said:

@Annie BynnolIrrespective of whatever is contained in those documents you refer to, Ridgewalk has provided first-hand knowledge of the carp people have to endure to just attempt to make a difference.

Some of those items in the original post have nothing to do with that crowd of wasters, just pen-pushers trying to justify their inflated salaries.

It does strike me as people trying to justify their existence/job role. Having worked in the public sector for 40 years I can tell you there are plenty of those

[Ridgewalk]

19 hours ago, Delbow said:

The data protection ones are standard everywhere now, due to the big fines made by the ICO for data breaches, and health data is very sensitive, so those two make complete sense. As do the safeguarding ones - if she rolls up someone's sleeve and they're covered in bruises, she needs to know what to ask and what to do. Conflict Resolution (not Revolution, although that would be interesting!) I can kind of see, because people who get really anxious about injections might kick off a bit. The others I can't see any need for, especially the Prevent ones. Do they think someone is going to shout "Death to the Infidel!" when they get their vaccine?

 

That said, e-learning modules tend to be quite basic and short. How long did it take her, out of interest? I would guess it should take maybe half a day, certainly no more than a day.

I've no problem with the training in itself, which would normally be rolled out over a year period. But as I mentioned I would have thought that expediency was important.

 

As for the what " if" comment , hypotheticals are endless. I'm also not sure someone employed to administer vaccines in the current situation would have time to get involved in the Safeguarding process. Additionally until the last couple of years she was regularly updated in safeguarding matters. 

 

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

Here's the BBC view of it.

 

BBC News - Coronavirus: Medics complain of 'bureaucracy' in bid to join Covid vaccine effort
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55516277

 

Why didn't they do it in August or September or even November? "Right we've got a vaccine, we need to get it out there. We should hire and train people". In January!!!!

Thanks for the link that article seems to cover it.

[Ridgewalk]

18 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

In my opinion threads like this are just a extended version of "waa waa health and safety gone mad..."

 

This is not so simple as just "stick a needle into someone's arm".  If it was then they would be scooping up junkies off the street to help out - after all many of them are well skilled in administering injectons.

 

Several of the courses listed are absolutely standard for all employers no matter what the circumstances.  Equality & Diversity is vital in view of recent events where one single action or even a simple turn of phrase could lead to mass complaint, outrage and legal action.    Same with the redicalisation which for the record is not so simple as being wary of peole from a certain race in case they start shouting "infidel".   It covers a whole range of potentially extreme right wing identifiers which could be rife in patients when dealing with an already highly contentious vaccine programme and crowds of people who even today are still denying that such disease and control methods are genuine. 

 

Safeguarding too is standard learning for protection of those vulnerable children, learning disability and elderly adults who will be subject to the vaccine and may be a high risk of being administered the same under duress, extreme control or harrassment by their parents/guardians/parter/spouses.  Despite what the cocky dentist says in his BBC interview - children may very well be part of the group he has to administer to-  so its quite right that he undergoes such training.

 

I can guarantee the NHS dont like "bureaucracy" any more than the man on the street.  However, they are also smart enough to know there is a good reason these training regimes exist and the consequences if they are not fulfilled either by breach of regulation, criminal negligence or civil litigation action. 

 

Those who feel put off by having to do some comprehensive training before they are given licence to conduct mass vaccinations in people quite frankly shouldn't be the type of people signing up to the do the job.   Personally, I am especially appaulled by some of the whiny comments from the the BBC interviewee Dentist whom, as an already registered dental professional subject to the mandatory standards of the GMC with all its CPD requirements and presumably a holder of various negligence insurance policies, really should know better and the reasons why such "bureaucracy" needs to exist.

 

Frustrating it may well be, but its the job.

 

Emergency or not, people will expect a FULLY trained professional undertaking their jab.   We all know full well that the second any one of these volunteers put a foot wrong the fallout and inevitable claim would all land on the NHS.   There would be no "....oh he was only a volunteer trying to help...."  get out clause.

 

and she's worked for 40 years until last couple of years as a first level nurse ? 

 

Incidentally all that training hasnt hasn't included instruction on actually how to administer the jab.

 

" frustrating it may well be". Well I know of two other nurses, one who worked until recently  as a senior theatre nursing sister at a Sheffield Hospital and another who worked at a high level both of whom would have been interested but are put off by the bureaucracy. You might argue that they shouldn't be so easily put off but you may agree that in the current situation their input would have been helpful.

18 hours ago, silverglade5 said:

This world gets more silly every day. There is an urgent need for experienced  professionals to do this work, but the current PC climate is such that people like Ridgewalk's wife would probably be so demoralised that they wouldn't be prepared to carry on with their applications.  This is work that clearly should be carried out by competent people, but to require a nurse of c.40 years experience to jump through the hoops described is in my opinion frankly absurd. 

Good post

18 hours ago, Pettytom said:

That’s simply not true. 
 

I’m delighted that the recruitment for vaccinators is being carried out in a professional manner. Anyone in such settings should have proper regard for safeguarding, for care of personal data and they also have responsibilities under the prevent programme.

 

Some people might be happy to be vaccinated by poorly trained, poorly vetted staff. I’m not amongst them.

She's not been " trained" to do any vaccinations yet. All the other stuff could have been done in anticipation of the vaccine becoming available a couple of months ago.

[Anna B]

23 hours ago, Pettytom said:

The diversity training is a nice peg to hang a sceptical hat on. It’s a distraction too. Take a look at all the other bits of training. They are mostly essential, those that aren’t essential are desirable.

 

I agree that we are up against it recruiting enough vaccinators, but that doesn’t excuse poor, potentially damaging recruitment procedures.

Nobody is saying there shouldn't be checks and some training, but this is over the top.

How many people are going to die whilst waiting for someone to complete this extensive and largely unnecessary training? These are mostly already qualified, professional medics. Will we still be waiting 2 years from now?

 Meanwhile the economy tanks and people die. 

This is an emergency. 

Can this government not move faster on anything? We are constantly drowning in red tape and bureaucracy.

[ECCOnoob]

6 hours ago, Ridgewalk said:

and she's worked for 40 years until last couple of years as a first level nurse ? 

 

Incidentally all that training hasnt hasn't included instruction on actually how to administer the jab.

 

" frustrating it may well be". Well I know of two other nurses, one who worked until recently  as a senior theatre nursing sister at a Sheffield Hospital and another who worked at a high level both of whom would have been interested but are put off by the bureaucracy. You might argue that they shouldn't be so easily put off but you may agree that in the current situation their input would have been helpful.

 

I do argue that they shouldn't  be easily put off.  In fact two "high level" nurses working up until very recently should be well aware of the reasons why such training is a  necessity and consequencies of it not being fulfilled.  

 

The fact that they "are put off" despite leaving the industry quite recently,  frankly says more about them and their attitude to the roles.    In that circumstance, no I dont feel their input would be helpful at all.     One would wonder though managerial eyes what other training/protocols/procedures they feel 'offputting' or just some waste of time tick box exercise which they subsequently may risk ignoring during their immunisation work. 

 

 

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

Nobody is saying there shouldn't be checks and some training, but this is over the top.

How many people are going to die whilst waiting for someone to complete this extensive and largely unnecessary training? These are mostly already qualified, professional medics. Will we still be waiting 2 years from now?

 Meanwhile the economy tanks and people die. 

This is an emergency. 

Can this government not move faster on anything? We are constantly drowning in red tape and bureaucracy.

Why are you so sure that this training is over the top and unnecessary.

 

We are talking about diversity here. - probably the most spotlighted and contentious issue right now.    We are talking about data protecton and data control - something which a mistake could leave to fines going into the millions of pounds.  We are talking about vulnerable adult and child safeguarding procedures and radicalisation identifiers - something which is clearly a key issue which those administering injections into patients needs to be wholly alert to and be aware of the signs of duress, abuse, control, triggers or extreme views. 

 

A wrong move and someone could die from this.   A step out of place and someone could be given a jab against their will opening up a whole range of outrage and litigation.   A slip of the tounge and the whole world of race issues may implode.    That red tape is there for good reason and the amount the NHS has to spend on litigation shows very clearly why. 

 

This is not just about simply jabbing a needle into someone's arm.  If it was any village idiot off the street could be shown how to do it.

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by ECCOnoob

[Annie Bynnol]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

Nobody is saying there shouldn't be checks and some training, but this is over the top.

How many people are going to die whilst waiting for someone to complete this extensive and largely unnecessary training? These are mostly already qualified, professional medics. Will we still be waiting 2 years from now?

 Meanwhile the economy tanks and people die. 

This is an emergency. 

Can this government not move faster on anything? We are constantly drowning in red tape and bureaucracy.

What is over the top? What is in the the application and process that you have seen that is causing  a problem?

Are you objecting to safeguarding, data protection or government policy on counter terrorism

If an applicant are "...already qualified, professional medics" they will have been required to do all these already and will be current. All they do register.

If they  are retired, they are no longer "professional" and will need to be brought up to speed-a few hours online ask any teacher. They will also need a refresher in the medical techniques.

 

As the supply of vaccine will increases to a peak over the next months, the requirement for vaccinators/immunisers will grow and at some point in time the paid volunteers will be required - lets get something right even if the government cannot and lets not panic and use emotive words.

 

 

 

[Anna B]

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

I do argue that they shouldn't  be easily put off.  In fact two "high level" nurses working up until very recently should be well aware of the reasons why such training is a  necessity and consequencies of it not being fulfilled.  

 

The fact that they "are put off" despite leaving the industry quite recently,  frankly says more about them and their attitude to the roles.    In that circumstance, no I dont feel their input would be helpful at all.     One would wonder though managerial eyes what other training/protocols/procedures they feel 'offputting' or just some waste of time tick box exercise which they subsequently may risk ignoring during their immunisation work. 

 

 

3 recent comments quoted from newspaper. 

"Insulting" from a retired consultant.

"Spent 2 full days already doing application, and not even half way through. Have enough to do without this, won't be continuing." recently retired nurse.

"I applied back in March to volunteer and heard nothing until November, then an email inviting me on a largely unhelpful online course, which I completed. Then nothing. No further contact whatsoever. Appalled that at a time when they are supposedly over run with cases they have failed to utilise the help offered." retired doctor. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Annie Bynnol said:

What is over the top? What is in the the application and process that you have seen that is causing  a problem?

Are you objecting to safeguarding, data protection or government policy on counter terrorism

If an applicant are "...already qualified, professional medics" they will have been required to do all these already and will be current. All they do register.

If they  are retired, they are no longer "professional" and will need to be brought up to speed-a few hours online ask any teacher. They will also need a refresher in the medical techniques.

 

As the supply of vaccine will increases to a peak over the next months, the requirement for vaccinators/immunisers will grow and at some point in time the paid volunteers will be required - lets get something right even if the government cannot and lets not panic and use emotive words.

 

 

 

I don't know how we managed when young nurses with no degree education, counter terrorism or diversity training etc used to give injections on a regular basis....

Edited January 4, 2021 by Anna B

[Annie Bynnol]

2 hours ago, Anna B said:

I don't know how we managed when young nurses with no degree education, counter terrorism or diversity training etc used to give injections on a regular basis....

... and then some statistician, manager and trainer of nurses comes along and  tries to organise the health care for thousands-"Florence Nightingale," they cried out "what does she know about emergencies!"