HSE Complaints Aidan Browne reviewed 14092011 by Liam Ó Gógáin

CASE STUDY Of End-user experience of seeking information from the HSE re the complaints process during the period 28th April 2006 to 22nd of November 2006 Background. In April 2006 I sought information of a personal nature relating to my son from the Health Services Executive. I Googled “HSE Ireland” and found the www.hse.ie website. I searched the site for Freedom of Information contacts. The following PDF document maps the trail of correspondence between myself and the HSE FOI official, Rosalie Smith-Lynch (RSL), whose contact details I discovered on the HSE website www.hse.ie. It is important to note that at all times I found RSL courteous while quite unhelpful, which supports my belief that the difficulties I experienced in seeking clear information from the HSE is both Systemic, and systematic. It is systemic in that it is deeply ingrained at a corporate cultural level and that this behaviour is so deeply embedded in many HSE staff that they act unconsciously in this “Blocking mode” where the customer, rather than being treated like Fergal Quinn’s “King” actually has no rights to information. It is systematic in that the “pat, uncooperative response” kicks in as a matter of course and is implemented by individuals who, while being influenced by a corporate culture are professionally educated, qualified and paid highly enough to have personal responsibility for their performance of their duties to the public My initial email to FOI officer Rosalie Smith-Lynch was seeking personal Information. She subsequently rang me for clarification of the details which I had sought. Following conclusion of this clarification I explained that I often assist people who wish to make a complaint about the HSE and in that vein I would be grateful if she would provide me with the information on the HSE complaints process that I might be more effective in giving advice. RSL offered me a flyer (a general information sheet). When I sought further, more comprehensive detail, RSL resisted this request stating that the flyer was all that was normally made available to the public.

Following a prolonged discussion, where RSL was quite courteous but unhelpful in offering to provide further detail, I requested all information at the disposal of the HSE about their complaints process. I specifically requested all of the internal documents relating to the complaints process. stressing that as I did not wish to waste taxpayers monies unnecessarily, I suggested that she provide me directly, informally (without having to formally invoke the act and unnecessary costs) with all the information that I would obviously be granted under the act, allowing for the future possibility of my applying formally under the act for any material which she believed I would not be entitled to. At no point did RSL ask me to clarify if I was seeking information about the complaints processes only for the NEHB or for all of the different previous Health Boards (I would then, as I do now, have expected each Health Board to operate similar complaints processes and certainly absolutely equivalent standards in their processes). RSL undertook to respond to me in this regard. Therein began this journey through the HSE “MAZE” which I believe has been brought to this degree of inepitude through “Intelligent if warped Design” NOTE:- This request for information about the complaints process is completely separate from my request for personal information as set out in my first email. No one could reasonably suggest any correlation whatsoever between the two separate issues nor was there any equivocation in my request to RSL for complaints information. Objective in writing this report During August 2006 there was a series of letters in the Irish Times in response to an article by John Waters which was quite critical of Social Workers, many of whom are employees of the HSE. I contributed a letter to that process. I noted particularly the weighty letter by Aidan Browne, signed as National Director,

Primary, Community and Continuing Care Directorate, HSE, Dublin. In his letter Aidan Browne reassuringly referred to a complaints process that “Any Client” could invoke giving the impression that such a transparent, accountable quality mechanism would guarantee accountability in the event a poor quality of service delivery within the HSE. Contemporaneously the media has been littered with commentary about HSE standards, most notable in terms of the Leas Cross Nursing home scandal.. After the release of the report by Prof. Des O’Neill into Leas Cross Affair on the week ending Saturday the 11th of November 2006, there were numerous references in media coverage of statements by the same Aidan Browne. The articles used terms such as Systemic” “Systematic” and “unequivocal”. I was acutely aware that I had been seeking information in relation to this alleged “Complaints process” from the self same HSE since April this year (2006). My journey seeking information was carried out completely independently of any knowledge of Leas Cross victims or other HSE users. At every turn it appeared to me that officials representing the HSE were in “Defense, Denial mode” and were simply blanking what I personally was experiencing, as an ongoing reality of unsatisfactory quality standards. I am also aware of how the minutiae and nuance of correspondence with a monolith such as the HSE, with a seemingly bottomless "warchest” which it can utilize to protect itself, makesit almost impossible for an individual to penetrate the Paradigm Blindness. I set out to forensically map out my trail of seeking to get information which I had quite clearly requested. To be fair, when I originally requested this information, I was not operating with the level of vigilance that my harrowing previous experiences with the Health services should have reminded me to apply. There is therefore the possibility that despite my forensic efforts to lay out the trail that someone will attempt to dismiss the facts, or suggest that there was confusion, in order to avoid the reality of systemic, systematic depersonalised “Blockage”.

It is my thesis that the experience I have been having is endemic, and serves as evidenced-based proof of what many other HSE service users are experiencing and articulating for examples in issues such as the “Leas Cross” affair. My underlying hope is that someone or group of people in positions of influence and power to implement change will consider my contribution to challenging the present abuse of taxpayer’s monies, the insult to the members of the public, and utilize this information to fundamentally, educate HSE personnel towards a quality service culture. To this end I submit that there must be a recognition of the "Facts", the holding of individuals accountable for their individual personal substandard performance, while recognizing the over-arching cultural sickness within the monolith which is the HSE. Irish citizens deserve to see this corporate cleansing and with one in every three euro of exchequer funding going towards Health services such change is not optional. NOTE;I have tried to make the reading of the collation of correspondence as easy to follow as possible, mindful of a comment some years ago by Michael McDowell TD that “The Devil is in the detail”. I have highlighted the new elements in successive emails and letters and included the relevant attachments mentioned in correspondence. Point of Information In her letter to me, dated 7th Nov 2006 (see within PDF file) RSL stated as follows:“I can confirm that the initial contact with yourself in April 2006 was by way of reference to access under the Freedom of Information legislation to records referring to your son Tadhg O’Gogain. I have absolutely no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation.” It is absolutely true that I had not made a formal FOI application. However, the content of Emails from RSL to me subsequent to May 2006 can only make sense

in light of my statement on the content of her phone call to me (between the 18th of April and the 5th of May 2006) following my email of the 18th of April 2006.

Conclusion:I am grateful to anyone who takes the time to consider in detail this contribution to positive change in the Irish Health Services. This present journey has taken an enormous amount of my energy and caused me great frustration. However it would be more frustrating for me to simply settle for being disillusioned and internally angry, without having at least tried to articulate and present my argument. I have personal complaints about my experiences at the hands of HSE personnel. However until the process is itself a quality system, It would be irrational for me to expect a just outcome of my making a complaint. To quote another clip from Professor Drum’s interview with Pat Kenny in the late summer of 2006 when he suggested that a sure sign of insanity is when one repeatedly carries out the same experiment while expecting to achieve different results. Signed Liam Ó Gógáin 22nd November 2006

To contact me:Email to ogogainl@gmail.com

PS:- Please feel free to distribute this document freely, while referencing its origin. I welcome all feedback, in terms of any challenging to the veracity of what I have presented, the conclusions which I have drawn or inferred, or any suggestions as to how this information can be leveraged to support positive customer-centered change in the HSE.

Technical Error on page 6. Thewhereby info isany replicated page 7 below. The HSE also operates a review and complaints process, client of theon HSE can make a

complaint and seek a response. Some of the points which Mr Waters quotes arise from such reviews. The HSE is also subject to complaints being investigated by the Ombudsman. The ultimate guardian of course is the court system. Mr Waters apparently believes the courts to be impotent and to blindly accept the recommendations of the social worker. Yet at another point in his article he acknowledges the "decency" of a court when they refused to grant an order. You can't have it both ways, Mr Waters. The courts can and do exercise the option to refuse a request for a care order but in the vast majority of cases they demonstrate their high regard for the social worker's professional decision-making by granting the care orders for which they apply . Social workers do not lightly go to court and do not lightly consider taking children into care. These processes are highly stressful for all concerned. Mr Waters paints a picture of social workers "out of control" and taking children from their families for random and spurious reasons. Actually our social workers try to ensure that separation from the family is a last resort. In the course of child protection proceedings, HSE social workers are required to undertake an assessment of reported concerns. One of our guiding principles is that the focus of this work is to ensure that children remain with their families, where possible, and to that end we offer support services and interventions as appropriate. However, at times children may be in need of "care and protection". If a child cannot safely remain in the care of its family, options of care within the extended family are routinely explored. The prime consideration is naturally the welfare of the child and it is our practice that children should return to their parents' care when it is safe to do so. This child protection assessment is carried out in conjunction with parents and other agencies who know the strengths and risks of the family members. In other cases, children may also come into the voluntary care of HSE when a parent requests and needs voluntary care. It is important to note that children in care and care proceedings account for a small proportion of the overall work undertaken by HSE social work services. The main thrust of social work services is to support families. Our social workers are carrying out a complex and difficult role along the fault-lines of Irish society. While Mr Waters is perfectly entitled to argue for a more enlightened approach from his particular perspective, it is not reasonable to vilify the entire social work profession in the process. As national director with overall responsibility for childcare services I don't accept that regional disparities are easily dismissed. One of the real positives of the unified system is that we can now start to examine this evidence in more detail and take the learning from it to ensure that we develop the very best service for our entire population. - Yours, etc, AIDAN BROWNE, National Director, Primary, Community and Continuing Care Directorate, HSE, Dublin.

This Letter below was published in the Irish Times, Monday 28th August 2006, under the heading "POWER OF SOCIAL WORKERS"

Madam, - I wish to respond to John Waters's outrageous article (August 21st) concerning his misguided opinions about social workers. This statement suggests that "ANY CLIENT" i.e Joe or Mary Public, ordinary citizens can access, avail of and effectively process a complaint against HSE personnel. The facts shown in the link below show the absolute untruth of this statement.

On behalf of the State, under the Child Act 1991 and Children Act 1997, the HSE is obliged to deliver its child protection and welfare services to children and families in this country. In order for the HSE to conduct this sensitive and complex duty, the HSE employs skilled and trained professional social workers. Mr Waters's claims of "unfettered power" are wide of the mark. In fact, our social workers are obliged to conduct their work in a professional, transparent and courteous manner. They are open to, and must comply with, professional, ethical, legal and agency standards and processes. The HSE also operates a review and complaints process, whereby any client of the HSE can make a complaint and seek a response. Some of the points which Mr Waters quotes arise from such reviews. The HSE is also subject to complaints being investigated by the Ombudsman. The ultimate guardian of course is the court system. Mr Waters apparently believes the courts to be impotent and to blindly accept the recommendations of the social worker. Yet at another point in his article he acknowledges the "decency" of a court when they refused to grant an order. You can't have it both ways, Mr Waters. The courts can and do exercise the option to refuse a request for a care order but in the vast majority of cases they demonstrate their high regard for the social worker's professional decision-making by granting the care orders for which they apply . Social workers do not lightly go to court and do not lightly consider taking children into care. These processes are highly stressful for all concerned. Mr Waters paints a picture of social workers "out of control" and taking children from their families for random and spurious reasons. Actually our social workers try to ensure that separation from the family is a last resort. In the course of child protection proceedings, HSE social workers are required to undertake an assessment of reported concerns. One of our guiding principles is that the focus of this work is to ensure that children remain with their families, where possible, and to that end we offer support services and interventions as appropriate. However, at times children may be in need of "care and protection". If a child cannot safely remain in the care of its family, options of care within the extended family are routinely explored. The prime consideration is naturally the welfare of the child and it is our practice that children should return to their parents' care when it is safe to do so. This child protection assessment is carried out in conjunction with parents and other agencies who know the strengths and risks of the family members. In other cases, children may also come into the voluntary care of HSE when a parent requests and needs voluntary care. It is important to note that children in care and care proceedings account for a small proportion of the overall work undertaken by HSE social work services. The main thrust of social work services is to support families. Our social workers are carrying out a complex and difficult role along the fault-lines of Irish society. While Mr Waters is perfectly entitled to argue for a more enlightened approach from his particular perspective, it is not reasonable to vilify the entire social work profession in the process. As national director with overall responsibility for childcare services I don't accept that regional disparities are easily dismissed. One of the real positives of the unified system is that we can now start to examine this evidence in more detail and take the learning from it to ensure that we develop the very best service for our entire population. - Yours, etc, AIDAN BROWNE, National Director, Primary, Community and Continuing Care Directorate, HSE, Dublin.

Page 1 of 1 The following pages attempt to follow chronologically my correspondence with the HSE in this matter

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Tuesday, April 18, 2006 12:20 PM

To:

'rosalie.smithlynch@maile.hse.ie'

Subject: FOI application Dear ms. Smith-Lynch,

While searching a government website seeking FOI officials for the HSE North East I found your name. Yours was the only FOI official with no email details supplied (see attached image). I rang the number and was given this email. Please confirm that you have received this email and that you are the relevant FOI official.

I am seeking under section 7 (and any other relevant section ) of the FOI Act all records in all formats in relation to my son Tadhg Ó Gógáin, of 1 Muirhevna, Dundalk. Tahdg may also have been presented to the medical services as Tadhg Cartwright (his mother's maiden name) possibly with addressed at 173 Glenwood Dundalk and laterally 47 Rathmount, Blackrock, Co.Louth.

For the purpose of clarification and to prevent unnecessary delay, I am Tadhg's father and guardian. I am mindful of the recent Supreme Court JudgPHnt in relaWLon to guardians and medical information (see attached pdf). I do not know what the situation in realtionship to fees for information sought by a guardian in relation to children or of time limitations for information prior to the implimentation of the act.

Tadhg's address is 1 Muirhevna,Dublin Road, Dundalk. He may also have been presented to the Health Services in his mother's maiden name of Cartwright with an address at 173 Glenwood, Dublin Road, Dundalk and laterally at 46 Rathmont, BlackrocN, Co.Louth.

Your Sincerelly Liam Ó Gógáin

PS: I will be away from my email for a few day, but if you wish to contact me with any queries, please contact me on 087 2543997

11/21/2006

Click here to jump to substantive issue

Click for Next Core material

Click for wording of Article 42 Bunreacht na hĂ&#x2030;ireann

Article 42 of Bunreacht na hÉireann. Note Art 42.1 where the State “guarantees to respect” and as Gaeilge “ráthaíonn (an Stát) gan cur isteach ar” in relation to the inalienable rights and duties of parents. The Irish version seems so much stronger, effectively confirming the state guarantee “not to interfere --- gan cur isteach. Liam Ó Gógáin 26/Jan ‘05

Education Article 42 1. The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children. 2. Parents shall be free to provide this education in their homes or in private schools or in schools recognised or established by the State. 3. 1° The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State, or to any particular type of school designated by the State. 2° The State shall, however, as guardian of the common good, require in view of actual conditions that the children receive a certain minimum education, moral, intellectual and social. 4. The State shall provide for free primary education and shall endeavour to supplement and give reasonable aid to private and corporate educational initiative, and, when the public good requires it, provide other educational facilities or institutions with due regard, however, for the rights of parents, especially in the matter of religious and moral formation.

5. In exceptional cases, where the parents for physical or moral reasons fail in their duty towards their children, the State as guardian of the common good, by appropriate means shall endeavour to supply the place of the parents, but always with due regard for the natural and imprescriptible rights of the child.

Oideachas 1. Airteagal 42 Admhaíonn an Stát gurb é an Teaghlach is múinteoir príomha dúchasach don leanbh, agus ráthaíonn gan cur isteach ar cheart doshannta ná ar dhualgas doshannta tuistí chun oideachas de réir a n-acmhainne a chur ar fáil dá gclainn i gcúrsaí creidimh, moráltachta, intleachta, coirp agus comhdhaonnachta. 2. Tig le tuistí an t-oideachas sin a chur ar fáil dá gclainn ag baile nó i scoileanna príobháideacha nó i scoileanna a admhaítear nó a bhunaítear ag an Stát. 3. 1° Ní cead don Stát a chur d'fhiacha ar thuistí, in aghaidh a gcoinsiasa nó a rogha dleathaí, a gclann a chur ar scoileanna a bhunaítear ag an Stát nó ar aon chineál áirithe scoile a ainmnítear ag an Stát. 2° Ach ós é an Stát caomhnóir leasa an phobail ní foláir dó, toisc cor an lae, é a dhéanamh éigeantach minimum áirithe oideachais a thabhairt do na leanaí i gcúrsaí moráltachta, intleachta agus comhdhaonnachta. 4. Ní foláir don Stát socrú a dhéanamh chun bunoideachas a bheith ar fáil in aisce, agus iarracht a dhéanamh chun cabhrú go réasúnta agus chun cur le tionscnamh oideachais idir phríobháideach agus chumannta agus, nuair is riachtanas chun leasa an phobail é, áiseanna nó fundúireachtaí eile oideachais a chur ar fáil, ag féachaint go cuí, áfach, do chearta tuistí, go mór mór maidir le múnlú na haigne i gcúrsaí creidimh is moráltachta.

5. I gcásanna neamhchoiteanna nuair a tharlaíonn, ar chúiseanna corpartha nó ar chúiseanna morálta, nach ndéanaid na tuistí a ndualgais dá gclainn, ní foláir don Stát, ós é an Stát caomhnóir leasa an phobail, iarracht a dhéanamh le beart oiriúnach chun ionad na dtuistí a ghlacadh, ag féachaint go cuí i gcónaí, áfach, do chearta nádúrtha dochloíte an linbh.

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Thursday, May 04, 2006 12:22 AM

To:

'rosalie.smithlynch@maile.hse.ie'

Subject: FW: FOI application Hi, We spoke recently re my application below. I subsequently had a phone call asking for my address for sending out information as I had discussed with yourself re complaints procedures. I have received nothing to date. Can you advise? Sincerely Liam Ó Gógáin

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 12:20 PM To: 'rosalie.smithlynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: FOI application

Dear ms. Smith-Lynch,

For the purpose of clarification and to prevent unnecessary delay, I am Tadhg's father and guardian. I am mindful of the recent Supreme Court Judgemnt in relaiton to guardians and medical information (see attached pdf). I do not know what the situation in realtionship to fees for information sought by a guardian in relation to children or of time limitations for information prior to the implimentation of the act.

Your Sincerelly Liam Ó Gógáin

PS: I will be away from my email for a few day, but if you wish to contact me with any queries, please contact me on 087 2543997

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Friday, May 05, 2006 5:41 PM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Subject: RE: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application Thanks for update Rosalie. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:33 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

Liam, info was held up due to delivery from printers re supply of comment/ complaints forms ,apologies for inconvience, I understand Foi is being processed at present. Rosalie Smithlynch

********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the Network Administrator. HSE-NE Contact: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie This email has been processed by an automated anti-virus system; however it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the message (including any attachments) is safe and authorised for use in their own environment. Tá eolas atá príobháideach agus rúnda sa ríomhphost seo agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis agus is leis an duine nó eagraíocht sin amháin a bhfuil siad seolta chucu a bhaineann siad. Cuir in iúil don Riarthóir Idirlinne led thoil má tá an ríomhphost seo faighte agat trí dhearmad, Teagmháil: FSS an Oirthuaiscirt: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie In ainneoin go ndearnadh próiseáil ar an ríomhphost seo trí chóras frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:10 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: RE: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application Hi Rosalie, Just to confirm that I received the preliminary information you sent out in relation to the complaints procedures within the HSE (NE) as attached. I was somewhat surprised that it was so scant. However as the flow chart is described as a “Summary” there is obviously a complete set of documentation in support of this. I would appreciate if you could either forward me a soft copy of the complete documentation of the complaints procedure or preferably send me a link to a website which contains the information (I presume that’s how such information is available within the HSE structure) Regards Liam Ó Gógáín Chairman Parental Equality

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:33 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

Liam, info was held up due to delivery from printers re supply of comment/ complaints forms ,apologies for inconvience, I understand Foi is being processed at present. Rosalie Smithlynch

11/21/2006

liamog From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:

liamog [info@liamog.com] Wednesday, May 17, 2006 12:50 PM 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' secretary@parentalequality.ie FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office.

Hi Rosalie, I presume that you are back in the office as per your automated reply. Perhaps you would attend to the email I sent recently in relation to complaints procedure details Sincerely Liam Ó Gógáin -----Original Message----From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 4:01 PM To: liamog Subject: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. I will be out of the office starting 15/05/2006.

10/05/2006 and will not return until

please contact Ms. Marie McPhillips 049 4360435 or Ms. Tracey Ann Martin at 049 4360462

**********************************************************************

-No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/337 - Release Date: 5/11/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Marie.McPhillips@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Monday, May 29, 2006 3:30 PM

To:

info@liamog.com

Subject: Summary of Complaints Procedure

Dear Liam With reference to your email to Rosalie Smith Lynch dated 12th May 2006 I attach herewith Summary of Complaints Procedure for your information. Regards Marie on behalf of Rosalie Smith Lynch

11/21/2006

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE Dublin North East

What is a Complaint? A complaint is defined as an expression of dissatisfaction however made, about the standard of service, action or lack of action by the Health Service Executive or its staff affecting an individual service user or group of users.

Principles of the Complaints Policy • • • • • • • •

Responsive Accessible Simple Impartial Speedy Confidential Informative Quality enhancement and monitoring

Role of Complaints Officer/Consumer Services Officer • • • • • •

Acknowledges complaint within 5 working days and explains clearly to the complainant the complaints procedure, the timeframe and the options available to the complainant at each stage in the process Documents and collates all the information relevant to the complaint investigation and also the outcome Documents outcome of investigation on complaint file Provides a written, and in some cases an oral explanation of the outcome of the investigation to the complainant within 28 days of receiving the complaint Should there be any delay in the process of investigation, the complainant should be informed by way of holding letter or contact by telephone Complainant should also be advised of their entitlement to refer complaint to the Regional Customer Service Officer and external appeal to the Ombudsman if they are dissatisfied with the outcome of the complaint

Who may make a Complaint? – Health Act 2004 Complaints can be made by the following: • • • • •

Service User Immediate family member Carer Legal Representative Other person with signed authority of complainant

Complaints made by Third Party Complaints maybe received on behalf of a service user, from a family member, a friend, or any other individual/body empowered by the patient/service user. Prior to the processing of such a complaint, the appropriate manager must be satisfied that the complaint is being made with the authority of the service user. The written authority of the service user will be required prior to processing the complaint.

Complaint log should record the following details: a) b) c) d) e) f)

Complainant’s name and address Service users name and address (if different from above) Contact telephone numbers Brief description of the complaint with details of staff involved, time and date Details of action taken All forms should be signed and dated

Documenting a Complaint Documenting and recording of a complaint is an important part of the complaints process. Documentation should provide • • • • •

Details of complaint An accurate record of what the complainant is concerned about A record of staff responses A record of steps taken to resolve the complaint A record of the outcome of complaint

Completion of log should be undertaken by the staff member to whom the complaint is made as soon as possible after receiving the complaint.

Time Frames • • • •

Acknowledged complaint within 5 working days Outcome of investigation must be issued within 28 working days Response on review issued within 20 working days Independent review response within 30 working days

Feedback On completion of the complaint all staff involved in the complaint investigation process should be informed when the process is completed and provided with details of the outcome.

Letter of response to the complainant should include the following: • • • • • •

Brief summary of the facts of the complaint with dates Explanation of the result of any investigation and statement to indicate that investigation has been completed Explanation of any remedial action undertaken to ensure non-reoccurrence Invitation to complainant to contact you to discuss the report if necessary Request for review of decision to the Regional Customer Services Officer Details of further extern appeal to the Office of the Ombudsman

____________________________

liamog From: Sent: To: Subject:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:02 PM liamog Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office.

I will be out of the office starting

08/09/2006 and will not return until 14/09/2006.

if you have an urgent message please contact Patricia Fitzsimons at 049 4360471/ 4360462

**********************************************************************

-No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/446 - Release Date: 9/12/2006

liamog From: Sent: To: Subject:

liamog [info@liamog.com] Friday, September 15, 2006 11:17 AM 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. FOI Complaints info request

Hi Rosalie, I presume from your auto response to my email of the 13th of September that you are back in the office today. I would appreciate an update to the status of my request. I do not wish to claim that I have not been given the information I requested if it has in fact been given to me. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin PS I have tried both phone numbers which you supplied in your automated response and there was no one to answer the phone. I left a message on the voicemail system fro your attention. -----Original Message----From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. Hi Rosalie, I presume that you are back in the office as per your automated reply. Perhaps you would attend to the email I sent recently in relation to complaints procedure details Sincerely Liam Ó Gógáin -----Original Message----From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 4:01 PM To: liamog Subject: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. I will be out of the office starting 15/05/2006.

10/05/2006 and will not return until

please contact Ms. Marie McPhillips 049 4360435 or Ms. Tracey Ann Martin at 049 4360462

**********************************************************************

-No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/337 - Release Date: 5/11/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Friday, September 15, 2006 5:41 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: Re: FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. FOI Complaints info request

Liamog, i have checked with Dundalk office and i have been informed that a reply was issued to your Foi request and our records indicate that info re complaints procedure was forwarded from this dept in may.

Rosalie Smithlynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Monday, September 18, 2006 9:04 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Subject: RE application for complaints proceedure Hi Rosalie, In response to your email below, I wish to confirm that I did receive (as you correctly pointed out) information in relation to my son Tadhg from the Dundalk office as you have pointed out. Separately, as regards the complaints procedures which I discussed in detail with you by phone some months ago, I would appreciate verification that your note re your records of your department relates to the email details I have pasted in below, which I sent to you on May the 12 th last. Give HSE resources and professionalism, the presumption must be that your records are correct. However I do no appear to have had any further details as per my request. If I am wrong and have mislaid the documents then I apologise for wasting your time. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin F r o m : Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] S e n t : Friday, September 15, 2006 5:41 PM To: liamog S u b j e c t : Re: FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. FOI Complaints info request

Rosalie Smithlynch

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:10 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

Hi Rosalie, Just to confirm that I received the preliminary information you sent out in relation to the complaints procedures within the HSE (NE) as attached. I was somewhat surprised that it was so scant. However as the flow chart is described as a “Summary” there is obviously a complete set of documentation in support of this. I would appreciate if you could either forward me a soft copy of the complete documentation of the complaints procedure or preferably send me a link to a website which contains the information (I presume that’s how such information is available within the HSE structure) Regards

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Thursday, September 21, 2006 9:23 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Subject: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.1 Tracking: Recipient

Read

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

secretary@parentalequality.ie

Read: 9/21/2006 10:55 PM

Hi Rosalie, I did not receive a response or acknowledgement to my email below. I would appreciate confirmation that you have received both the email of Sept 18th and the earlier one on 12th May last. I feel very frustrated by the practical impossibility I am experiencing getting details of the HSE complaints process. Regards Liam Ó Gógáín

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 9:04 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: RE application for complaints proceedure

Hi Rosalie, In response to your email below, I wish to confirm that I did receive (as you correctly pointed out) information in relation to my son Tadhg from the Dundalk office as you have pointed out. Separately, as regards the complaints procedures which I discussed in detail with you by phone some months ago, I would appreciate verification that your note re your records of your department relates to the email details I have pasted in below, which I sent to you on May the 12 th last. Give HSE resources and professionalism, the presumption must be that your records are correct. However I do no appear to have had any further details as per my request. If I am wrong and have mislaid the documents then I apologise for wasting your time. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin F r o m : Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] S e n t : Friday, September 15, 2006 5:41 PM To: liamog S u b j e c t : Re: FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. FOI Complaints info request

Liamog, i have checked with Dundalk office and i have been informed that a reply was issued to your Foi request and our records indicate that info re complaints procedure

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

was forwarded from this dept in may.

Rosalie Smithlynch

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:10 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:33 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

Liam, info was held up due to delivery from printers re supply of comment/ complaints forms ,apologies for inconvience, I understand Foi is being processed at present. Rosalie Smithlynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 3

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Friday, September 22, 2006 3:53 PM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Subject: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2 Hi Rosalie, I am concerned that I have not heard back from you re the material below, nor have I have confirmation of receipt of delivery. I have had confirmation from other recipients of copies. Normally if you are a way your autoresponder operates. I am frustrated as statements recently made in the media re HSE complaints process accessibility do not concur with my experience to date. As there is the likely possibility that, being a sole individual with limited resources and energies compared to the HSE, I am in error and perhaps I have not noticed the material you your records show you have sent, I am loathe to take this matter further, until I get clarification. Please confirm that you are receiving my correspondence. Regards Liam O Gogain

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 9:23 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.1

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 9:04 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: RE application for complaints proceedure

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 3

To: liamog S u b j e c t : Re: FW: Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office. FOI Complaints info request

Rosalie Smithlynch

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:10 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:33 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

Liam, info was held up due to delivery from printers re supply of comment/ complaints forms ,apologies for inconvience, I understand Foi is being processed at present. Rosalie Smithlynch

11/21/2006

Page 3 of 3

frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Monday, September 25, 2006 1:13 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: Re: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2

Liamog, just rec e-mail today we have had difficulities with e-mail over past few months however same have been addressed,i will examine details as outlined in your corres over the next few days. Rosalie Smith

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Wednesday, October 11, 2006 12:26 PM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie'; secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: RE: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2 Tracking: Recipient

Read

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' 'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie' secretary@parentalequality.ie

Read: 10/11/2006 4:33 PM

Hi Rosalie, I received some information in the post the other day. I need you to confirm that this is the full information that is being made available to me further to my emails to you in relation to complaints. I have attached a photo of the material which I received. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin PS. I have note that I previously received as one page flowchart summary sheet.

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 1:13 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie In ainneoin go ndearnadh próiseáil ar an ríomhphost seo trí chóras frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:43 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie'; 'secretary@parentalequality.ie'

Subject: FW: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.3 Tracking: Recipient

Read

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' 'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie' 'secretary@parentalequality.ie'

Read: 10/17/2006 10:31 PM

Hi Rosalie, I have not received any response or acknowledgement of receipt of the email bleow. Please confirm the your HSE email is receiving these emails. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 12:26 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: 'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie'; secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

processed by an automated anti-virus system; however it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the message (including any attachments) is safe and authorised for use in their own environment. Tá eolas atá príobháideach agus rúnda sa ríomhphost seo agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis agus is leis an duine nó eagraíocht sin amháin a bhfuil siad seolta chucu a bhaineann siad. Cuir in iúil don Riarthóir Idirlinne led thoil má tá an ríomhphost seo faighte agat trí dhearmad, Teagmháil: FSS an Oirthuaiscirt: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie In ainneoin go ndearnadh próiseáil ar an ríomhphost seo trí chóras frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:41 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: Re: FW: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.3

Liamog , I have responded to any e-mails re,. however last e-mail was sent to customer services .I will forward all documentation again to avoid confusion. Rosalie Smith-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 6:26 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: RE: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2

Liamog, i have just rec this e-mail , apologies response as per previous . Rosalie

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 3

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Friday, October 20, 2006 11:07 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie'; secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: application for complaints proceedure Liam O Gogain. Status of query to date? Tracking: Recipient

Read

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' 'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie' secretary@parentalequality.ie

Read: 10/11/2006 4:33 PM

HI Rosalie, I received your email dates Tuesday 10/17/2006 5.41pm with content as follows :Liamog , I have responded to any e-mails re,. however last e-mail was sent to customer services .I will forward all documentation again to avoid confusion. I apologise if I have been unclear in my correspondence to you. As regards sending a copy to 'cavan.regcustserv@maile.hse.ie', I am simply trying to ensure that my correspondence does actually reach you. In order to clarify my request, I understand I have received to date three pieces of information following my lengthy interaction with you as FOI contact in the HSE. These docs are attached with this email. Rather than wasting your time and costs resending me the above, perhaps you could simply confirm that this information is the sum total of the information sent to me in relation to my request (including my original phone conversation with you months ago and my follow up correspondence). I presume that you can confirm this easily from you records. If there is other information which you have sent me and which I have not referred to in the attached documents please let me know. Please confirm receipt of this email. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 3:53 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.2

Hi Rosalie, I am concerned that I have not heard back from you re the material below, nor have I have confirmation of receipt of delivery. I have had confirmation from other recipients of copies. Normally if you are a way your autoresponder operates. I am frustrated as statements recently made in the media re HSE complaints process accessibility do not concur with my experience to date. As there is the likely possibility that, being a sole individual with limited resources and energies compared to the HSE, I am in error and perhaps I have not noticed the material you your records show you have sent, I am loathe to take this matter further, until I get clarification. Please confirm that you are receiving my correspondence.

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 3

Regards Liam O Gogain

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 9:23 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure Reminder no.1

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 9:04 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: RE application for complaints proceedure

Rosalie Smithlynch

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com]

11/21/2006

Page 3 of 3

S e n t : Friday, May 12, 2006 11:10 AM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie S u b j e c t : RE: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:33 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: [Maybe spam] FW: FOI application

Liam, info was held up due to delivery from printers re supply of comment/ complaints forms ,apologies for inconvience, I understand Foi is being processed at present. Rosalie Smithlynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:40 PM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: RE application for complaints proceedure. Status of application

Hi Rosalie, I wish to confirm receipt of the information re complaints procedures sent by mail to me dated 23 rd of October last (Copy attached). I note that the latest information contains a text summary of complaints procedure, which had not previously been supplied to me. It is important for me to emphasise that I originally discovered your contact details online and emailed you last April (18/4/2006). Shortly afterwards you rang me and we had an extensive phone conversation in which I specified that I was seeking detailed information in all formats of the HSE/previous Health Boards Complaints processes or in the alternative a clear statement from you that either I was not entitled to the information or that I would have to seek it under the formality of FOI. In order to minimise cost to the taxpayer and inconvenience to all of us, I requested that I be given the information outside of a formal application if it was your judgment that I would get it anyway under a formal application of the act (in the spirit of the act). There has been extensive correspondence between us on this issue. There also appears to be an unreliability in relation to HSE email reception (“difficulties with e-mail over past few months” 25/9/200 your email). At this juncture, months later I can safely say that my request for the detailed complaints process information has not been adequately addressed. Consider the most obvious issue of providing me with summary document, which by definition means that there is a comprehensive document/process to summarise. However, despite repeated requests I am repeatedly provided by you with summaries only. I appreciate that you are probably doing your level best to assist me in this matter and it is perhaps frustrating for you not to be able to close file on this request for information. However, please imagine my frustration being unable to access the information on complaints which I originally requested. My frustration has led me to try to contact AIDAN BROWNE, National Director, Primary, Community and Continuing Care Directorate, HSE, Dublin. I have tried to locate an email address for him through the HSE website at info@hse.ie (once again without even a response). I would dearly appreciate if you would forward me his email, that I might refocus my issues directly to him as supplying the information I had requested may not be within the scope of your competence or functionality. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Tuesday, November 07, 2006 8:28 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure. Status of application. Reminder No.1 Hi Rosalie, I have not heard back form you in relation to the email below, nor have I had confirmation of your receipt of same. I would appreciate both an immediate acknowledgment of receipt and a response as soon as possible. Regards Liam Ó Gógáín

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:40 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE application for complaints proceedure. Status of application

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

without even a response). I would dearly appreciate if you would forward me his email, that I might refocus my issues directly to him as supplying the information I had requested may not be within the scope of your competence or functionality. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Tuesday, November 07, 2006 4:42 PM

To:

info@liamog.com

Cc:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Subject: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch

Please see the attached.

_____________________ Angie Sutherland On behalf of Rosalie Smith Lynch Regional Customer Services Department 049 4360462 **********************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the Network Administrator. HSE-NE Contact: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie This email has been processed by an automated anti-virus system; however it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the message (including any attachments) is safe and authorised for use in their own environment. Tá eolas atá príobháideach agus rúnda sa ríomhphost seo agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis agus is leis an duine nó eagraíocht sin amháin a bhfuil siad seolta chucu a bhaineann siad. Cuir in iúil don Riarthóir Idirlinne led thoil má tá an ríomhphost seo faighte agat trí dhearmad, Teagmháil: FSS an Oirthuaiscirt: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie In ainneoin go ndearnadh próiseáil ar an ríomhphost seo trí chóras frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Mr Liam O’Gogain 1 Muirhevna Dublin Rd Dundalk Co. Louth 07 November 2006 Ref: 113 RSL/AS

The culmination of months of forensically following my request for complaints information. If what she says is true, then why on earth would RSL have begun sending me any complaints info at all?

Dear Mr O’Gogain I acknowledge receipt of your email of 2nd November 2006. I can confirm that the initial contact with yourself in April 2006 was by way of reference to access under the Freedom of Information legislation to records referring to your son Tadhg O’Gogain. I have absolutely no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation. All documentation available within the HSE Dublin North East, formerly the North Eastern Health Board for provision to the public in relation to the complaints process has been forwarded to you. I note that in your email of 2nd November that you have specified that you were seeking detailed information in all formats of the HSE previous health boards complaints processes. I at no time was requested for that information and the information provided related as already identified to the former North Eastern Health Board area. If you are seeking access to information regarding complaints procedures and processes in the former health boards I will forward your email onto the relevant personnel within the HSE. Can you please clarify if this is what you request? In relation to your email of 2nd November 2006 I have forwarded same to Mr Aidan Browne, National Director of Primary, Community and Continuing Care. Mr Browne can be contacted at the following address: Mr Aidan Browne, National Director of Primary, Community and Continuing Care, HSE, Block D, Parkgate Business Centre, Parkgate Street, Dublin 8. Yours sincerely ______________________________ Rosalie Smith Lynch Regional Customer Services Co-ordinator & Freedom of Information Manager

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:56 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: Re: FW: RE application for complaints proceedure. Status of application. Reminder No.1

Liamog, e-mail rsesponse was issued today on my behalf byTracey Martinin or Angie Sutherland . R Smith-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:55 PM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

'TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie'; secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: RE: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch Tracking: Recipient

Read

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' 'TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie' secretary@parentalequality.ie

Read: 11/7/2006 10:27 PM

Hi Rosalie, Thanks you for your reply to my second reminder. While you supplied the physical address for Aiadan Browne I would appreciate if you would supply his email as I had requested. In relation to your statement that you “have

absolutely no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation”, I would request that you reflect on this position and perhaps

reaffirm this very unequivocal statement, or perhaps amend it to reflect the facts. I appreciate that this correspondence has been lengthy. However as the citizen and tax payer who was simply requesting information I am becoming very frustrated, though by now, not surprised at the Health Service systemic response. Regards Liam Ó Gógáín PS. Please acknowledge receipt of this email by return

From: TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie [mailto:TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 4:42 PM To: info@liamog.com Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie Subject: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch

Please see the attached.

_____________________ Angie Sutherland On behalf of Rosalie Smith Lynch Regional Customer Services Department 049 4360462 **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Tuesday, November 07, 2006 7:09 PM

To:

liamog

Cc:

secretary@parentalequality.ie; TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie

Subject: RE: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch

liamog, my responses are neither systematic or unequivocal .i do not have at present an e-mail address for A Browne but will get one wed.and forward to you. can you please clarify whether the info you seek is in respect of all former health boards or only the north east as i had understood from previous communications . Rosalie Smith-lynch

11/21/2006

liamog From: Sent: To: Subject:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie Tuesday, November 07, 2006 7:18 PM liamog Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office.

I will be out of the office starting

07/11/2006 and will not return until 09/11/2006.

if you have an urgent message please contact Patricia Fitzsimons at 049 4360471/ 4360462

**********************************************************************

-No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.30/521 - Release Date: 11/7/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Friday, November 10, 2006 5:54 PM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

secretary@parentalequality.ie

Subject: FW: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch Hi Rosalie, Further to your email below and the separate one stating you would be out of the office until yesterday the 9/11/2006, I presume that you have had an opportunity to get an email address for Aidan Browne. It appears you may have misunderstood the content of my email below in relation to the use of “unequivocal” and “systemic”. “Systematic” for me is associated with the Film “Grease” – Systematic, Hydroamtic, automatic—Greased Lightning. My understanding of “systemic” is somewhat different in terms of corporate culture. There may in fact be a systematic element within it. However I believe that if a behaviour is ingrained systemically in the corporate belief system then individuals may not even be aware of their systematic actions. As regards your position of your having “absolutely

no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation”

This statement is unequivocal, even if, as in this case, it does not concur with the facts. As you have had a few days to consider your response, you may feel now like either reaffirming you mistaken position or correct it. As regards clarification re the complaints process info I had originally sought from you, I must say that I was surprised (though on hindsight why should I be in light of my previous experiences) to find now that there may be a number of quite different complaints processes which have existed in the previous Health Board Structure. So, it appears that depending on where in Ireland you lived you were getting a different Health service quality system. Very reassuring! I hope that in the North East I had the best one. In my ignorance I had originally sought info re the NEHB area as I presumed that there was only one standard. However, now that you have raised the multiple processes I believe it is an issue of obvious National Importance to produce all the complaints process information. I have to assume that this information is already available in soft copy and on intranet environments. Finally it is important to me to get the email for Aidan Browne as the info@hse.ie simply does not respond to my emails. I have been asked by a reader how you forwarded my email to Aidan Browne as per your earlier letter of the 7 th November “In relation to your email of 2nd November 2006 I have forwarded same to Mr Aidan

Browne”, if as you subsequently stated below, that you didn’t have his email address. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin liamog, my responses are neither systematic or unequivocal .i do not have at present an e-mail address for A Browne but will get one wed.and forward to you. can you please clarify whether the info you seek is in respect of all former health boards or only the north east as i had understood from previous communications . Tue 11/7/2006 7:09 PM From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:55 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: 'TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie'; secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

Please see the attached.

_____________________ Angie Sutherland On behalf of Rosalie Smith Lynch Regional Customer Services Department 049 4360462 **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 3

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Monday, November 13, 2006 10:43 AM

To:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'

Cc:

'PaulColeman'

Subject: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch Reminder No1 Hi Rosalie, I have spent long periods over the weekend reading the various newspaper reports of the Leas Cross debacle. I note repeated references to words used in the process such as “Systemic”, “Systematic”, and “Unequivocal”, which suggest they form part of the language of Health professionals. I am quite frustrated, though obviously not alone, in seeking basic information from the HSE representatives. I am requesting that you respond without delay with confirmation of receipt of this and the previous email(see below) and with a comprehensive response to the issues raised. Regards Liam Ó Gógáín

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 5:54 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: FW: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch

Hi Rosalie, Further to your email below and the separate one stating you would be out of the office until yesterday the 9/11/2006, I presume that you have had an opportunity to get an email address for Aidan Browne. It appears you may have misunderstood the content of my email below in relation to the use of “unequivocal” and “systemic”. “Systematic” for me is associated with the Film “Grease” – Systematic, Hydroamtic, automatic—Greased Lightning. My understanding of “systemic” is somewhat different in terms of corporate culture. There may in fact be a systematic element within it. However I believe that if a behaviour is ingrained systemically in the corporate belief system then individuals may not even be aware of their systematic actions. As regards your position of your having “absolutely

no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation”

Browne”, if as you subsequently stated below, that you didn’t have his email address.

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 3

Regards Liam Ó Gógáin liamog, my responses are neither systematic or unequivocal .i do not have at present an e-mail address for A Browne but will get one wed.and forward to you. can you please clarify whether the info you seek is in respect of all former health boards or only the north east as i had understood from previous communications . Tue 11/7/2006 7:09 PM From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:55 PM To: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Cc: 'TraceyAnn.Martin@maile.hse.ie'; secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: RE: Please see attached - Rosalie Smith Lynch

Please see the attached.

_____________________ Angie Sutherland On behalf of Rosalie Smith Lynch Regional Customer Services Department 049 4360462 **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 3 of 3

Idirlinne led thoil má tá an ríomhphost seo faighte agat trí dhearmad, Teagmháil: FSS an Oirthuaiscirt: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie In ainneoin go ndearnadh próiseáil ar an ríomhphost seo trí chóras frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

liamog From: Sent: To: Subject:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie Monday, November 13, 2006 4:28 PM liamog Rosalie SmithLynch/NEHB is out of the office.

I will be out of the office starting

13/11/2006 and will not return until 14/11/2006.

if you have an urgent message please contact Patricia Fitzsimons at 049 4360471/ 4360462

**********************************************************************

-No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.3/531 - Release Date: 11/12/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie

Sent:

Monday, November 13, 2006 4:29 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: Re: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam, e-mail for A Browne PA is Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie Rosalie Smithl-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 1

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Monday, November 13, 2006 4:31 PM

To:

'Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie'

Cc:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'; 'PaulColeman'

Subject: FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3 Dear Annmarie, Rosalie Smyth-Lynch has supplied me with your email contact, as PA for Aidan Browne. I have been trying unsuccessfully to get an email contact for him for some time. Please confirm that you are a direct conduit to Aidan Browne. Yours Sincerely, Liam Ó Gógáin

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 4:29 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam, e-mail for A Browne PA is Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie Rosalie Smithl-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

Ann-Marie Kennedy [annmarie_kennedy@hse.ie]

Sent:

Monday, November 13, 2006 5:06 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3 Liam Ann-Marie has moved to another post but I am covering her post on a temporary basis as Aidan’s PA. Regards Jennifer Veale Office of Mr. Aidan Browne National Director Primary Community and Continuing Care Health Service Executive Block D, Parkgate Business Centre Parkgate Street Dublin 8 Tel: 01-6352971 Fax: 01-6352899 E-mail: jennifer_veale@hse.ie

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: 13 November 2006 16:31 To: Ann-Marie Kennedy Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie; 'PaulColeman' Subject: FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Dear Annmarie, Rosalie Smyth-Lynch has supplied me with your email contact, as PA for Aidan Browne. I have been trying unsuccessfully to get an email contact for him for some time. Please confirm that you are a direct conduit to Aidan Browne. Yours Sincerely, Liam Ó Gógáin

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 4:29 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam, e-mail for A Browne PA is Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie Rosalie Smithl-lynch

********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the Network Administrator. HSE-NE Contact: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie This email has been processed by an automated anti-virus system; however it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the message (including any attachments) is safe and authorised for use in their own environment. Tá eolas atá príobháideach agus rúnda sa ríomhphost seo agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis agus is leis an duine nó eagraíocht sin amháin a bhfuil siad seolta chucu a bhaineann siad. Cuir in iúil don Riarthóir Idirlinne led thoil má tá an ríomhphost seo faighte agat trí dhearmad, Teagmháil: FSS an Oirthuaiscirt: admin_sweep@maile.hse.ie In ainneoin go ndearnadh próiseáil ar an ríomhphost seo trí chóras frithvíreas uathoibríoch, tá freagracht ar ghlacadóir a chinntiú go bhfuil an teachtaireacht (ceangaltáin san aireamh) sábháilte agus ceadaithe le n-úsáid ina suíomh oibre féin. **********************************************************************

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Monday, November 13, 2006 7:17 PM

To:

'jennifer_veale@hse.ie'

Cc:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'; 'PaulColeman'

Subject: FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3 Tracking: Recipient

Read

'jennifer_veale@hse.ie' 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' 'PaulColeman'

Read: 11/13/2006 9:25 PM

Hi Jennifer, Thank you for your prompt response. I would be grateful if you would bring Aidan Browne up to date with all elements of my correspondence with Rosalie Smyth-Lynch since the 18thy of April 2006. I would also be grateful if he could forward me a copy of the correspondence forwarded to him by Rosalie, which she referred in her email to me dated 7th November 2006. In light of the HSE “Systemic” failure defence as used by Aidan Browne in relation to the Leas Cross affair, I would ask that this request is processed without delay and that Aidan Browne comments in correspondence to me about the quality of the HSE response to my ongoing request for information since the end of April/ beginning of May last. I have a fundamental problem with the quite “unequivocal” statement by Rosalie Smyth-Lynch (see letter attached) that she has “absolutely no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation”. In fairness I have asked to reflect on her position but she does not seem to wish to modify her statement. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin PS I have also repeatedly emailed info@hse to seek an email address foe Aidan. I have never once received an acknowledgement of receipt never mind an answer. I got the info@hse.ie address at the following web page http://www.hse.ie/en/ContactUs/. I need to know if it is HSE policy to not answer requests to this email.

From: Ann-Marie Kennedy [mailto:annmarie_kennedy@hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 5:06 PM To: liamog Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam Ann-Marie has moved to another post but I am covering her post on a temporary basis as Aidan’s PA. Regards Jennifer Veale Office of Mr. Aidan Browne National Director Primary Community and Continuing Care Health Service Executive Block D, Parkgate Business Centre

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

Parkgate Street Dublin 8 Tel: 01-6352971 Fax: 01-6352899 E-mail: jennifer_veale@hse.ie

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: 13 November 2006 16:31 To: Ann-Marie Kennedy Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie; 'PaulColeman' Subject: FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 4:29 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam, e-mail for A Browne PA is Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie Rosalie Smithl-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2

liamog From:

JENNIFER VEALE [JENNIFER_VEALE@HSE.IE]

Sent:

Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:27 PM

To:

liamog

Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3 Liam I do not have copies of any of your correspondence to Rosalie Smyth-Lynch and the attachment you refer to in your e-mail was not attached unfortunately. Regards Jennifer Veale -----Original Message----F r o m : liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] S e n t : 13 November 2006 19:17 To: JENNIFER VEALE Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie; 'PaulColeman' S u b j e c t : FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Hi Jennifer, Thank you for your prompt response. I would be grateful if you would bring Aidan Browne up to date with all elements of my correspondence with Rosalie Smyth-Lynch since the 18thy of April 2006. I would also be grateful if he could forward me a copy of the correspondence forwarded to him by Rosalie, which she referred in her email to me dated 7 th November 2006. In light of the HSE “Systemic” failure defence as used by Aidan Browne in relation to the Leas Cross affair, I would ask that this request is processed without delay and that Aidan Browne comments in correspondence to me about the quality of the HSE response to my ongoing request for information since the end of April/ beginning of May last. I have a fundamental problem with the quite “unequivocal” statement by Rosalie Smyth-Lynch (see letter attached) that she has “absolutely no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation”. In fairness I have asked to reflect on her position but she does not seem to wish to modify her statement. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin PS I have also repeatedly emailed info@hse to seek an email address foe Aidan. I have never once received an acknowledgement of receipt never mind an answer. I got the info@hse.ie address at the following web page http://www.hse.ie/en/ContactUs/. I need to know if it is HSE policy to not answer requests to this email.

From: Ann-Marie Kennedy [mailto:annmarie_kennedy@hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 5:06 PM To: liamog Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam Ann-Marie has moved to another post but I am covering her post on a temporary basis as Aidan’s PA.

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

Regards Jennifer Veale Office of Mr. Aidan Browne National Director Primary Community and Continuing Care Health Service Executive Block D, Parkgate Business Centre Parkgate Street Dublin 8 Tel: 01-6352971 Fax: 01-6352899 E-mail: jennifer_veale@hse.ie

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: 13 November 2006 16:31 To: Ann-Marie Kennedy Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie; 'PaulColeman' Subject: FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 4:29 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam, e-mail for A Browne PA is Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie Rosalie Smithl-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 3

liamog From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Wednesday, November 15, 2006 1:04 PM

To:

'JENNIFER VEALE'

Cc:

'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'; 'PaulColeman'

Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3 Hi Jennifer, Apologies for not attaching the letter referred to below with the last email. As regards My request to enable Aidan Browne to understand the context of my communication with him, I suggest that the correspondence is important. I presume that the HSE internal communications system is the most effective way of you getting that material together for him. It’s been difficult for me as an ordinary citizen who can’t make any sense of the HSE organisational structure, to even get a response form info@hse.ie. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

From: JENNIFER VEALE [mailto:JENNIFER_VEALE@HSE.IE] Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:27 PM To: liamog Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam I do not have copies of any of your correspondence to Rosalie Smyth-Lynch and the attachment you refer to in your e-mail was not attached unfortunately. Regards Jennifer Veale -----Original Message----F r o m : liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] S e n t : 13 November 2006 19:17 To: JENNIFER VEALE Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie; 'PaulColeman' S u b j e c t : FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Hi Jennifer, Thank you for your prompt response. I would be grateful if you would bring Aidan Browne up to date with all elements of my correspondence with Rosalie Smyth-Lynch since the 18thy of April 2006. I would also be grateful if he could forward me a copy of the correspondence forwarded to him by Rosalie, which she referred in her email to me dated 7 th November 2006. In light of the HSE “Systemic” failure defence as used by Aidan Browne in relation to the Leas Cross affair, I would ask that this request is processed without delay and that Aidan Browne comments in correspondence to me about the quality of the HSE response to my ongoing request for information since the end of April/ beginning of May last. I have a fundamental problem with the quite “unequivocal” statement by Rosalie Smyth-Lynch (see letter attached) that she has “absolutely no record or recollection of you requesting access to information in relation to complaints under the Freedom of Information legislation”. In fairness I have asked to reflect on her position but she does not seem to wish to modify her statement. Regards Liam Ó Gógáin PS I have also repeatedly emailed info@hse to seek an email address foe Aidan. I have never once

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 3

received an acknowledgement of receipt never mind an answer. I got the info@hse.ie address at the following web page http://www.hse.ie/en/ContactUs/. I need to know if it is HSE policy to not answer requests to this email.

From: Ann-Marie Kennedy [mailto:annmarie_kennedy@hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 5:06 PM To: liamog Subject: RE: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: 13 November 2006 16:31 To: Ann-Marie Kennedy Cc: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie; 'PaulColeman' Subject: FW: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

From: Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie [mailto:Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 4:29 PM To: liamog Subject: Re: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Liam, e-mail for A Browne PA is Annmarie_Kennedy@hse.ie Rosalie Smithl-lynch

11/21/2006

Page 3 of 3

11/21/2006

Page 1 of 2 Please consider the 5 repeated attempts by me to get a response (never mind the actual information I had requested) from a €14 Billion annual turnover organisation (give or take a couple of Billion euro). What cultural message is deeply ingrained in a contact email on the FRONT PAGE of a website that simply does not respond? The technology is not rocket science. Please note the quote from Einstein used by Professor Drumm on the Pat Kenny radio programme during the summer of 2006 "You cannot solve a problem with the thinking that created it". liamog See HSE site page below

From:

liamog [info@liamog.com]

Sent:

Tuesday, November 21, 2006 9:41 AM

To:

'info@hse.ie'

Cc:

'PaulColeman'; 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'; 'JENNIFER VEALE'

Subject: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.5 Hi, This is my 5th reminder of a basic request to the front end of the HSE website. I have never once received either a “bounceback” to suggest an invalid email account, nor an acknowledgment of receipt of my email, never mind a response to my original request. Please respond with the information requested.

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 10:32 AM To: 'info@hse.ie' Cc: 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie'; 'PaulColeman' Subject: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.4

Hi, Please note this reminder No.4 and I still have no acknowledgement of receipt or information. Please respond. Regards Liamog

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 5:58 PM To: 'info@hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie; 'Rosalie.SmithLynch@maile.hse.ie' Subject: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.3

Hi, Is there anyone out there running the HSE website? This is the third email I have sent with a simple query. Please respond as per the request below or explain why I am being refused a response. Please acknowledge receipt of this email Regards Liam Ó Gógáin

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 8:31 AM To: 'info@hse.ie' Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.2

Hi please acknowledge receipt of this email and provide a response to the query. Sincerely Liam Ó Gógáin

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:13 PM To: 'info@hse.ie'

11/21/2006

Page 2 of 2

Cc: secretary@parentalequality.ie Subject: FW: Request for email Contact! Reminder No.1

From: liamog [mailto:info@liamog.com] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 10:05 PM To: 'info@hse.ie' Cc: 'PaulColeman' Subject: Request for email Contact!

Hi Please email me the email address for the party below Sincerely Liam Ó Gógáin AIDAN BROWNE, National Director, Primary, Community and Continuing Care Directorate, HSE, Dublin.

11/21/2006

Health Service Executive Home

Page 1 of 2

Sitemap | Text Only

> > > > > > > > > > >

About Us News & Events Publications Links Health Services Freedom of Information Forms Careers Contact Us Avian Flu PQs

Y o u a r e h e r e : Home

Welcome to the Health Service Executive Website

Search - Cuardaigh

Enter search

The HSE is responsible for providing health and personal social services to everyone living in Ireland. Choose from the options on the left to learn more about us, how we work and how you can access our services. For information on health services and entitlements, call the HSE infoline CALL SAVE 1850 24 1850 Monday - Saturday, 8 am to 8 pm email: info@hse.ie Latest News z z

http://www.hse.ie/en/

HSE Publishes Neurosurgical Report 21.11.06 Regional Health Forum Dublin and North East, Monday 27th November, 2006 20.11.2006 North Dublin's New GP Urgent Out of Hours Service to Commence on November 28th 19.11.06 HSE Statement Regarding Nursing Home Inspections 16.11.06 HSE Accepts Labour Court Recommendation on Nursing Pay 14.11.06 Cork Geriatrician Presents Lecture at British Geriatrics Society Conference 13.11.06 Euro950M Commitment to Ireland's Mental Health Services 13.11.06 HSE South Healthcare Assistants Graduate with FETAC Certificates at Kerry General Hospital 13.11.06 Free Health Checks for Men and Women in West Kerry 13.11.06 HSE Dedicated to Improving Quality and Reducing Risk 13.11.06 HSE launches "Use The Right Door" campaign 13.11.06 Provision of Nursing Home Facilities in Dublin Information Leaflet

11/21/2006

Health Service Executive Home

http://www.hse.ie/en/

Page 2 of 2

Teil: 045 880400 Faics: 1890 2008

11/21/2006

Original Article and follow up Letter which set the context for this Case Study

Series of current dialogue in Irish Times re Social Workers, Fathers etcâ&#x20AC;Ś.. If you feel like contributing to this debate then do get writing to lettersed@irishtimes.ie Regards Liamog

Monday 21st August Unfettered power of a faceless few John Waters Usually, when a State body claims the increase in this or that phenomenon within its area of responsibility is due to X or Y, some degree of transparency enables the assertion to be checked. Not so with social workers. Here, there is no transparency, no accountability, no monitoring, no checks or balances. So when the HSE, through its social workers, suggests that there are, for the first time, more than 5,000 children in State care because of increasing poverty, single parenthood and growing addiction problems, the proper response of a healthy democracy would be to ask, "Why should we believe a word you say?" Instead, we swallow without a murmur the prognostications of an unaccountable bureaucracy, pausing only to wonder about the regional disparities. (Figures published last week indicate that children are nearly twice as likely to be taken into care in the east as the west. The varying levels of investment in family support services is advanced in explanation.) Another possibility stares us in the face: social workers are out of control. Since the most likely cause is a rampant and illogical ideology, the regional disparity becomes comprehensible on the grounds that, generally speaking, the west remains marginally more level-headed and commonsensical than the PCdominated east. It is rare indeed that we get to observe how social workers operate, but when we do we invariably become so shocked by what emerges that we cling to the notion that the case in question is an aberration. Last year, rare media coverage enabled the public to briefly glimpse the tactics of HSE-ordained social workers, when a family had its children taken into care after

the father expressed frustration to a social worker on account of the lack of State support in caring for his children. For nearly a fortnight, the family was frustrated by faceless HSE automatons until a court had the decency to send the children home. I pointed out then that, although there is no system of public accountability by which social workers can be called to book, the State continues to extend them powers that, if allowed to a police force in combating terrorism, would provoke huge social protest. Social workers or their representatives frequently respond to this assertion by pointing out that they are required to hold case conferences involving key individuals who know the circumstances of the family under observation. The fact that social workers believe case conferences render them in any meaningful sense accountable is a measure of their detachment from reality. Case conferences are initiated by the HSE, which not only decides who should attend but also functions in each case as presiding judge. In one case (in the west of Ireland) such a conference was held in advance of an application by the HSE for a barring order against a man whose wife was ill and who himself had sought the financial assistance of the HSE in caring for his children. Several of those invited to the conference, including the family GP, declined to attend, believing it unnecessary. The principal of the children's school attended and vigorously argued that the social workers were behaving inappropriately. He was ignored. Of those present, only the social workers said an intervention was necessary. The intervention proceeded and the children were eventually taken into care. This suggests that case conferences are used to "legitimate" the use of care orders as an option of first resort, rather than for use in extreme emergencies as the law stipulates. Investigations into social workers are rare, but two reports into the treatment by social workers of fathers represent a devastating indictment of an increasingly insidious and dangerous profession. Two years ago, the Family Support Agency reported that social workers had with impunity effected the exclusion of fathers from the lives of children on the basis of such emblems of parenting ability as accents, tattoos, shaved heads and bulked-up physiques. Related conclusions were reached in a more recent report conducted by an external review group after complaints by a non-custodial father (in the east this time) against the HSE. The father claimed that he had been improperly excluded from discussions concerning his daughter's welfare. "It appears to us," the report concluded, "that this issue of including fathers in treatment options was not the norm at the time. There was no knowledge as to the rights of non-custodial parents. Whilst there has been a wish to have men more involved in services for their children, practice has grown among health professionals whereby they are not surprised if a father does not attend, and they have learned to work with mothers. In some ways this has made practice easier and in some ways less complicated and it will take time for services to both change their outlook and equip themselves to deal with the new reality".

So there you have it: the most unfettered power available to any government agency is governed not by law but by ignorance, prejudice, policies deep-fried in a rancid ideology, negligence and the agendas and convenience of faceless officials who are, as I said, completely out of control.

POWERS OF SOCIAL WORKERS Friday August 25th

Madam, - John Waters (August 21st) writes with unfortunate predictability - unfortunate because his evident passion for pointing out error seems to push him into extreme and lonely positions and predictable because we have heard such broad stroke allegations against social workers many times before. It is also unfortunate because, in his repetitive rants, John Waters further alienates those who might share something of his passion. John Waters insists on the essential role that fathers play in the care of their children, whether or not they are married to the child's mother. If he were interested in looking for it, he would find that many child-protection social workers share this position, work late into nights and travel great lengths to facilitate contact between fathers and children. John Waters is angered by what appears to be the complacent reaction to the huge numbers of children in care of the HSE. If he looked for it, John Waters would find that many child-protection social workers are angered and frustrated at the lack of communitybased resources, which means that parents and children do not have prompt access to the kinds of support and therapy services that could keep families together and out of HSE care. John Waters points to the power allegedly possessed by child-protection social workers. If he had asked social workers about this, he would have heard much laughter, as many child-protection social workers struggle with a real sense of powerlessness when faced with child abuse and neglect and a system that demands too much from under-resourced child-protection teams and community-based support and therapy services. As for his repeated charges that social workers act as unaccountable automatons, I am surprised that John Waters appears ignorant of the fact that regardless of what is recommended at case conferences, it is the courts that ultimately decide whether or not a child is to be removed from the care of his or her parents. And, as is proper, when the court makes such a decision, it is certainly never on the say-so of a social worker. It would be tempting for social workers to conclude from his writings that John Waters acts in the very way that he alleges social workers operate - without accountability, and with prejudice and negligence. But as a profession, social workers attempt to build alliances even in the worst of circumstances and work together with people in the interests of co-creating positive change with people who seek or require our service. Sadly, John Waters is at risk of sounding like the hurler on the ditch who has many harsh words to say, but little understanding of what it is like to be in the thick of it. - Yours, etc, DECLAN COOGAN, Communications Co-ordinator, Irish Association of Social Workers, Pearse St., Dublin 2.

POWERS OF SOCIAL WORKERS

Monday August 28th

Madam, - I wish to respond to John Waters's outrageous article (August 21st) concerning his misguided opinions about social workers. On behalf of the State, under the Child Act 1991 and Children Act 1997, the HSE is obliged to deliver its child protection and welfare services to children and families in this country. In order for the HSE to conduct this sensitive and complex duty, the HSE employs skilled and trained professional social workers. Mr Waters's claims of "unfettered power" are wide of the mark. In fact, our social workers are obliged to conduct their work in a professional, transparent and courteous manner. They are open to, and must comply with, professional, ethical, legal and agency standards and processes. The HSE also operates a review and complaints process, whereby any client of the HSE can make a complaint and seek a response. Some of the points which Mr Waters quotes arise from such reviews. The HSE is also subject to complaints being investigated by the Ombudsman. The ultimate guardian of course is the court system. Mr Waters apparently believes the courts to be impotent and to blindly accept the recommendations of the social worker. Yet at another point in his article he acknowledges the "decency" of a court when they refused to grant an order. You can't have it both ways, Mr Waters. The courts can and do exercise the option to refuse a request for a care order but in the vast majority of cases they demonstrate their high regard for the social worker's professional decision-making by granting the care orders for which they apply . Social workers do not lightly go to court and do not lightly consider taking children into care. These processes are highly stressful for all concerned. Mr Waters paints a picture of social workers "out of control" and taking children from their families for random and spurious reasons. Actually our social workers try to ensure that separation from the family is a last resort. In the course of child protection proceedings, HSE social workers are required to undertake an assessment of reported concerns. One of our guiding principles is that the focus of this work is to ensure that children remain with their families, where possible, and to that end we offer support services and interventions as appropriate. However, at times children may be in need of "care and protection". If a child cannot safely remain in the care of its family, options of care within the extended family are routinely explored. The prime consideration is naturally the welfare of the child and it is our practice that children should return to their parents' care when it is safe to do so. This child protection assessment is carried out in conjunction with parents and other agencies who know the strengths and risks of the family members. In other cases, children may also come into the voluntary care of HSE when a parent requests and needs voluntary care. It is important to note that children in care and care proceedings account for a small proportion of the overall work undertaken by HSE social work services. The main thrust of social work services is to support families. Our social workers are carrying out a complex and difficult role along the fault-lines of Irish society. While Mr Waters is perfectly entitled to argue for a more enlightened approach from his particular perspective, it is not reasonable to vilify the entire social work profession in the process. As national director with overall responsibility for childcare services I don't accept that regional disparities are easily dismissed. One of the real positives of the unified system is that we can now start to examine this evidence in more detail and take the learning from it to ensure that we develop the very best service for our entire population. - Yours, etc, AIDAN BROWNE, National Director, Primary, Community and Continuing Care Directorate, HSE, Dublin.

POWERS OF SOCIAL WORKERS th

Tues 29 August IT Madam, - John Waters may appear to have been very critical (August 21st) of unaccountable and unfettered behaviour by social workers, particularly when dealing with fathers. However, the documentary on BBC2 the following evening, exposing the systemic misconduct by the social services in Orkney in 1990 where numbers of children were wrongfully removed from their families was a clear-cut illustration of the Stasi-like powers of social services. The most worrying element of the documentary was hearing (some 16 years later) the instigating social worker still refusing to admit her misdiagnosis, against the overwhelming view of the whole community and the decision of the courts. Her mindset was smug, unchallengeable and unchangeable. Recently on the Pat Kenny radio show, when discussing changes in the HSE, Prof Brendan Drumm quoted Einstein as saying that you cannot solve a problem with the thinking that created it. In the light of the recent external independent evaluations quoted by John Waters which suggest at best the mindset within social services of non-inclusion of fathers, I sincerely hope Prof Drumm bears Einstein's quote in mind when addressing change in the social and family services. Yours, etc, LIAM Ó GÓGÁIN, Chairman, Parental Equality, Dublin Road, Dundalk.

POWERS OF SOCIAL WORKERS st

Friday Sept 1

Madam, - Liam Ó Gógáin, (August 29th), criticises the powers of social workers. These powers came about because of rampant child abuse. The successful Mary Ellen case in New York in 1875, when an abused child was brought to the courts under animal welfare legislation, resulted in child protection legislation across the western world. A vigorous child-saving movement emerged, including organisations such as Barnardo's, the ISPCC (then NSPCC) and many others, which sought to uphold children's rights and insist they be treated as citizens with a right to care and protection by the State. Unfortunately, we didn't come to this enlightened position in Ireland until the late 20th century, when we enacted the Child Care Act, 1991. We are all now sadly aware of the horrifying abuses visited upon Irish children in the care of religious charities during the 20th century. If we had social workers and a welfare state, like our European neighbours, these terrible crimes might not have been allowed to happen. . - Yours, etc, Prof FRED POWELL, Department of Applied Social Studies, UCC, Cork.

Brutal rule of social workers Mon Sept 4th IT John Waters In my column of August 21st, I made a serious misstatement about social workers, which has been brought to my attention by a former social worker. In describing social work as "an increasingly insidious and dangerous profession", I was fundamentally wrong, says my correspondent, because social work is not a profession. Phil Mac Giolla Bhain, a reader with whom I've had previous correspondence writes: "Professionals - medics, lawyers, teachers, accountants - can sell their specialist skills on the open market to private citizens. The idea of a private citizen soliciting the services of a social worker to 'help' them in some way is bizarre. The above mentioned professionals are licensed by outside bodies (eg The Law Society, the Medical Council). Social work has no such body. There is no fitness-to- practise committee to deal with the social worker equivalent of Dr Moira Woods (although there are plenty of these). Moreover, there is no specialist knowledge base that constitutes social work. As a social worker you can make it up as you go along. I speak as a qualified social worker and a former social work lecturer. Medics assessing a head injury use the world-accepted Glasgow Coma Scale, which is scientifically verified and tested. There is no equivalent body of knowledge in social work." Two letters have appeared criticising my column, one from a representative of social workers, the other from a spokesman for the HSE. Both sought to refute the central elements of my argument, concerning the treatment of fathers by social workers and the more general question of accountability. Declan Coogan, communications co-ordinator of the Irish Association of Social Workers, wrote (August 25th) that "many child-protection social workers ... work late into nights and travel great lengths to facilitate contact between fathers and children". Aidan Browne, national director, Primary Community and Continuing Care Directorate of the HSE, made similarly sweeping assertions, unsubstantiated by particulars. "In fact," he wrote, "our social workers are obliged to conduct their work in a professional, transparent and courteous manner. They are open to, and must comply with, professional, ethical, legal and agency standards and processes." These assertions are contradicted every week by my postbag and the calls and e-mails I get from parents brutalised by social workers. Neither Mr Coogan nor Mr Browne dealt with the specifics of my column, in which I referred to several cases in which social workers were manifestly out of control. Neither did they respond to my reference to two reports which damningly contradict their assurances. In "Strengthening Families through Fathers" (Family Support Agency 2004), Harry Ferguson and Fergus Hogan wrote: "There is something in the very nature of social work and how it is organised and done which is currently antithetical to adopting a more holistic, father-inclusive form of practice... [ E]ven in the context

of examining 'father-inclusive' practice we still found a great deal of evidence of exclusion of fathers in the very same cases. If fathers are being excluded by some parts of the system in the midst of some of the best work that is going on, then we shudder to think what is happening in the worst case scenarios, which we suspect are extensive." Mr Browne painted a rosy picture of a pyramid of redress and accountability rising through a series of regulated and transparent procedures, at the top of which is the Ombudsman, the ultimate guarantor of justice. Yeah right. Earlier this year the Supreme Court found the Ombudsman had wrongfully denied a separated father access to his daughter's hospital records in a case spanning the terms of two office holders. Mrs Justice Susan Denham said the Ombudsman applied the wrong legal test in determining that the release of the records would be directed only where there was "tangible evidence" that it would serve the interests of the girl. The former ombudsman should have approached the request by acknowledging that a parent's entitlement to access the information is presumed and that its release is in the child's best interests. It was "unfortunate", said Mrs Justice Denham, that the father's rights as parent and guardian were viewed "so erroneously". And so, at the very top of the alleged pyramid of redress which Mr Browne seeks to exalt, is precisely the problem I claimed infects social workers in their everyday operations: an inversion of the constitutional requirement that the rights of parents as guardians of their children be respected and protected. The social workers in this case are still out there defending the indefensible. Unfortunately, because this entire area operates behind the cloak of the in camera rule, it is impossible for many wronged families to obtain justice as the system, shielded from public scrutiny, closes in to protect its various elements. The only mechanism that works for parents is media publicity, as we saw in a high-profile case in Co Meath last year. The only hope of ending the arbitrary, vindictive and brutal rule of social workers, therefore, is for journalists to tell the truth. Watch this space.

Sunday Independent 10th Sept 2006 'Brutal rule' of nation's quiet heroes THE social worker was locked in an office, alone and under attack. He had agreed to work late to suit the family, when his young client's father phoned to say he was delayed. Then both parents arrived, smelling of alcohol, and turned nasty. Now they were kicking and battering his door. It was 15 minutes of fear before the gardai got there. An Irish Times headline last week condemned the "Brutal rule of social workers". It flagged the latest attack by John Waters, one of that paper's foremost columnists, on a profession that daily deals with many people at their worst or weakest. Waters is a campaigner for the rights of single fathers such as himself, and he feels that social workers do them down.

CAMPAIGN: John Waters has used the problem of exclusion of fathers as 'a platform for attacking social work in general', believes Colum Kenny (Photo: Gerry Mooney)

There is evidence that, in Ireland and abroad, fathers are sometimes unduly excluded from the social work process. It is partly because mothers tend to be more actively involved than fathers are in parenting. Waters has used this problem as a platform for attacking social work in general. The profession has been shocked by Irish Times headlines accusing it of "unfettered power" and "brutal rule". One social worker, known to me personally, was recently assaulted by a teenager and left with recurrent chest pain. The teenager is disturbed and has responded aggressively again and again to attempts to help her. Another social worker had her car scratched along its full length. She has her suspicions about who did it, but will never bring charges. Many social workers are inclined to absorb blows rather than add to clients' woes. They may be misguided. For one thing, it means that nobody pays to repair her car. For another, the reticence of social workers to talk about cases leaves an opening for the same Irish Times columnist to accuse them of "ignorance, prejudice [and] rancid ideologies". In fact, anyone may complain about a social worker to the Health Service Executive or other relevant employer. It is not the fault of social workers that the Government has failed to set up the promised Health and Social Care Professionals Registration Board, which the Irish Association of Social Workers (IASW) supports and which would provide even greater scrutiny of professional practice. The training of social workers is already regulated by law in Ireland, and has been more demanding than in Britain - yet they are not well-paid compared to doctors or psychologists. Their work is fraught with tension, and even danger.

Waters quotes from a Department of Social and Families Affairs report to support his attack on social workers. But one of the report's two authors, Prof Harry Ferguson of the University of the West of England, told me last week that there was "a lack of balance" in such use of his research. Ferguson dismissed the claim by Waters that Irish social workers have unfettered powers: "They don't have enough power, for God's sake." A more balanced article than that by Waters might have included this comment from the introduction to Ferguson's report, which was based on 24 family case studies: "It takes great courage - as well as extra work - for professionals to allow their practice to be explored by researchers and we would like to thank the social workers, family support workers and the social care workers who gave so much to this work." Such a tribute does not support the demonisation of social workers. Roscommon-born Waters reasonably demands a convincing explanation for differences between Connaught and Leinster when it comes to the percentage of children in care. But his own suggestion, that "the west remains marginally more level-headed and commonsensical than the PC-dominated east", is dismissed by Harry Ferguson as "complete nonsense". IASW spokesman (and social worker) Declan Coogan says, "As a man myself I am very conscious of involving fathers in the welfare and care of children, and so too are my female colleagues, without doubt. They make huge efforts to involve fathers in the care of their children." The Department's report acknowledges that "some very creative and effective work is going on with fathers and their families. This includes regular casework visits from social workers." Waters omits this praise and concentrates on the report's criticism. Social workers are front-line workers in a world where the growing gap between rich and poor can drive those excluded to the edge. Many work outside normal hours to facilitate their clients. They get no overtime rates or bonus time off for putting 10th Sept SOCIAL workers are not being contentious when they talk about the underbelly of the Celtic Tiger. To them, it is an everyday reality. For example, because the Government has failed to deliver child and adolescent mental health resources to the extent promised, young people with serious problems may wait for up to a year even to begin to get the support they need and want. Social workers are often caught between the demands of difficult parents and the need to protect children from imminent harm. They must strive for the wisdom of Solomon mainly in the community and homes of clients, which is a fluid process where they have limited control over what they get to see. As in any profession, some social workers are arrogant, misguided or lazy. In Britain, they have received very bad publicity for serious errors in Orkney and London. But, in a world of tough talk and hard-nosed pressure groups, it is a cheap shot for TV dramatists or newspapers to cast social workers as bumbling or self-righteous dogooders. Social workers are out there attempting to solve problems. Trying to help elderly people who are alone or very ill. Trying to salvage or assist broken families. Trying to

assist prisoners to go straight, or children in danger to cope; and the handicapped and the traumatised to swim rather than sink. They get paid to do it, and they do not claim to be saints. To scapegoat social workers for an imperfect world, or for the failure of ministers to deliveron promised services inthe community, is unfair. Not all social workers are threatened. Not all are humiliated in court by certain judges or lawyers who are paid far more than social workers will ever be. Not all are stalked or assaulted. But those who are cannot easily shrug it off. Damned in official reports such as that relating to the Kilkenny incest case for not intervening enough, they are then damned elsewhere for intervening. Social workers are frequently involved in cases that most of us do not like to hear about. The details are too depressing. What would you say to a young child whose mother refuses to meet her under any circumstances or even to send a Christmas card? To a prisoner with Aids who cannot help his ailing father as he would like to? To a sister whose brother has just killed himself? The "Brutal rule of social workers" makes a catchy tabloid-style headline for the Irish Times. It is far from the reality of a profession that is generally no better or worse than any other. Colum Kenny

Sunday Independent 10th Sept 2006 One accusation from branded child abuser Sir - Being a person falsely accused of incest and eventually being cleared of any wrongdoing by the Fitness to Practise Committee of the Medical Council and not by Child Protection Services (social workers), I ask that I be allowed add my experiences to the current debate. Like all right thinking people I have been appalled and disgusted by stories of child abuse. Like me, Irishmen and women have turned to the Government for solutions. But the very institutions entrusted with the care of victimised children are often the greatest perpetrators. Granted almost unlimited authority and complete immunity, Child Protection Services (CPS) workers have become judge, jury, and executioner. But unlimited power breeds unlimited abuse. Every year, worldwide, it is estimated that several million people are falsely accused of child abuse. The liberal agenda of CPS condones blatant abuses of the system. Social workers are allowed to violate constitutional rights. Innocent parents may appear on computer registers and be branded as incestuous parents, child molesters, paedophiles and 'child abusers' for life. Child Protection Services (social workers) kidnapped a six-year-old girl from her kindergarten class because she rubbed herself between her legs. The child was forced to strip, pose for photographs and submit to a vaginal exam. The diagnosis: a yeast infection. Without a trial, social workers demanded that the father leave home, until he admits his guilt. Another father is charged with abuse, molestation, and having a dirty house. All charges are dropped except for dirty housekeeping. The sentence: 60 days in jail and both parents lose all parental rights. These are not isolated incidents. The deplorable and unauthorised might of Child Protection Services is capable of reaching into and destroying any home in Ireland. No matter how innocent and happy your family may be, you are but one accusation away from disaster. In Ireland in 1991 there were 3,856 reported cases of child abuse; 1,465 were confirmed. False accusations: 237. What these official statistics reveal is that there were 3,856 cases of child abuse reported to the eight health boards in 1991. These official statistics raise very serious questions for Irish Child Protection Services. How many of these 3,856 alleged cases were reported to the gardai? How many cases of confirmed child abuse were reported to the gardai? How many false accusations were reported to the gardai? Garda Commissioner's Report on Crime 1991: Cruelty/neglect of children; three offences reported; one conviction. Defilement of girls up to 17 years; 30 offences reported; three convictions. Incest; six offences reported; two convictions. False Accusations reported, N/A. Prosecutions, nil. Convictions, nil. No information is available for convictions overturned on appeal.

What is clearly indicated by the Garda Commissioner's Report on Crime for 1991 is the fact that only 39 offences relating to all forms of child abuse ever reached the gardai or the DPP and these 39 offences resulted in six convictions. On the basis of these official statistics it is clearly indicated that Child Protection Services, and in particular social workers, are totally out of control. Every year, thousands of people are falsely accused of child abuse/child sexual abuse. No other crime carries such stigma. Even if they are acquitted their lives will never be the same. Social workers and their legal representatives defend the indefensible in closed courts or inquiries held in camera while whole families are torn apart. Edward P Hernon, VOCAL-IRELAND, The Liberties, Dublin 8

ETHICS, RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS OF SOCIAL WORKERS IT I

IT WED. Sept 13th Madam, - Is it not generally accepted that responsible journalism requires a writer to cross-check sources to establish the veracity of the claims made by informants?

There is no evidence in John Waters's recent articles about social workers that he has made any attempt to do so in the cases he describes. Social workers are prevented by their professional code of ethics, which requires them to preserve confidentiality in individual cases, from disputing the facts as recounted by Mr Waters. This leaves them with no right of reply to the particular allegations he makes against them. Social workers, like journalists, have guidelines for what constitutes good practice. In carrying out a comprehensive assessment of the circumstances of individual children, they are required to consult as many sources as possible in order to formulate a recommendation to the court. These sources often include the child's extended family members and others concerned with their welfare such as the family GP, the local public health nurse, teachers and pre-school carers. Where it is felt that the child is not sufficiently well represented, a guardian ad litem can be appointed by the court. Miscarriages of justice, as we well know, can and do occur, and where they do, responsible journalists have played a leading role in exposing them, leading to justice for the victims concerned. It has to be said that social workers, as other professionals, can engage in practices that could not be supported. I do not make apologies for such practice. If there are genuine complaints of malpractice, these should be reported and investigated and sanctions should be applied. Child protection social workers are employed by the State and have employee reporting systems, involving principals and child care managers. However, one has to question here in whose interests John Waters is taking up the cudgels. Is it in the interests of Irish children's right to live in a secure, violence-free environment with adults who can provide for their physical and emotional needs? Or is it in support of the rights of fathers, irrespective of the needs and rights of their children? The Constitution is clear that the interests of children are usually best served by being cared for within their birth family. It is unfortunate that in some instances the needs and interests of children and parents do not coincide. There is considerable evidence to show that a high proportion of referrals to social workers are self-referrals, or come from concerned family or community members such as public health nurses, teachers and GPs. In such circumstances, it behoves the professionals concerned with the welfare of children to put their own biases and prejudices aside, and to take whatever action is needed to safeguard the children

concerned. There are undoubtedly campaigns that need to be waged to improve the lot of children in our society. Family poverty is a good example, as are improvements in health care, educational and family support services, including more extensive mediation centres throughout the country for separating parents. John Waters's time might be better spent highlighting some of these injustices, than in dubbing as "vindictive and brutal" those who are struggling daily to work within a system which is, at best, patchy in its staffing and back-up resources, and at worst, lacking the prerequisites for supporting children in a supposedly civilised society. - Yours, etc, Dr MARIAN MURPHY, Senior Lecturer in Applied Social Studies, University College Cork. **** A Chara, - I do not envy anyone seeking to fulfil the role of social worker in our society, which appears to be experiencing a gradual breakdown in order and personal responsibility. However, society has given social workers a major role in trying to ameliorate its ills. Their professional findings are afforded great weight by State institutions. By and large the clients of social workers are quite vulnerable and seldom in a position to resist or challenge their findings. This gives social workers an even more powerful role. Aidan Browne of the HSE has listed the various mechanisms for challenging the findings of social workers. Declan Coogan of the Irish Association of Social Workers has written (August 25th) about the professionalism of social workers. However, John Waters demonstrates again in his column of September 4th that both these aspects are very much open to question. From my own long experience as principal of a special school, I would tend to agree with Mr Waters. It would appear that when a social worker comes to a finding, it is well nigh impossible to have it overruled, despite glaring flaws in the process. I feel that one of the reasons why men fare so poorly with social workers is the fact that, in my experience, most social workers were women. - Yours, etc, ANTHONY JORDAN, Gilford Road, Sandymount, Dublin 4.