Five patients made 8,303 emergency calls in a year - BBC News Website

TiredSam

TiredSam

Committee Member
Ambulances and emergency response vehicles were deployed more than 1,500 times to five patients in 12 months, the BBC has learned.

A total of 8,303 emergency calls were made by the five most frequent UK callers.

An NHS spokesman said the calls were often related to mental health, chronic pain and alcohol or drug dependence.

Vicki Nash from mental health charity Mind said the figures show that individuals' needs were not being met.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-43293581

Now that we have been categorised as MUS and demonised for overusing doctors (even though many of us avoid any engagement with the health service at all), is this little "Blimey that's outrageous" story a prelude to the demonisation of all the "MUS patients" who overuse the ambulance service?

An NHS spokesman said the calls were often related to mental health, chronic pain and alcohol or drug dependence.
Click to expand...

Well that's four of them - he forgot to tell us what the fifth person was phoning for. At least it gives us a clue as to who's up for demonisation next.
 
That's pretty much every single day for each of the five people that emergency vehicles and personnel were allegedly deployed.
I find this very difficult to believe. And if it were true, it would speak loudest of how the health care system is failing them, as Alvin pointed out.

This sounds like hogwash and propaganda to me.
 
Some cities in the United States have similar problems with "frequent fliers". It's a complicated issue that isn't likely to be solved anytime soon.
SFGate said:
“A couple of addresses get over 700 calls per year. That’s more than two a day for 911 calls — something needs to be done,” said Fire Commissioner Ken Cleveland at last week’s San Francisco Fire Commission meeting."

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A-day-with-S-F-s-Fire-Engine-1-the-busiest-5859683.php
Click to expand...

As a result, first responders can be stretched thin, interfering with their ability to respond to actual life threatening emergencies on time.
 
Seattle had a good solution to a similar problem which saved a lot of money and even reduced alcohol usage for homeless people with severe alcoholism who were heavy users of emergency and police services. Basically they built an apartment building for them, allow them to drink without restrictions, and keep a trained EMT or similar on duty most of the time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05homeless.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/health...hat-allows-drinking-helps-homeless-drink-less

Expenses per participant have dropped from US$50,000 per year to $13,000 per year.
 
Valentijn said:
Seattle had a good solution to a similar problem
Click to expand...
This is a bit radical - instead of blaming homeless people who drink, and making support conditional on stopping, they're tackling the homelessness head-on. Once housed, it appears that some of the people concerned cut down their drinking by themselves. And if they don't, they are still better off with a roof over their heads, and it costs less.

We could really do with some common sense around basic needs like food and shelter elsewhere in social care and healthcare.
 
Valentijn said:
Seattle had a good solution to a similar problem which saved a lot of money and even reduced alcohol usage for homeless people with severe alcoholism who were heavy users of emergency and police services. Basically they built an apartment building for them, allow them to drink without restrictions, and keep a trained EMT or similar on duty most of the time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05homeless.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/health...hat-allows-drinking-helps-homeless-drink-less

Expenses per participant have dropped from US$50,000 per year to $13,000 per year.
Click to expand...

Some times it takes someone to properly think through a problem to get a good solution rather than the knee jerk reactions that we get from doctors in the UK.

I remember then the fire service were trying to reduce calls the started removing all the abandoned cars because many of the calls they had were to deal with car fires (and it worked).

If doctors dealt with the real problems then this would help. I've often wondered what the average number of visits to a GP it takes to get a diagnosis (I suspect it is quite a lot).
 
Valentijn said:
Seattle had a good solution to a similar problem which saved a lot of money and even reduced alcohol usage for homeless people with severe alcoholism who were heavy users of emergency and police services.
Click to expand...
These so-called "wet houses" are working for some communities, but they are often a tough sell politically. No one wants a wet house in their neighborhood. Plus in expensive cities, the idea that chronic alcoholics should be given free housing where the working class can't afford to live can be unpopular.

Public radio covered the complex topic recently in San Francisco. San Francisco has been studying Seattle and other wet houses for years, but has not set one up yet.

http://kalw.org/post/harm-reduction-homeless-alcoholics-might-be-safe-place-have-drink
KALW radio said:
So why hasn’t San Francisco — where over 3,000 homeless people self-report drug and alcohol issues — gotten on board?

For starters, there’s still a pretty serious stigma about enabling drug and alcohol use — even among the homeless themselves.

An informal survey of people in downtown San Francisco that are struggling with housing issues revealed skepticism about a facility allowing homeless people to drink.

“I don’t think it’s a good idea,” said Marjorie Robinson. “Because it's eventually gonna cause chaos.”

“I’m an alcoholic ... I don’t think it's good,” reflected Melvin King. “I know what alcohol does to certain people.”

“I feel like some people don’t know how to handle their alcohol,” added a women named TJ. “So it's hard to give them the ability to have somewhere to drink.”
Click to expand...
 
I expect that these frequent callers are people who are frightened by their symptoms - be they physical or mental. It just speaks volumes about how large health systems work that sufficient funding can’t be allocated to a specific purpose like this - to support a small number of highly distressed individuals.
 
Daisybell said:
I expect that these frequent callers are people who are frightened by their symptoms - be they physical or mental. It just speaks volumes about how large health systems work that sufficient funding can’t be allocated to a specific purpose like this - to support a small number of highly distressed individuals.
Click to expand...
At the risk of sounding cold and heartless, some "frequent flyers" are drug addicts or alcoholics who go on a binge, then take an ambulance to "dry out" in the hospital.

When they're recovered and sober, they leave the hospital to binge again and repeat the process.

How to break this tragic cycle is a good question. Wet houses are one potential solution.
 
Valentijn said:
Seattle had a good solution to a similar problem which saved a lot of money and even reduced alcohol usage for homeless people with severe alcoholism who were heavy users of emergency and police services. Basically they built an apartment building for them, allow them to drink without restrictions, and keep a trained EMT or similar on duty most of the time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05homeless.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/health...hat-allows-drinking-helps-homeless-drink-less

Expenses per participant have dropped from US$50,000 per year to $13,000 per year.
Click to expand...

I had to keep working until I literally couldn't prop myself up in my chair. There was then and still is now no offer of free housing and time off. After I got sick I had to move over a dozen times (lost count). No free nothing. That probably foreclosed the possibility of ever recovering from this disease. Had I been deemed a danger to the public or alcho-drug-a-holic there were special programs that provide housing (free), including free food, and (so I'm told by those in the program) free sex with the staff and a good supply of drugs, but you have to pay for the latter.

Sure, I'll support all that free stuff, but on the condition that I get free housing in a no-drugs, no-drunks, no-noise etc etc building, also new and built for "my special needs", plus recompense for getting nothing when I needed it. Of course, this may seem an excess demand to some, so I propose it be paid for only by those who voted to build the new, free, up-to-code building for the druggie crowd. They can afford it, obviously, so it's time to share.

I paid taxes for decades, got nothing back, but lifetime druggies are to get the red carpet. Having paid in about 1000000000x more, I modestly request I get a like ration back in return, with interest, because I heard "they owe us that" at a protest somewhere. I rate the likelihood of any of that happening as a bit less than a 100 ton asteroid strike within the next week.
 
Last edited:
Allele said:
That's pretty much every single day for each of the five people that emergency vehicles and personnel were allegedly deployed.
Click to expand...
Perhaps some were calling multiple times per day. I certainly would if I had chronic pain and was not getting a response.
 
Little Bluestem said:
Perhaps some were calling multiple times per day. I certainly would if I had chronic pain and was not getting a response.
Click to expand...
Yes but deploying a vehicle and personnel 300 days a year is a response, if we're to believe that. The article said the "top five" callers called about 5 times a day each, and had a team come almost every day. This just seems implausible to me, call me cynical.
 
Last edited:
Indigophoton said:
This is a bit radical - instead of blaming homeless people who drink, and making support conditional on stopping, they're tackling the homelessness head-on. Once housed, it appears that some of the people concerned cut down their drinking by themselves. And if they don't, they are still better off with a roof over their heads, and it costs less.

We could really do with some common sense around basic needs like food and shelter elsewhere in social care and healthcare.
Click to expand...

It's a really good idea, similar to needle exchanges. It seems to be based on the fact that homeless people are human. Such a shame it has to be considered radical.
 
Allele said:
Yes but deploying a vehicle and personnel 300 days a year is a response, if we're to believe that.
Click to expand...
I was assuming that the ambulance was not being deployed because they were known frequent callers. Now I see that the article says:
Ambulances and emergency response vehicles were deployed more than 1,500 times to five patients in 12 months
Click to expand...
That does support your claim that this is implausible. (And show how bad my memory is.)
 
Allele said:
Yes but deploying a vehicle and personnel 300 days a year is a response, if we're to believe that. The article said the "top five" callers called about 5 times a day each, and had a team come almost every day. This just seems implausible to me, call me cynical.
Click to expand...
I had the same thought, you would think they would figure out in short order that the same person keeps calling and needing services but i suspect this is about using these people as scapegoats to justify public service cuts.
 
Alvin said:
i suspect this is about using these people as scapegoats to justify public service cuts.
Click to expand...

I feel like there is a nasty campaign of scapegoating and outright making up "needy" people to justify as you say service cuts. The whole trend right now is about pretending another's misfortune is simply evidence of their inadequacy as a person, and that success, health etc is the natural outcome of being somehow superior and separate from the hoi polloi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom