Latest news with #UHSussex
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Give trans staff extra breaks to adjust underwear, NHS trust suggested
An NHS hospital trust drew up plans to give trans staff extra breaks if they wore chest binders or had to tuck their genitals away. In draft guidance seen by The Telegraph, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust (UH Sussex) said trans colleagues 'may require extra scheduled breaks in their shift in order to have breaks from binding and tucking'. However, the trust said the new proposals, which also said women-only spaces should include trans women, had been put on hold in February and would not be pursued following the Supreme Court ruling last month. Judges ruled that the Equality Act referred to biological women and biological sex, rather than those choosing to identify as a woman. But critics said the draft guidance raised concerns about the time spent by NHS staff on working up and consulting on these types of policies. The NHS has no specific advice for trans people who wear chest binders or tuck their genitals, but the actions are considered controversial by some because of the harm they can cause. Chest binding is when a woman wears an item of clothing to compress their breasts to look more like a man, while the 'tuck' involves pushing the testes and penis back between the legs to appear more female. Both can cause infections, inflammation and other health problems, doctors have warned, which in some cases can be irreversible or lead to infertility in biological males. The proposed guidance said: It is understood that employees in the UH Sussex LGBTQ+ staff network had written the 15-page document last year and sent it to other groups for consultation. One former employee at the trust said: 'If we're going to make allowances for people who have to use the toilets to change and do this, that and the other, should we not be making allowances for women with heavy periods, or people who have to pray three times a day? Why are we making allowances for one group of staff over everyone else?' Dr Alice Hodkinson, a co-founder of Biology in Medicine, a doctors' campaign group, said people binding or tucking were 'risking medical and psychological harm'. She said tucking male genitals 'between the buttocks can cause pain, inflammation, fertility problems and testicular torsion', while 'binding can cause chest and spine deformities, cysts, infections and difficulties breathing'. Dr Hodkinson added that testicular torsion 'is a surgical emergency requiring an immediate operation to preserve fertility and sexual function', saying: 'The UK National FGM Centre considers breast flattening to be a form of child abuse.' Helen Joyce, the director of advocacy at Sex Matters, a human rights charity, said the proposals for 'employees who are self-harming in pursuit of the impossible goal of sex change should never have made it onto paper, even as a draft'. She added: 'Tucking genitals and binding breasts are culturally motivated actions that cause permanent physical damage, just like breast ironing and the use of neck coils. The only difference is that self-harm in the name of trans identity is high status and fashionable. 'This blatant attempt to normalise such a harmful practice is particularly disgraceful coming from a healthcare body. It is a relief to know that NHS Sussex won't be taking it forward.' The draft guidance also told staff they should try and understand the impact of cross-sex hormones on any trans colleagues and their mood. 'It is also helpful to gain an understanding of if there are certain times that are better or worse for their mood and wellbeing e.g. when someone is prescribed testosterone, energy levels and mood can be lower towards the end of a medication cycle, and can vary greatly on the type of preparation,' it said. 'Feminising hormones can require a lot more consultation to achieve an appropriate dosage, and may similarly impact mood and energy levels.' UH Sussex said it had never had a policy on this and that this draft had been put on hold in February, after being reviewed by senior leaders and had now been dropped altogether. A spokesman for the trust said: 'This draft paper is not trust policy or guidance, it never has been, and never will be. 'A colleague submitted it to a manager in February, for consideration, but it was not accepted.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
02-04-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
NHS trust apologises after man died when it failed to treat tumour
An NHS trust has apologised after a man died when it failed to treat his tumour. Richard Harris, 71, died in July last year after errors by the Royal Sussex County Hospital 's neurosurgery department in Brighton, West Sussex. University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust (UHSussex), which runs the hospital, has admitted it failed to monitor or operate on a tumour in his nervous system despite doctors recommending this be done. An internal review of Harris's care found doctors had not arranged a routine MRI scan after he received an urgent referral in 2017. It was not until two years later, in 2019, that he had the scan after he contacted the neurology department himself. Harris was then diagnosed with a benign schwannoma tumour and recommended for twice-yearly monitoring and surgical intervention, The Guardian reported. But the surgery was not arranged and follow-up scans were postponed and cancelled. In 2024, Harris, a former massage therapist, was referred to the neurosurgery department again after experiencing acute pain. The review found there were further delays until his tumour was assessed as cancerous and inoperable. He was released to hospice care and died a few weeks later. 'Possible corporate manslaughter' Harris's family has been told his death was being investigated as possible corporate manslaughter along with 90 other deaths at the hospital's general surgery and neurosurgery departments, the newspaper reported. Sussex Police has launched Operation Bramber to investigate allegations of medical negligence in those departments between 2015 and 2020. The trust apologised to Harris before he died for its failure to arrange the follow-up scans in 2019. 'They seem to be expert at fobbing people off,' said his sister, Jane. 'The way they have treated us mirrors how Richard was treated. We are just so horrified by how Richard's life was cut short.' She added: 'Richard slipped through the net time and time again. It is the whole system there that is the problem. The more you read about his case, the more delays you see.' Katie Urch, the chief medical officer for UHSussex, said: 'Our heartfelt sympathies and apologies go to Richard Harris's family. We have conveyed this to them previously but hope to do so in person in the coming weeks. 'We know that they understandably still have many questions about Mr Harris's care. 'Regrettably, we cannot publicly discuss any of the details of this case at this time, but we will sincerely attempt to address any issues the family raise with us.'
Telegraph
01-04-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
NHS trust apologises after man died when it failed to treat brain tumour
An NHS trust has apologised after a man died when it failed to treat his brain tumour. Richard Harris, 71, died in July last year after errors by the Royal Sussex County Hospital's neurosurgery department in Brighton, West Sussex. University Hospitals Sussex NHS foundation trust (UHSussex), which runs the hospital, has admitted it failed to monitor or operate on a tumour in his nervous system despite doctors recommending this be done. An internal review of Mr Harris's care found doctors had not arranged a routine MRI scan after he received an urgent referral in 2017. It was not until two years later, in 2019, that he had the scan after he contacted the neurology department himself. Mr Harris was then diagnosed with a benign schwannoma tumour and recommended for twice-yearly monitoring and surgical intervention, The Guardian reported. But the surgery was not arranged and follow-up scans were postponed and cancelled. In 2024, Mr Harris, a former massage therapist, was referred to the neurosurgery department again after experiencing acute pain. The review found there were further delays until Mr Harris's tumour was assessed as cancerous and inoperable. He was released to hospice care and died a few weeks later. Mr Harris's family have been told his death is being investigated as possible corporate manslaughter along with 90 other deaths at the hospital's general surgery and neurosurgery departments, the newspaper reported. Sussex Police has launched Operation Bramber to investigate allegations of medical negligence in the hospital's general surgery and neurosurgery departments between 2015 and 2020. The trust apologised to Mr Harris before he died for its failure to arrange the follow-up scans in 2019. 'They seem to be expert at fobbing people off,' said Mr Harris's sister, Jane. 'The way they have treated us mirrors how Richard was treated. We are just so horrified by how Richard's life was cut short.' She added: 'Richard slipped through the net time and time again. It is the whole system there that is the problem. The more you read about his case, the more delays you see.' Katie Urch, the chief medical officer for UHSussex, said: 'Our heartfelt sympathies and apologies go to Richard Harris's family. We have conveyed this to them previously but hope to do so in person in the coming weeks. 'We know that they understandably still have many questions about Mr Harris's care. 'Regrettably, we cannot publicly discuss any of the details of this case at this time, but we will sincerely attempt to address any issues the family raise with us.'
The Guardian
01-04-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
NHS trust apologises as man's tumour death investigated for manslaughter
A troubled NHS trust has apologised to the family of a man who died after a series of potentially fatal delays to treat a tumour, in a case that is being investigated by police as possible corporate manslaughter. Richard Harris, 71, died last July after a series of errors in the neurosurgery department at the Royal Sussex County hospital in Brighton, which is part of University Hospitals Sussex NHS foundation trust (UHSussex). The trust admitted that Harris was 'lost to follow-up' when the hospital repeatedly failed to monitor a tumour in his nervous system, or operate on it, as doctors recommended. An internal review of Harris's care found that doctors failed to arrange a routine MRI scan for him when he was first urgently referred to neurosurgery in 2017. Harris, who was fit and a regular swimmer, only received a scan when he contacted the department again in 2019. The scan picked up a benign schwannoma tumour, which a multidisciplinary team concluded would require regular monitoring, every six months. They also said 'surgical intervention should be advised', the review found. But no surgery was arranged. And the required follow-up scans were postponed and cancelled at a time when internal whistleblowers expressed alarm about high cancellation rates, and repeated and allegedly dangerous failures to follow up patients under the trust's care. Eventually Harris, who had worked as a gardener, delivery driver and massage therapist, was referred to neurosurgery early last year suffering with acute pain. He had to wait weeks to be seen, despite repeatedly pleading with his consultant in emails complaining of 'red-hot poker pain' that was 'scaring me to death'. There were yet further delays in arranging MRI scans, the review found. Months later, the tumour was assessed to be cancerous and inoperable. Harris was discharged to hospice care and died a few weeks later. Sussex police have confirmed to Harris's family that his death is being investigated as possible corporate manslaughter, as part of its expanding Operation Bramber investigation. Police documents seen by the Guardian show that more than 90 deaths in the general surgery and neurosurgery departments are being reviewed as possible manslaughter. Detectives and a clinical panel are examining alleged medical negligence and cover-ups between 2015 and 2021. The allegations were first made by two internal whistleblowers: Krishna Singh, a consultant surgeon, and Mansoor Foroughi, a consultant neurosurgeon, who lost their jobs after raising concerns. Police have explained to Harris's family that his case has been included because, although he died outside the investigation's timeframe, the errors that could have contributed to his death occurred earlier. Before he died, the trust apologised to Harris for its failure to arrange follow-up scans as planned in 2019. Now the trust's internal review has detailed what went wrong and the 'missed opportunities' to correct repeated failures to monitor the tumour. It found the trust had 'systems and process that allowed patients needing active monitoring to be lost to follow-up if not corrected by the patients themselves'. It noted that Harris cancelled a scan in error in 2020, but further scans or appointments were not arranged by the hospital. It even failed to arrange a scan after Harris was picked up in routine review in 2022 and wrongly classified as not requiring monitoring. Additionally, when Harris attended the hospital as an outpatient for three other complaints in 2022 and a physical assault in 2023, his need for a scan was not picked up. The trust also apologised 'unreservedly' to the family for the way Harris's 'humbling' emails about what he said was 'unbearable pain' were ignored. Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Richard's sister, Jane Harris, said the report on her brother's death was 'pathetic'. She said: 'They seem to be expert at fobbing people off. The way they have treated us mirrors how Richard was treated. We are just so horrified by how Richard's life was cut short.' She added: 'Richard slipped through the net time and time again. It is the whole system there that is the problem. The more you read about his case, the more delays you see.' Months before the trust sacked him in December 2021, Foroughi complained about high cancellation rates in the hospital and how failure to follow up with a number of individual patients led to deaths and serious harm. A dossier setting out his concerns said: 'Delays and cancellations of hundreds of operations and OPD [outpatient department] appointments each year has been stressful, demoralising and beyond measure in terms of costs to the patients and their families.' Katie Urch, the chief medical officer for UHSussex, said: 'Our heartfelt sympathies and apologies go to Richard Harris's family. We have conveyed this to them previously, but hope to do so in person in the coming weeks. 'We know that they understandably still have many questions about Mr Harris's care. 'Regrettably, we cannot publicly discuss any of the details of this case at this time, but we will sincerely attempt to address any issues the family raise with us.'
