Nagging questions over tragic demise of Jennyfer

Published: 1 April, 2010

WHENEVER a government minister or a council spokesman denies a wrongdoing it may be thought that something is probably amiss.
And the louder and more unyielding the denial the more sceptical the reaction.
There are occasions, however,  when the sound of protestation, if made against a background of quiet, solid reasoning, may win the day.Is this the case concerning the tragic death of Jennyfer Spencer?
To some extent it appears to highlight the difficulties an authority faces whenever a patient or a client refuses to be helped.
The council paint a picture of a difficult client, saying Ms Spencer failed to attend four arranged meetings. But, so far, the council have themselves failed to provide full documentation on aborted meetings. Facts and dates are required here.
But two nagging questions remain:
1. Why did the council, over seven years, fail to move a severely handicapped woman from the fifth floor to a ground-floor flat? Whatever the difficulties in communication, surely this was not an intractable problem beyond a solution – difficult to solve for a few months, perhaps, but for seven years? Something is wrong here.
2. Why did the council take away Ms Spencer’s care payment nearly two years ago, presumably leaving her to live off disability benefits alone?
According to the senior Tory councillor Martin Davies it seems as if Ms Spencer’s case went before review conferences. If so, was Cllr Davies or any other councillor apprised of the case?
If not, why wasn’t it considered an important enough case for a fresh mind to be brought in?
These are some of the questions that require answers.

Rachel: Let’s close this A&E

WE can now put a face to the looming decision to close down Whittington’s A&E department.
It belongs to chief executive of Islington NHS, Rachel Tyndall.
At a meeting on Monday she sounded implacable.
As she seems to see it, the A&E must go. Don’t bother me with facts – the plans should go ahead, she appeared to say.
In the 1990s experts predicted that central London didn’t need so many hospitals. University College Hospital should go, they said. The government nodded. But loud public protest – partly led by this newspaper – made the planners back down.
Who, today, would say that hospital should close?
Like so many experts, Ms Tyndall has tunnel vision.
It is she who should go – not the A&E department.