UKC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38032959

Are people comfortable with this? What training would health car staff get in spotting radicalisation?

Patient confidentiality?

In reply to Big Ger:

Probably the same training as we get at work; 30mins of listening to someone rattle on about Prevent and pointing at a PowerPoint, followed by a multiple choice online quiz about terrorism/extremism afterwards.

In reply to Big Ger:

What training would health car staff get in spotting radicalisation?

Basically f*ck all.


Patient confidentiality?

Putative high risk to individual, others and state assets mitigates special snowflake status.


D

In reply to Big Ger:

If I understand it correctly, doctors and nurses have a duty to report FGM, which may be a woman having consented to having a genital piercing. I can't help thinking that would make such womenthink twice about seeking medical advice for problems in that area, so quite possibly counter-productive.

In reply to Big Ger:

You can make a safe guarding referral without someone's consent to do so. That could be for a child at risk of abuse or even an adult who abuses themselves through self neglect.

You can't force anyone to accept help, but you can at least make sure it's offered.

In reply to Big Ger:

There seems to be an acceptance that quite lot of issues trump patient confidentiality, which I don't think have been thought through particularly well.

In optometry it is widely accepted that patients who can't see well enough drive but carry on doing so should be reported to the DVLC. Personally I suspect this will lead to people who suspect they may be borderline not having a sight test, with potentially a lot more negative outcomes.

In reply to Bimble:


Did they give you a flowchart? I hope they gave you a flowchart.

In reply to Big Ger:

It's all academic now they've passed the snoopers charter. You phone is grassing on you right this minute and a bored plod could be casually browsing through all the web cams on your street.

In reply to wintertree:


The extra-reading material did include a rather snazzy 'pyramid of genocide' (our title, not theirs). Tolerating abuse by others at the bottom, but by time you've got to the top, you're pretty much the next Hitler.

It is all prepared by a police department and delivered to schools for PSHE lessons, which makes for some comedy moments when your yr8s start pointing out that the plod who created it was illiterate.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:



So what is the answer to this then?
My grandads driving licence was revoked by the DVLA after a letter from his doctor due to altzimers, he point blank refused to stop driving because he was unaware of his condition.
Even after his licence was revoked he couldn't understand it and carried on driving until I physically took his car off him.

Some people will recluse themselves from driving when they don't feel safe but anyone who won't get an eye test incase their licence is removed probably won't quit without steps being taken.

In reply to Bimble:


You can't beat the semi-literate powerpoint presentation for completely undermining the presenter and subject matter

In reply to Big Ger:

A tangent. I was walking past out town hall and looked through the window to see a bunch of people having a serious session called WRAP (Working to Raise Awareness of Prevent) and I am sure the slide that was up when I walked past was describing how to work with nursery and infant school children. Presumably they were brainstorming how to 'facilitate' these children informing on their terroristic parents. It's like something out of the cultural revolution in Mao's China.

In reply to Big Ger:


They get issued with a box set of Homeland. After the first couple of series you get the hang of it, kind of like after watching a couple of series of Casualty you can tell the guy that stumbles on the stairs probably has a brain tumour.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:


Optometrists must advise patients to self-report to the DVLA - it's not our job to report people - but we'd have a good case to break patient confidentiality and report them to DVLA without their consent if it was clearly in the public interest to do so. That's quite a drastic measure though, and I'd have to be really concerned that the patient was putting people at risk before breaking confidentiality - in fact, I'd seek legal advice first to make sure I'd got everything recorded for when I received the inevitable complaint.

In reply to Dauphin:





What would 'special snowflake status' be in relation to this?

It just seems like a rather unthinking thing to post/say: That somebody genuinely concerned about radicalisation who reports it, is somehow wanting special snowflake status...

In reply to Bobling:

I went to one of these talks.Its no worse than for those of us who can remember the IRA bombing campaigns and the publicity on keeping your wits about you in those times.

TBH I was surprised as to how low the numbers were on referrals considering the number of people who use the nhs in a day.

In reply to Timmd:

I was referring to the 'Perp'. If that makes you feel any better?

Lighten up.

Its nonsense, basically. Im pretty sure I've looked after people with all sorts of radical views including Muslims who favour the finger pointy types. At what point do you have enough time to kick off a discussion about what they think about martyrdom operations?


D

In reply to Dauphin:

I half found myself wondering about how deeply staff might get to find out a patient's views too...

In reply to Timmd:

Its also important to consider vulnerable people with mental health problems and/or learning disability...the NHS is much more than medical care. We do a 1 hour session where I work...it's just a heads up to say consider it as an issue if you hear anything that would give you any concerns.

In reply to abr1966:

I guess people could just not be 'in their right mind' through being unwell too. I remember as a child being feverish and telling my mum I could see things which were invisible, I don't remember that I was feverish - but thinking that I could see them.

In reply to Timmd:

Terrorists are very good, in my experience; at manipulation, bribery, coercion, blackmail and grooming. People who are vulnerable for a number of reasons are therefore more likely to be targeted....it was the same in N Ireland where lots of terrorist activity was committed by people who wouldn't have got in to those positions by their own volition..

In reply to Big Ger:

A while back I looked after a paeient whose family believed in white suprematism. There was section in the file documenting this and how it might effect their ability to parent.

In reply to abr1966:
I've read in New Scientist about the people who do the recruitment of suicide bombers to carry out attacks on Israel being good at grooming and manipulating more vulnerable people into blowing themselves up (while not doing anything as drastic themselves). It talked about the two different kinds of people.

In reply to abr1966:


Indeed. How are mental health workers, (psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, and ancillary staff,) to tell if the sudden change in religious intensity of a patient is;

A) the result of radicalization.
B) an emerging/prodromal illness or component of a delusional state.
C) a genuine religious experience.
D) some combination of all the above?

In reply to Big Ger:


Radicalisation Awareness training is part of our 2016/2017 CPD programme where I work.

In North Wales we have so little contact with ethnic/ religious minorities that I'm really not sure if I would be able to tell the difference between a Muslim who was devout and followed a strict religious lifestyle and one who had terrorist intentions.

My other big concern is that a basic principle of human rights is accessibility to health care, if Muslims (as a group) feel that accessing healthcare is going to potentially open them up to investigation/interrogation from the security services, they may avoid accessing care when they desperately need it.

I do NOT see it as my role as a paramedic to act as the eyes and ears of MI5!

In reply to SAF:

In the IRA bombing campaigns you may remember that there were big publicity campaigns to keep your eyes and ears "open".

It is no different to that.

I recall that members of the public alerted the police at the time of the bombings in manchester Arndale for example. That saved lives even though the bombs went off before rush hour.

Perhaps its worth stepping back and thinking about it.

In reply to SAF:
No one is asking you to become a spook, but you probably drive many miles and hours around all communities, don't you see it as the morally right thing to do and report ANY suspicious activity, be it potential terrorism or chav breaking into cars.

It is thought by some that if a few very widespread range of dots were joined together there might have been more warning of 7/7. Even a seemingly insignificant observation a member of the public makes could join some dots. With Isis scattering and Europe's porous borders, I'd say we all need to be having our eyes and ears open..

In reply to neilh:





This is something we have always done, and that won't change, London Ambulance Crews were the ones who noticed the suspicious car with the Calor gas bomb in it and notified the police.

What we are being asked to do now is different. It is using our unique position and access to an individual as a health professional to pass information or "concerns" to the intelligence services, and thus breaching a patients right to confidentiality in the process.

As a paramedic I am invited at little notice into a patients home under emergency circumstances, people feel vulnerable at this time as it is without fearing that I might report them for investigation.

In reply to Big Ger:

I really have no idea what/who I am looking for as a potential terrorist/suspicious person. One of the doctors at one of the north wales Emergency Departments was recruited to ISIS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36362957

He was obviously not a "vulnerable" person since he clearly had the intelligence to work as a middle grade ED doctor. From what I remember of him he was a friendly approachable guy (which certainly can't be said for all the Doctors we interact with). He appeared of middle eastern origin and had a beard!!!! Certainly not enough to base passing a report on to "Big Brother".

In reply to SAF:

Fair do's

In reply to SAF:



You're assuming Prevent is all about the shouty beardy types. Your local Counter- terrorism Unit is equally, (if not more so now), interested in your clients with the big Nazi eagle on the mantlepiece.

In reply to Ridge:


Who are just as entitled to have distasteful political beliefs particularly where they are confined to their own home and just as entitled to access healthcare.

In reply to SAF:


Not disputing that, just countering the assumption that Prevent is purely aimed at the Muslim community. It's a non-discriminatory snooping thing.

In reply to Big Ger:

Interesting that what I thought was a reasonable post about consenting genital piercings has got 8 dislikes, especially when the view I expressed was mirrored by a nurse who works in the field. I'd like to know what the actual objection is.

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

It didn't get one from me, so I can't help you there.