Friday, 16 November 2007

Is new Queens Hospital all that bad?

One of the first things I heard about the new Queens hospital in Romford, Essex, was clearly negative – some one moaning about how bad the service “despite all the money the government – and hence the tax payer – has splashed on it!”.

Then I recently came across a story in the Ilford Recorder where a pregnant mother refused to give birth at the hospital.

The woman visited the hospital bleeding and in pain and claims that, after waiting more than 5 hours, she was dismissed and given two paracetemols when no consultants were available.

She said she’d rather give birth at the back of her husband’s van than at Queens Hospital – yes, it was that bad.

But is Queens that bad? Is it staffed with heartless nurses who discharge bleeding women with 2 paracetmols?

I tried to get the facts on the hospital and (what joy!) when I logged onto a site for the hospital and saw a Facts and Figures link. I thought I’d get some serious stuff about the place – but lo and behold - some of the facts were:

- The hospital is made up of approximately 1.5 million bricks

- There are 1186 alcohol dispensers

- The new hospital building footprint occupies 8.5 hectares of the 14.5 hectare site, almost 12 football pitches if applying FiFA regulations.

I hurriedly clicked off this page – for obvious reasons – and googled more about Queens.

Whereupon I came across a site for
who were discussing if they recommend Queens hospital.

I stumbled across a comment from one Pali who said her sister-in-law had a baby there and it was lovely. Pali did say, however, that the matron was quite abrupt. Another said most of the staff are good but some bad.

However you see it, if you live in the Havering area, count your blessings that you got Queens, because King George’s Hospital in Redbridge has been downgraded and women are being forced to go outside Redbridge to have their babies.

So at least you got a hospital – and that’s a lot better than the back of a van, believe me!

No comments: