Ella takes on Windemere swim to raise £1,350 in memory of her dad
Ella Mason was taking part in last weekend's Great North Swim and raised £1,350 for the Royal Preston Hospital's Critical Care Unit in memory of her dad William.
Ella, from Clitheroe, took on the challenge to thank the unit's staff for going 'above and beyond' in the care they gave to William.
Despite the treatment he received, William passed away in February, aged 61, after contracting a Staph (Staphylococcus) infection.
Ella, who now helps run the family farm with mum Fiona and brother Matthew, said: 'Dad was never ill.
'He was physically strong, but he came down with what we thought was flu.
"Dad was never one for doctors but mum took him to the Urgent Care Centre in Burnley.
'Initially, he was sent home, but when he went back, he was taken by ambulance to Royal Blackburn Hospital and then on to the Critical Care Unit in Preston.
'By this time, the infection had spread all the way down his spine, but staff on the Critical Care Unit took on a very complicated surgery to remove a spinal abscess, after which dad was put in an induced coma.
'We were never given any guarantees but dad was so strong, he came round.
"He got to see Matthew, who had been working in Australia but immediately flew home when told dad was ill.
"Dad received the most exceptional care from all the staff, who went above and beyond. They also cared for us as a family.'
Ella added: 'The swim was tougher than I thought it would be because it was very windy and the waves were huge.
"I lost my cap and goggles in the first quarter mile, which knocked my confidence, but I made it. I'm very grateful to everyone who sponsored me.'
Ella raised her donation through an online fundraising page at the Arla Great North Swim's Enthuse website, and she's hoping to add to it by organising a 13-mile sponsored walk from dad's home village of Dunsop Bridge to Clitheroe on September 6.
Lucy Clark, a fundraiser for Lancashire Teaching Hospitals Charity, which supports the Critical Care Unit as well as other units and wards at the Royal Preston and Chorley and South Ribble Hospitals said: 'Congratulations to Ella on achieving a tough swim in tough conditions.
"We are incredibly grateful to her for her support.
'We know the last few months must have been very difficult for Ella and her family, so for her to go to the time and effort to thank staff in this way is so generous and means a great deal to everyone in the critical care team.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Harry left ‘devastated' by boardroom battle at his charity Sentebale
The Duke of Sussex has been left emotionally devastated by the events surrounding the boardroom battle that saw him leave his Sentebale charity, a source has said. The dispute, which prompted Harry to step down as patron in support of trustees who resigned in opposition to board chairwoman Dr Sophie Chandauka, was described as a 'hostile takeover' by the source. On Tuesday, the Charity Commission published a report into the episode criticising all sides for making the fallout public with interviews and statements, but the war of words has continued. Sentebale appeared to suggest allegations made by Dr Chandauka of bullying, harassment and misogyny at the charity – which the commission found no evidence of – may be pursued against individuals through 'avenues more appropriate'. A source said: 'This has been emotionally absolutely devastating for Prince Harry and (Sentebale co-founder) Prince Seeiso (of Lesotho). What's been perpetrated over the last few months is nothing short of a hostile takeover.' Seeiso also stepped down as patron of the charity which works in Botswana and Lesotho supporting the health and wellbeing of young people, especially those with HIV and Aids. The source added: 'You have to remember Prince Seeiso and Prince Harry started this charity nearly two decades ago to honour the work and continue the legacy of their mothers Queen Mamohato and Princess Diana, and the work that they had done in southern Africa to support those living with HIV and Aids. 'In the 19 years that they have worked with this charity, and a lot of the former board of trustee members, they have raised tens of millions of pounds and distributed tens of millions of pounds.' The commission criticised all parties in the dispute for allowing it to play out publicly and described how all trustees contributed to a 'missed opportunity' to resolve the issues that led to the serious disagreement which risked undermining public trust in charities generally. The regulator, which cannot investigate individual allegations of bullying, found no evidence of systemic bullying or harassment, including misogyny or misogynoir at the charity but acknowledged 'the strong perception of ill treatment' felt by some involved. After conducting its regulatory compliance case the commission issued a Regulatory Action Plan with Sentebale saying it had complied with the steps, from implementing an internal dispute policy to improving the charity's complaints and whistle-blowing procedures. The trustees who resigned said in a statement they were 'gravely concerned for the future of the charity' adding they were 'disheartened' by the way the regulator had 'chosen to ignore key concerns and irrefutable evidence raised with them regarding the leadership and oversight of Sentebale's chair'. Sentebale said in statement: 'The Charity Commission is explicitly clear, including in its public guidance, that it is not the commission's responsibility to adjudicate or mediate internal disputes. This would include individual allegations of bullying, harassment, misogyny, misogynoir etc. 'As a result, the commission has not investigated any individual allegations and therefore has not made any findings in relation to individuals, including Prince Harry. 'The issues not investigated by the commission can and may be dealt with through avenues more appropriate than the commission.'
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Do Employers Have A Rational Fear Of Hiring Disabled Staff?
Sir Charlie Mayfield, a stalwart of the UK business community and advisor to Liz Kendall, Work and Pensions Secretary, has recently been quoted in The Times stating that employers have a 'rational' fear of hiring disabled staff. During his review of workplace sickness, Mayfield concluded that adapting work to staff with health problems was a huge issue that required employers to change, but suggested extra duties on businesses were not the answer. He said: "We've got a large amount of legislation which places requirements on employers and it's partly because of that that a lot of employers see it as risky to employ disabled people. And so quite rationally, they don't, even though we all know that's not the right outcome." The context for these comments is one in which 2.5 million UK workers are permanently off sick, and 8.7 million workers identifying as disabled. There's been an increase of 800,000 people too unwell to work since 2019, which is unsustainable for workers, their life outcomes and financial stability as well as the national economy. Rights Versus Reality? So are Mayfield's comments and his discovery report for the Department of Work and Pensions yet another stick with which to beat disabled people? Or are his remarks click bait headlines, papering over some well reasoned insights which need to be surfaced, understood and addressed? Mayfield commented on the rise in Employment Tribunals and the extra duties on UK businesses: The present approach "pitches rights against reality. If someone's ill and they have a fit note, there's a stand-off almost between that person and their employer, who could be part of the solution. We need to move from a position where too much of this is about risk and fear, to one where we humanise this and encourage people to be talking of finding solutions." The adversarial narratives that exist between communities of lived experience and employers has swiftly deepened in recent years, with each group finding very different sources of advice online and increases in perceptions of conflict and unfairness from all sides – employee, colleague and employer. However, read deeper into the report, and Mayfield is recommending an incentivisation approach to disability employment (the proverbial 'carrot', rather than the legislative 'stick'). Crucially, he recommends that employers intervene early when someone is struggling, rather than lagging in the provision of adjustments or support. Indeed, failure to provide timely intervention is a frequent cause of employment tribunals, with compensation up to £230,000 in one recent case. A shift in responsiveness would be very welcome by the disabled and neurodivergent community and it seems pretty logical. Government support and incentives for early intervention seem rational, but we will need to think carefully about what to provide. Early Intervention Guidance Advice on disability adjustments for individuals from the government service Access to Work or in-house / private Occupational Health is routinely a first port of call for employees and employers respectively. Access to Work has been a lifeline for employees over the past few decades, and has funded services and equipment that exceeds the budgets of many small businesses. However, it has become so log jammed that there is a community pressure group now set up to raise awareness of the problem founded by Dr Shani Dhanda. Occupational health services can be excellent and provide or signpost the specialist advice needed. But costs have spiralled with a clinical, 'assessment first' provision when there are so many referrals. There's a lack of filtering so those with the greatest needs are getting the same level of intervention as those who need a simple set of strategies or some software. Some of the occupational health companies are delivering the same services that they recommend, which is a structural conflict of interest and risks driving up costs - this practice is banned in Access to Work and Disabled Students Allowance, for example. So while we're telling employers to do more, faster, we will also need to be clear about the 'how' and the 'what'. With grand policy gestures and an increasingly litigious atmosphere, the needs of the businesses risk being overlooked and on that note, Sir Mayfield's comments are on point. Advice on adjustments for health and disability needs to be a collaboration between employer and employee. An assessment should consult both parties, and review what the individual needs in relation to the resources available. For example, a higher cost burden might be acceptable for a larger business than a small business. Safety critical roles might not have as much flexibility as a standard role. It is therefore not possible to list reasonable adjustments for each physical, emotional or cognitive difficulty. These can act as guidance, but not definitive entitlements. The policy and specialist support environment is going to need to become more sophisticated, and more responsive to balancing needs and addressing conflict, unfairness and unreasonable requests / restrictions. This is not a straightforward ask. Needs-led models How can employers find good advice in a complex and risky environment? The needs-led model is a good alternative to the medical model, relying more on practical support than clinical diagnosis. At work, we don't need to know the cause of back pain to know that a first port of call is a desk assessment or moving and handling review. Improving knowledge of functional, everyday difficulties and potential scaffolding is within the grasp of HR with the occasional advice of specialists where needed. Up-skilling employer confidence and competence is a potential avenue to improving outcomes, particularly in the areas of emotional regulation and cognition-dependent task performance where the challenges and the solutions are not visible. Knowing what to provide can be a pragmatic, low-cost conversation – research indicates that the cheapest or free adjustments are typically the most welcome, and that employees prefer the ability to personalize rather than passively receive an off-the-shelf allocation. As the population ages, the disability inclusion problem is not going to go away. Employers who are not developing a straightforward and accessible pathway to inclusion – at the company and individual level – will remain at risk of employment tribunal losses. This isn't a question of rights versus reality, it is a question of taking charge of a business need versus sticking your head in the sand. The rational fear of tribunals can be replaced by a rational approach to managing a large and growing cohort of disabled employees. Given the urgency of resolving the problem at the national level, now is a great time to start a strategic workforce plan.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Hackers Steal Passwords From UK's NHS With Sneaky Malware Tool
Ambulances parked outside the emergency department at the National Health Service's Royal Liverpool University Hospital in Liverpool, UK.
