Rotherham Hospital NHS staff given temporary eviction reprieve
NHS staff facing eviction from their accommodation within the grounds of a South Yorkshire hospital have been given a temporary reprieve.The 18 residents currently living in three housing blocks at Rotherham Hospital expected to have to leave on 10 February, but Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust said there had been "an error with the notice" issued.Campaigners working with the residents told the BBC they believed the trust mistakenly served an invalid eviction notice in December.Mike Suter, chair of Sheffield and South Yorkshire Save Our NHS group, said: "We welcome the news that the tenants are able to stay in their accommodation for now."
In August, the NHS trust informed residents their tenancy agreements at Swale Court, Derwent Court and Loxley Court would end in January due to fire safety concerns.The trust said an assessment of the blocks, which were built in the 1970s, found "extensive work" would be needed and the costs were "not affordable".
Mr Suter said 76 tenants were served notices at the three blocks, including trainee GPs, mental health care workers and international students, with only 18 remaining. Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust said "new notices will be given" to the remaining residents, with a final date not yet determined."We are continuing to work closely with the remaining residents to understand their individual needs and support them in securing alternative accommodation," a trust spokesperson said. The trust said it was still "unaffordable" to repair the blocks and they "will be eventually closed".Listen to highlights from South Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North or tell us a story you think we should be covering here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
19 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Cambridge professor ‘deliberately failed IQ test to aid £1m brain injury claim'
A University of Cambridge professor has been accused of deliberately failing IQ and memory tests to boost a £1 million brain damage claim. Dr Mohamed Atef Hakmi, 64, is suing the NHS for more than £1 million, claiming a failure to promptly diagnose a stroke left him with permanent brain damage and physical disabilities. Seeking damages the High Court, he claimed a failure to promptly diagnose him meant he missed the chance of vital treatment. But Dr Hakmi has been forced to deny deliberately throwing a pre-trial IQ test after scoring only a 'very bad' 84, putting him well below the UK average even though he still lectures at one of the world's most prestigious universities. Dr Hakmi had to give up orthopaedic surgery after suffering two strokes stroke at home in 2016. After the first, he was given clot-busting thrombolysis treatment and made a very good recovery, returning to the operating theatre within weeks, the court heard. He suffered a second stroke in November that year, while he worked late at night on paperwork, Robert Kellar KC, his barrister, told Judge David Pittaway KC. Spotting the symptoms, Dr Hakmi went to Lister Hospital in Stevenage, calling ahead and telling staff that he was having a stroke, said the barrister. However, the Royal College of Surgeons fellow says he was told he would not be offered thrombolysis because he was 'not having a stroke', with a remote doctor suggesting it could be simply a migraine or epilepsy. It was not until hours later that his stroke was diagnosed, at which point it was too late to treat him with the same drugs. Dr Hakmi accuses the NHS of 'cumulative and inter-related' failings, including a 'cursory and sub-standard examination' in A&E and the fact that he was only able to speak to the remote stroke specialist on the phone because of the NHS's Telemedicine system malfunctioning. He was left with reduced sensation in his fingers and toes, fatigue in his right arm, and a brain injury causing short-term memory impairment, impaired concentration, reduced processing speed and 'executive deficits'. He no longer has any private practice and has returned to the NHS on restricted duties, the barrister added, saying: 'He no longer does any surgery. But for the breach of duty, the claimant is likely to have made a good recovery. 'He would have been able to return to all types of surgery that did not require a high degree of manual dexterity.' 'Very surprising' results But John de Bono KC, representing the NHS, denied Dr Hakmi was due any damages payout at all and accused him of hamming-up his symptoms while being assessed before trial. He said Dr Hakmi scored only 84 on an IQ test, putting him below 86 per cent of the general population, adding: 'That's very bad – it suggests it would be hard to function as a surgeon or as an educator at that level.' Dr Hakmi was assessed by two neuropsychologists, who also performed memory tests, with 'very surprising' and sometimes 'astonishing' results, which Mr De Bono said raised 'serious concern about whether he was putting forward his best effort'. 'You scored astonishingly badly for someone operating at the level you are describing this morning,' Mr De Bono said, referring to the fact Dr Hakmi had spoken with pride in the witness box of his work with the university. 'Is it possible when you went to be tested that you performed worse than you should have done because you were trying to demonstrate to them just how big the impact had been?' Dr Hakmi denied performing worse than he should have, telling the court he found the tests 'exhausting'. He said: 'I definitely have a memory problem, slow effort. I know definitely I'm not as before I had the stroke.' The damages claim is against the East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, which runs the Lister Hospital, and the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, where the doctor who spoke to Dr Hakmi by phone was based. The trusts deny blame, saying Dr Hakmi was 'at all times treated with reasonable care and skill by highly competent clinicians'. The Trust said he was assessed as being unsuitable for thrombolysis treatment because his symptoms were not serious enough and it was too long after their onset. Such treatment can also be risky, carrying a significant risk of brain haemorrhage and death, said the NHS barrister, and even if Dr Hakmi had been given it, the outcome would probably have been the same.
Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments. But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'. They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it. 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. 'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe. 'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.' Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'. 'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said. 'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.' He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.' But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour. The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote. 'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. 'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.' Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying. Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill. People with terminal illnesses, surrounded by loved ones, display their dying wishes on tags outside the Palace of Westminster in London to urge MPs to support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Jas Lehal/PA) Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down. While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments. But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'. They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it. 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. 'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe. 'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.' Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'. 'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said. 'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.' He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.' But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour. The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote. 'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. 'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.' Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying. Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill. Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down. While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
