Hospice patients are dying while waiting for a bed

Southend Standard: Nursing assistant Lisa Clarke, chief executive Andy Smith and staff nurse Linda Mathurin outside Fair Havens Hospice Nursing assistant Lisa Clarke, chief executive Andy Smith and staff nurse Linda Mathurin outside Fair Havens Hospice

HAVENS hospices told how patients are dying while they wait up to a month for a bed because its current building is just too small.

Hospice bosses say this is exactly why they need to build a new £15million hospice, as soon as possible, on green belt land in Leigh.

Campaigners and Southend Council, which turned down an application last October to build the hospice on land off Belton Way West, say a brownfield site must be found, but the hospice charity claims none are suitable.

Catherine Wood, head of patient services at Havens, said: “It’s not just every now and then that we have to tell a patient in desperate need of a bed that we don’t have one available - it’s on a daily basis.

“The amount of distress that causes, not only to the patient but their loved ones too, is immeasurable.

“Last week we were finally able to offer a bed to a patient who had been on the waiting list for 31 days.

“This week alone, three patients in need of our care died whilst waiting for a bed and another two over the weekend.

“The demand on our services is putting immense pressure on what we’re able to provide. We are in an urgent situation and I can’t imagine what would happen if we just sat back and did nothing to address that.”

The charity must now convince planning inspector Richard Clegg at a forthcoming public inquiry, to start on June 18, that the need for a new facility is strong enough to justify building on green belt land

Comments (36)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:15pm Fri 26 Apr 13

RobertFS says...

Not on Belton Way West under any circumstance.
Havens do a wonderful job but are wasting money on this cause.
There are other sites more suitable: readily accessible by train, car and bus.
An example could be Victoria Avenue where there are a number of suitable building where the money wasted so far would have been better employed.
Those sites are not the only ones available.
Keep off Belton Way West!
Not on Belton Way West under any circumstance. Havens do a wonderful job but are wasting money on this cause. There are other sites more suitable: readily accessible by train, car and bus. An example could be Victoria Avenue where there are a number of suitable building where the money wasted so far would have been better employed. Those sites are not the only ones available. Keep off Belton Way West! RobertFS
  • Score: 5

12:18pm Fri 26 Apr 13

How-ironic says...

I find it hard to believe that there is no suitable 'brown field' sites, or is it because they are more expensive than green belt developments.

Whilst I appreciate the good work Havens do, all this green belt development idea needs to cease. I have raised quite a bit of money in the past for Havens, but no more until this stops.
I find it hard to believe that there is no suitable 'brown field' sites, or is it because they are more expensive than green belt developments. Whilst I appreciate the good work Havens do, all this green belt development idea needs to cease. I have raised quite a bit of money in the past for Havens, but no more until this stops. How-ironic
  • Score: 6

12:28pm Fri 26 Apr 13

cazza says...

I'm sure the TWO or so extra beds (that would be created if the monstrosity they are intent on getting on Belton Way West) will not help much at all. Oh and emotional blackmail to get your way is appalling
I'm sure the TWO or so extra beds (that would be created if the monstrosity they are intent on getting on Belton Way West) will not help much at all. Oh and emotional blackmail to get your way is appalling cazza
  • Score: 4

12:33pm Fri 26 Apr 13

dhd says...

Nobody is stopping them building a new hospice. It's their own stubborness that's causing the problem. Perhaps they could remind us again how many more beds they are expecting to gain on the Belton Way site, not even a handful if I remember correctly. I hate all this emotional blackmail.
Nobody is stopping them building a new hospice. It's their own stubborness that's causing the problem. Perhaps they could remind us again how many more beds they are expecting to gain on the Belton Way site, not even a handful if I remember correctly. I hate all this emotional blackmail. dhd
  • Score: 3

12:33pm Fri 26 Apr 13

Elephantman2 says...

If they were that concerned they would have not tried to ride roughshod over the planning laws that has lead to this long drawn out (and expensive) saga.

This is more about their insidious campaign to undermine the planning laws than it is about the work that they actually do.

Their whole campaign has been based on emotive arguments that has lead to them losing support and creating conflict with the community that has traditionally supported them.

A very foolish strategy.
If they were that concerned they would have not tried to ride roughshod over the planning laws that has lead to this long drawn out (and expensive) saga. This is more about their insidious campaign to undermine the planning laws than it is about the work that they actually do. Their whole campaign has been based on emotive arguments that has lead to them losing support and creating conflict with the community that has traditionally supported them. A very foolish strategy. Elephantman2
  • Score: 4

12:35pm Fri 26 Apr 13

Howard Chase says...

plenty of big empty buildings in Southend.....
plenty of big empty buildings in Southend..... Howard Chase
  • Score: 2

12:53pm Fri 26 Apr 13

j-w says...

Get a nice new building built on cheaper greenbelt as well as a great plot for redevelopment in a much sought after location. Will all the money saved be going back into the charity?
Get a nice new building built on cheaper greenbelt as well as a great plot for redevelopment in a much sought after location. Will all the money saved be going back into the charity? j-w
  • Score: 2

1:00pm Fri 26 Apr 13

supermadmax says...

There is a massive shortage for terminally ill patients across the country.

The NHS kick them out as soon as they can not save them (as they need the beds) and then its a waiting game to get in a hospice.
There is a massive shortage for terminally ill patients across the country. The NHS kick them out as soon as they can not save them (as they need the beds) and then its a waiting game to get in a hospice. supermadmax
  • Score: 4

1:04pm Fri 26 Apr 13

jaguarxxv says...

Is this the start of a 'moral blackmail' PR campaign?

If the Belton Way scheme is allowed it will set a precedence which will lead to much more development there.
Is this the start of a 'moral blackmail' PR campaign? If the Belton Way scheme is allowed it will set a precedence which will lead to much more development there. jaguarxxv
  • Score: 1

1:10pm Fri 26 Apr 13

Vox SoS says...

The tactics and emotional blackmail being used here by Fair Havens is dispicable . . . . if it is imperative they they find a larger facility offering many more beds than they can currently offers, then i trust they are still looking at alternative sites to the one of Belton Way !

I will not give them another penny in support until they cease this case against the refusal to develop in Belton Way . . . and i am not alone in withdrawing my funding to them !
The tactics and emotional blackmail being used here by Fair Havens is dispicable . . . . if it is imperative they they find a larger facility offering many more beds than they can currently offers, then i trust they are still looking at alternative sites to the one of Belton Way ! I will not give them another penny in support until they cease this case against the refusal to develop in Belton Way . . . and i am not alone in withdrawing my funding to them ! Vox SoS
  • Score: 3

1:26pm Fri 26 Apr 13

mys842 says...

Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it!
Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it! mys842
  • Score: 5

1:27pm Fri 26 Apr 13

mys842 says...

mys842 wrote:
Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it!
sorry Eastern Esplanade, not Avenue!
[quote][p][bold]mys842[/bold] wrote: Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it![/p][/quote]sorry Eastern Esplanade, not Avenue! mys842
  • Score: -1

2:05pm Fri 26 Apr 13

andyh says...

Sutton Rectory in Sutton Road has been "for sale" for ages. Although this is also green belt, it strikes me that any alterations and extensions necessary would meet much less opposition than in Belton Way.
Sutton Rectory in Sutton Road has been "for sale" for ages. Although this is also green belt, it strikes me that any alterations and extensions necessary would meet much less opposition than in Belton Way. andyh
  • Score: 2

2:22pm Fri 26 Apr 13

notinwestcliffanymore says...

mys842 wrote:
Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it!
At last a good use for shoebury, as has been mentioned on other posts leigh is not blessed with green spaces this will be the start of much more.... are they really only creating two extra beds?
[quote][p][bold]mys842[/bold] wrote: Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it![/p][/quote]At last a good use for shoebury, as has been mentioned on other posts leigh is not blessed with green spaces this will be the start of much more.... are they really only creating two extra beds? notinwestcliffanymore
  • Score: -4

2:26pm Fri 26 Apr 13

the citizen says...

Please can we be clear...ALL that Fairhavens have said is that people have died before they have been able to get a place at the hospice. It is a fact. It was the Echo who added the atrocious heading on the front page "Hold-up over new hospice is costing lives ". By definition a hospice is primarily for those who are terminally ill so people are not dying because of a hold-up. They are dying because they are terminally ill. They are just not able to find a place in a caring environment such as a hospice like Fairhavens. Fairhavens are NOT saying that the hold-up is costing lives. Terrible journalism and sadly increasingly typical of the Echo's misrepresentation in their approach to Fairhavens.

We DO need to get to the truth behind the claims and counter claims about identifying sites. It could be about interpretation or selective represntation, but why would Fairhavens say they had encouragement from the planners only to have this refuted. Someone is not being truthful. Discussions with planners were minuted so any mis-information and any misleading will become clear to the inspector.

Fairhavens have been quite clear and refuted the many false claims made by individuals and printed in the local press. eg conference centre etc At best it is clear that there is a fundamental blindness by some to the function, needs and workings of an expanding hospice. At worst it is scaremongering of the same proportion that Fairhavens are being accused of. We need some honesty here please.

I do not read emotional blackmail. I read poor journalism and sweeping statements by the uninformed, or intentionally obstructive. The protection of greenbelt can come equally loaded with emotion. Is that not potentially blackmail too, or perhaps self -interest in disguise? Are any of the objectors part of groups who are objecting to other projects being proposed in the adjacent council authorities? Or is it just the one that is in the vicinity of where they live?

Anyway it is in the hands of the Inspector and all parties will be able to make their case. Hopefully any decision will be the end of the trauma for all parties.
Please can we be clear...ALL that Fairhavens have said is that people have died before they have been able to get a place at the hospice. It is a fact. It was the Echo who added the atrocious heading on the front page "Hold-up over new hospice is costing lives ". By definition a hospice is primarily for those who are terminally ill so people are not dying because of a hold-up. They are dying because they are terminally ill. They are just not able to find a place in a caring environment such as a hospice like Fairhavens. Fairhavens are NOT saying that the hold-up is costing lives. Terrible journalism and sadly increasingly typical of the Echo's misrepresentation in their approach to Fairhavens. We DO need to get to the truth behind the claims and counter claims about identifying sites. It could be about interpretation or selective represntation, but why would Fairhavens say they had encouragement from the planners only to have this refuted. Someone is not being truthful. Discussions with planners were minuted so any mis-information and any misleading will become clear to the inspector. Fairhavens have been quite clear and refuted the many false claims made by individuals and printed in the local press. eg conference centre etc At best it is clear that there is a fundamental blindness by some to the function, needs and workings of an expanding hospice. At worst it is scaremongering of the same proportion that Fairhavens are being accused of. We need some honesty here please. I do not read emotional blackmail. I read poor journalism and sweeping statements by the uninformed, or intentionally obstructive. The protection of greenbelt can come equally loaded with emotion. Is that not potentially blackmail too, or perhaps self -interest in disguise? Are any of the objectors part of groups who are objecting to other projects being proposed in the adjacent council authorities? Or is it just the one that is in the vicinity of where they live? Anyway it is in the hands of the Inspector and all parties will be able to make their case. Hopefully any decision will be the end of the trauma for all parties. the citizen
  • Score: 4

2:28pm Fri 26 Apr 13

mys842 says...

notinwestcliffanymor
e
wrote:
mys842 wrote: Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it!
At last a good use for shoebury, as has been mentioned on other posts leigh is not blessed with green spaces this will be the start of much more.... are they really only creating two extra beds?
Not sure what you have against Shoeburyness? It's very nice and peaceful, yes there are some not so desirable parts, but that's the same in Leigh and across Southend. I assume it's just ignorance on your behalf.
[quote][p][bold]notinwestcliffanymor e[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mys842[/bold] wrote: Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it![/p][/quote]At last a good use for shoebury, as has been mentioned on other posts leigh is not blessed with green spaces this will be the start of much more.... are they really only creating two extra beds?[/p][/quote]Not sure what you have against Shoeburyness? It's very nice and peaceful, yes there are some not so desirable parts, but that's the same in Leigh and across Southend. I assume it's just ignorance on your behalf. mys842
  • Score: 0

2:31pm Fri 26 Apr 13

perini says...

Don't I recall Mr Smith stating that they would never stoop so low as to use emotional blackmail for thos application? Quite honestly an extra 2 bedrooms will make no difference, in so much as that there will always be more prospective patients than available beds so where do we go from there - extensions perhaps? Maybe just stay at the present capacity and realise that you cannot ease everyones passing and be realistic about what can be achieved. As previously stated; if space is what is needed there are several buildings (empty) in Victoria Avenue which will cost a lot less to convert.
Don't even go there about views etc. as, if according to the article, 5 people died waiting for a bed - would they have really cared about a view?
Fair havens has lost a lot of local goodwill and funding has been withdrawn by a lot of individuals - why waster more money on this pipe-dream!
Don't I recall Mr Smith stating that they would never stoop so low as to use emotional blackmail for thos application? Quite honestly an extra 2 bedrooms will make no difference, in so much as that there will always be more prospective patients than available beds so where do we go from there - extensions perhaps? Maybe just stay at the present capacity and realise that you cannot ease everyones passing and be realistic about what can be achieved. As previously stated; if space is what is needed there are several buildings (empty) in Victoria Avenue which will cost a lot less to convert. Don't even go there about views etc. as, if according to the article, 5 people died waiting for a bed - would they have really cared about a view? Fair havens has lost a lot of local goodwill and funding has been withdrawn by a lot of individuals - why waster more money on this pipe-dream! perini
  • Score: 0

2:36pm Fri 26 Apr 13

Discouraged says...

How wickedly manipulative.
How wickedly manipulative. Discouraged
  • Score: -1

2:38pm Fri 26 Apr 13

A.N.Other says...

Another example of emotional blackmail - this time a developer wants 80 homes on the green belt and in exchange will fund the building of a hospice. What a greedy scumbag.

http://www.thurrockg
azette.co.uk/news/10
240276.Hospice_holds
_key_to_new_homes_de
velopment/
Another example of emotional blackmail - this time a developer wants 80 homes on the green belt and in exchange will fund the building of a hospice. What a greedy scumbag. http://www.thurrockg azette.co.uk/news/10 240276.Hospice_holds _key_to_new_homes_de velopment/ A.N.Other
  • Score: -3

3:09pm Fri 26 Apr 13

marybelle says...

If it is anything like small havens then what a lovely and much needed addition to the area.

Rather a hospice than the building of Council houses because under planning law and needs permitting there I am exemption in planning law for the purpose of building council properties, and they certainly no not add to the benefit of the area, quite the reverse in fact.
If it is anything like small havens then what a lovely and much needed addition to the area. Rather a hospice than the building of Council houses because under planning law and needs permitting there I am exemption in planning law for the purpose of building council properties, and they certainly no not add to the benefit of the area, quite the reverse in fact. marybelle
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Fri 26 Apr 13

marybelle says...

andyh wrote:
Sutton Rectory in Sutton Road has been "for sale" for ages. Although this is also green belt, it strikes me that any alterations and extensions necessary would meet much less opposition than in Belton Way.
Are you a humane person or some type of devil?

How wonderful for the terminally ill to spend their last few days/weeks looking at the crematorium or the smoke from the crem.

Idiot!
[quote][p][bold]andyh[/bold] wrote: Sutton Rectory in Sutton Road has been "for sale" for ages. Although this is also green belt, it strikes me that any alterations and extensions necessary would meet much less opposition than in Belton Way.[/p][/quote]Are you a humane person or some type of devil? How wonderful for the terminally ill to spend their last few days/weeks looking at the crematorium or the smoke from the crem. Idiot! marybelle
  • Score: 1

3:22pm Fri 26 Apr 13

j-w says...

Sutton Rectory is nowhere near the crem, though there is a rather nice parish church just across the road. Perhaps you should apologise?
Sutton Rectory is nowhere near the crem, though there is a rather nice parish church just across the road. Perhaps you should apologise? j-w
  • Score: 0

3:27pm Fri 26 Apr 13

mys842 says...

"Are you a humane person or some type of devil?"

Funniest thing on here in ages ! lol
"Are you a humane person or some type of devil?" Funniest thing on here in ages ! lol mys842
  • Score: -2

3:52pm Fri 26 Apr 13

Keptquiettillnow says...

No matter how big the hospice, there is always going to be a lack of beds.
No matter how big the hospice, there is always going to be a lack of beds. Keptquiettillnow
  • Score: -1

4:12pm Fri 26 Apr 13

mys842 says...

notinwestcliffanymor
e
wrote:
mys842 wrote: Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it!
At last a good use for shoebury, as has been mentioned on other posts leigh is not blessed with green spaces this will be the start of much more.... are they really only creating two extra beds?
Leigh was, like the rest of the country, blessed with open spaces. However, somewhere, some time, some place, someone decided to settle and build a house. Leigh is full of high density terraced and semis not by nature, but because someone chose to build on the land. In my opinion, the Leigh's worst feature is the fact it's so high density, with barely room to swing a cat, let alone a car.

I can understand your desire to keep the land that separates the town from the railway and sea green, but someone probably said they didn't want your house to be built. If there's anything worthy of building on green belt this is it.

Also, if the planners did mislead them, I can totally understand Haven's stubborn nature in pursuing the plans, if only for the sake of not losing what they've already spent.
[quote][p][bold]notinwestcliffanymor e[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mys842[/bold] wrote: Come to Shoebury, there's plenty of nice sites around The Garrison that aren't surrounded by monstrosity buildings like in Victoria Avenue and that provide the calm surroundings that Haven's seek. Why are they so insistent on Belton Way, is it because of the Salvation Army land? There are other sites in Southend too, how about the nasty half knocked down building on Eastern Avenue - it has a beautiful sea outlook and noone seems to be doing very much with it![/p][/quote]At last a good use for shoebury, as has been mentioned on other posts leigh is not blessed with green spaces this will be the start of much more.... are they really only creating two extra beds?[/p][/quote]Leigh was, like the rest of the country, blessed with open spaces. However, somewhere, some time, some place, someone decided to settle and build a house. Leigh is full of high density terraced and semis not by nature, but because someone chose to build on the land. In my opinion, the Leigh's worst feature is the fact it's so high density, with barely room to swing a cat, let alone a car. I can understand your desire to keep the land that separates the town from the railway and sea green, but someone probably said they didn't want your house to be built. If there's anything worthy of building on green belt this is it. Also, if the planners did mislead them, I can totally understand Haven's stubborn nature in pursuing the plans, if only for the sake of not losing what they've already spent. mys842
  • Score: 6

4:41pm Fri 26 Apr 13

stopmoaning1 says...

We were in the position of using Havens wonderful facilities about six years ago for my mother in law. They were without doubt fantastic. Unfortunately it looks like we will be needing them again for another relative in the not too distant future. And as a family, we ALL say to Havens, PLEASE DO NOT BUILD ON THE GREEN BELT LAND. There are plenty of other sites that are not on the green belt land. It is the wonderful caring and dedicated work that goes on inside the comfortable rooms that matters
We were in the position of using Havens wonderful facilities about six years ago for my mother in law. They were without doubt fantastic. Unfortunately it looks like we will be needing them again for another relative in the not too distant future. And as a family, we ALL say to Havens, PLEASE DO NOT BUILD ON THE GREEN BELT LAND. There are plenty of other sites that are not on the green belt land. It is the wonderful caring and dedicated work that goes on inside the comfortable rooms that matters stopmoaning1
  • Score: -1

5:47pm Fri 26 Apr 13

firedog says...

What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article
about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their
commander,and the usual threats that
they will withdraw from donating any
money,a sad sad group.
What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their commander,and the usual threats that they will withdraw from donating any money,a sad sad group. firedog
  • Score: 1

6:59pm Fri 26 Apr 13

mikey-leigh says...

For all you planning/building/la
nd experts on here who seem to know about building hospices, what the Echo hasn't put online is the list of alternative suitable sites that are going to be debated at the appeal. I think 4/5 out of 6 are not actually available to buy!

And as for the emotional blackmail claim, I think I've said it on here before. This is not blackmail, unfortunately it's real life for an increasing amount of families (mine included) They (Havens) are not saying they need to build at Belton now or more people will die (blackmail), they're questioning the council's claim that there isn't an urgent and significant need for more specialist hospice care (despite that being backed up by study after study). Yes, the need for a new hospice is of course urgent, and they say Belton is the most suitable site that's available.

But for the council to claim that it's acceptable for families in their town to have to wait weeks/month for proper palliative care, and not class this as a significant need? Council of the Year is just a joke.
For all you planning/building/la nd experts on here who seem to know about building hospices, what the Echo hasn't put online is the list of alternative suitable sites that are going to be debated at the appeal. I think 4/5 out of 6 are not actually available to buy! And as for the emotional blackmail claim, I think I've said it on here before. This is not blackmail, unfortunately it's real life for an increasing amount of families (mine included) They (Havens) are not saying they need to build at Belton now or more people will die (blackmail), they're questioning the council's claim that there isn't an urgent and significant need for more specialist hospice care (despite that being backed up by study after study). Yes, the need for a new hospice is of course urgent, and they say Belton is the most suitable site that's available. But for the council to claim that it's acceptable for families in their town to have to wait weeks/month for proper palliative care, and not class this as a significant need? Council of the Year is just a joke. mikey-leigh
  • Score: 0

8:22pm Fri 26 Apr 13

stopmoaning1 says...

firedog wrote:
What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article
about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their
commander,and the usual threats that
they will withdraw from donating any
money,a sad sad group.
Sad, protester, mobilised? try reading my post again!
[quote][p][bold]firedog[/bold] wrote: What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their commander,and the usual threats that they will withdraw from donating any money,a sad sad group.[/p][/quote]Sad, protester, mobilised? try reading my post again! stopmoaning1
  • Score: -1

2:42pm Sat 27 Apr 13

Nebs says...

mikey-leigh wrote:
For all you planning/building/la

nd experts on here who seem to know about building hospices, what the Echo hasn't put online is the list of alternative suitable sites that are going to be debated at the appeal. I think 4/5 out of 6 are not actually available to buy!

And as for the emotional blackmail claim, I think I've said it on here before. This is not blackmail, unfortunately it's real life for an increasing amount of families (mine included) They (Havens) are not saying they need to build at Belton now or more people will die (blackmail), they're questioning the council's claim that there isn't an urgent and significant need for more specialist hospice care (despite that being backed up by study after study). Yes, the need for a new hospice is of course urgent, and they say Belton is the most suitable site that's available.

But for the council to claim that it's acceptable for families in their town to have to wait weeks/month for proper palliative care, and not class this as a significant need? Council of the Year is just a joke.
What size plot do you need?
[quote][p][bold]mikey-leigh[/bold] wrote: For all you planning/building/la nd experts on here who seem to know about building hospices, what the Echo hasn't put online is the list of alternative suitable sites that are going to be debated at the appeal. I think 4/5 out of 6 are not actually available to buy! And as for the emotional blackmail claim, I think I've said it on here before. This is not blackmail, unfortunately it's real life for an increasing amount of families (mine included) They (Havens) are not saying they need to build at Belton now or more people will die (blackmail), they're questioning the council's claim that there isn't an urgent and significant need for more specialist hospice care (despite that being backed up by study after study). Yes, the need for a new hospice is of course urgent, and they say Belton is the most suitable site that's available. But for the council to claim that it's acceptable for families in their town to have to wait weeks/month for proper palliative care, and not class this as a significant need? Council of the Year is just a joke.[/p][/quote]What size plot do you need? Nebs
  • Score: 0

4:56pm Sat 27 Apr 13

firedog says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
firedog wrote:
What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article
about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their
commander,and the usual threats that
they will withdraw from donating any
money,a sad sad group.
Sad, protester, mobilised? try reading my post again!
Read your post again,and concluded
the same.
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]firedog[/bold] wrote: What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their commander,and the usual threats that they will withdraw from donating any money,a sad sad group.[/p][/quote]Sad, protester, mobilised? try reading my post again![/p][/quote]Read your post again,and concluded the same. firedog
  • Score: 1

9:06am Mon 29 Apr 13

Sim0n says...

I am disgusted at this story, why is Andy Smith insisting on building on the sea front of Leigh ? I have to agree it is a nice place and will offer a nice view to patients, but any delay in finding a new location for Fair Havens is down to him. Planning rules are planning rules he is wasting tens of thousands of pounds of "DONATED MONEY " donated to support the Hospice Charity not one man’s dream of a seaside hospice.
This is not Andy Smiths money and the passing of these people are not advertising weapons to force his ideas on the local community.
The proposed plans are not just for a hospice, if I recall correctly less than half the space is for patients and their care , the rest is set aside for Lecture Theatre’s , conference facilitates and car parking to support these activities, would a smaller proposal be more acceptable to the planning department in Southend Council and the local people of Leigh, who knows.
I am disgusted at this story, why is Andy Smith insisting on building on the sea front of Leigh ? I have to agree it is a nice place and will offer a nice view to patients, but any delay in finding a new location for Fair Havens is down to him. Planning rules are planning rules he is wasting tens of thousands of pounds of "DONATED MONEY " donated to support the Hospice Charity not one man’s dream of a seaside hospice. This is not Andy Smiths money and the passing of these people are not advertising weapons to force his ideas on the local community. The proposed plans are not just for a hospice, if I recall correctly less than half the space is for patients and their care , the rest is set aside for Lecture Theatre’s , conference facilitates and car parking to support these activities, would a smaller proposal be more acceptable to the planning department in Southend Council and the local people of Leigh, who knows. Sim0n
  • Score: -2

1:25pm Mon 29 Apr 13

stopmoaning1 says...

firedog wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
firedog wrote:
What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article
about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their
commander,and the usual threats that
they will withdraw from donating any
money,a sad sad group.
Sad, protester, mobilised? try reading my post again!
Read your post again,and concluded
the same.
Then I must conclude that you have simply looked at some words without understanding them and just lumped me in to a little group of people you call protesters simply because I have a different opinion to you.

You clearly have no idea of the devastation to caused to our family over the loss of my mother in law which resulted in her final days in Fair Havens, and our praise and support for their wonderful caring staff and facilities.
You clearly have no idea of the amount of money we have, and **continue** to donate to this fantastic facility.
You clearly have no idea of the trauma we are going through again and the knowledge that we will soon be in the unfortunate position of having to make use of their facilities again.
You clearly have no idea of the amount of money we will continue to donate **wherever** the new building ends up.
And finally, you clearly have no idea that a person is entitled to have an opinion without having to have somebody else making an assumption that they are **sad,** **a protester,** or have been **mobilised by a commander**

So to be clear, **MY** OPINION, is please don’t build the new facility on Green Belt land.

Your apology is accepted in advance.
[quote][p][bold]firedog[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]firedog[/bold] wrote: What a sad lot of people these protesters are.as soon as an article about Fairhavens appears all the protesters are mobilised by their commander,and the usual threats that they will withdraw from donating any money,a sad sad group.[/p][/quote]Sad, protester, mobilised? try reading my post again![/p][/quote]Read your post again,and concluded the same.[/p][/quote]Then I must conclude that you have simply looked at some words without understanding them and just lumped me in to a little group of people you call protesters simply because I have a different opinion to you. You clearly have no idea of the devastation to caused to our family over the loss of my mother in law which resulted in her final days in Fair Havens, and our praise and support for their wonderful caring staff and facilities. You clearly have no idea of the amount of money we have, and **continue** to donate to this fantastic facility. You clearly have no idea of the trauma we are going through again and the knowledge that we will soon be in the unfortunate position of having to make use of their facilities again. You clearly have no idea of the amount of money we will continue to donate **wherever** the new building ends up. And finally, you clearly have no idea that a person is entitled to have an opinion without having to have somebody else making an assumption that they are **sad,** **a protester,** or have been **mobilised by a commander** So to be clear, **MY** OPINION, is please don’t build the new facility on Green Belt land. Your apology is accepted in advance. stopmoaning1
  • Score: 1

5:34pm Wed 1 May 13

r6keith says...

I had not realised where the current Fair Havens location was . Now I know its in Chalkwell Avenue it puts a very different light and blows out of the water on some of the so called arguments for the Belton Way location , things like the out look and the view and the tranquility. The location in Chalkwell Avenue has none of these yet functions perfectly well as a hospice with much praise and many would testify too. So why not find another location which will not create such a fuss there are plenty around open your eyes. Its the stalling of the Hospice owners themselves that are causing this lack of bed problem.
I had not realised where the current Fair Havens location was . Now I know its in Chalkwell Avenue it puts a very different light and blows out of the water on some of the so called arguments for the Belton Way location , things like the out look and the view and the tranquility. The location in Chalkwell Avenue has none of these yet functions perfectly well as a hospice with much praise and many would testify too. So why not find another location which will not create such a fuss there are plenty around open your eyes. Its the stalling of the Hospice owners themselves that are causing this lack of bed problem. r6keith
  • Score: -1

6:47pm Wed 1 May 13

Point-of-view says...

supermadmax wrote:
There is a massive shortage for terminally ill patients across the country.

The NHS kick them out as soon as they can not save them (as they need the beds) and then its a waiting game to get in a hospice.
I find Supermadmax's comment so incredulous.
I have had 3 members of my family cared for by the NHS at the end of their time with us. There was nothing but care and compassion each time and at no time did we feel that our relative was taking up a bed space.
Yes there is a massive shortage for terminally ill patients across the whole country and more needs to be done to improve their care but for goodness sake I am sick of people belittling the hard work many people in healthcare do on a daily basis.
With regard to building on greenbelt land....... its greenbelt for a reason, there are plenty of other places in the area to build on, what about that half knocked down building along the seafront, knock the rest down and build a lovely new place with a pretty view!
[quote][p][bold]supermadmax[/bold] wrote: There is a massive shortage for terminally ill patients across the country. The NHS kick them out as soon as they can not save them (as they need the beds) and then its a waiting game to get in a hospice.[/p][/quote]I find Supermadmax's comment so incredulous. I have had 3 members of my family cared for by the NHS at the end of their time with us. There was nothing but care and compassion each time and at no time did we feel that our relative was taking up a bed space. Yes there is a massive shortage for terminally ill patients across the whole country and more needs to be done to improve their care but for goodness sake I am sick of people belittling the hard work many people in healthcare do on a daily basis. With regard to building on greenbelt land....... its greenbelt for a reason, there are plenty of other places in the area to build on, what about that half knocked down building along the seafront, knock the rest down and build a lovely new place with a pretty view! Point-of-view
  • Score: -1

12:55pm Thu 2 May 13

onegreatjohnny says...

Time to leave it folks ... this issue will now be decided by a Planning Inspector 'standing in the shoes of the Secretary of State'.

It's the best democracy money can buy and recognition that councils do not get things right all the time with over 30% of appeals succeeding.

This hugely supported application had to go to appeal in the circumstances.
Time to leave it folks ... this issue will now be decided by a Planning Inspector 'standing in the shoes of the Secretary of State'. It's the best democracy money can buy and recognition that councils do not get things right all the time with over 30% of appeals succeeding. This hugely supported application had to go to appeal in the circumstances. onegreatjohnny
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree