Guest guest Posted September 23, 2000 Report Share Posted September 23, 2000 That is really good news. As it as evening, I may be able to get space at King's, which is right opposit Waterloo (daytime is always impossible: we even ended up hiring the adjacent church crypt one year to find enough space to teach students in!). As it will be in the evening, I wonder if London (or near) members might be prepared to offer overnight accomodation to anyone travelling a distance to save expense? I live in Tunbridge Wells, which is a bit over an hour from Waterloo or Charing Cross; an hour and a half from , Paddington, Euston, King's Cross ( I am thinking of the return journeys, here). I would happily shift the ironing out of my spare room to sleep two people! Bidmead wrote: Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the end of the week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 24, 2000 Report Share Posted September 24, 2000 I would be happy to clear my spare room and offer accommodation to one or two people. Also, thought SENATE members may be interested in accessing Medscape, an American web site for nurses which gives useful up to date news digests from medical journals, clinical info. etc. Access is free but requires a one-time membership registration. www.medscape.com/ June Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2000 Report Share Posted September 26, 2000 Dear , Will try to book one of the new lecture rooms at UCL: need confirmation of the date before I go to the college (very near Euston, walking distance from King's Cross and St.Pancras stations, but do not try to drive to UCL as parking is extremely limited and expensive in WC1). Do we have a high level speaker lined up for the " health visitors are just like every other nurse and not remotely a group distinguished by professional skills and ethics " side of the debate ? s springs to mind... or perhaps Colin from the Cardiff medical school ? The only person I know who ever tried to make a truly professional case for having just one generic community nurse was A.Fawcett-Henesy when she was Director of Nursing & Quality for the old South East Thames Region, but I am not sure where Ainne is now- the WHO perhaps ? Woody. > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the end of the week. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2000 Report Share Posted September 27, 2000 Putting people up is a great idea! I am about an hour and a half from London but very happy to offer if people can bear the journey into deepest Sussex >From: Cowley <sarah@...> >Reply-egroups >egroups >Subject: Re: Debate >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:35:55 +0100 > >That is really good news. As it as evening, I may be able to get space >at King's, which is right opposit Waterloo (daytime is always >impossible: we even ended up hiring the adjacent church crypt one year >to find enough space to teach students in!). > >As it will be in the evening, I wonder if London (or near) members might >be prepared to offer overnight accomodation to anyone travelling a >distance to save expense? > >I live in Tunbridge Wells, which is a bit over an hour from Waterloo or >Charing Cross; an hour and a half from , Paddington, Euston, >King's Cross ( I am thinking of the return journeys, here). I would >happily shift the ironing out of my spare room to sleep two people! > > > > Bidmead wrote: > > > > > My Groups | Main Page | Start a new > [eGroups] > group! > > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now we > > need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered before. > > University of London? Could you explore the possibilities for us? We > > need to confirm a date with yet but we could be looking at 17th > > November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 people from about > > 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for preparation and clearing > > away etc. Date should be confirmed by the end of the week. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2000 Report Share Posted September 29, 2000 Hi Woody, Good to meet you at the beginning of the week. Perhaps you could make a provisional booking at UCL for the 17th November. We will try to confirm next week. . Re: Debate > Dear , > > Will try to book one of the new lecture rooms at UCL: need > confirmation of the date before I go to the college > (very near Euston, walking distance from King's Cross and St.Pancras > stations, but do not try to drive to UCL as parking is extremely > limited and expensive in WC1). > Do we have a high level speaker lined up for the " health visitors are > just like every other nurse and not remotely a group distinguished by > professional skills and ethics " side of the debate ? s > springs to mind... or perhaps Colin from the Cardiff medical > school ? The only person I know who ever tried to make a truly > professional case for having just one generic community nurse was > A.Fawcett-Henesy when she was Director of Nursing & Quality for the > old South East Thames Region, but I am not sure where Ainne is now- > the WHO perhaps ? > > Woody. > > > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the > end of the week. > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2000 Report Share Posted October 1, 2000 I spoke last night to June who would be very happy to oppose in the debate. June is a stong advocate of health visiting - even more so since the Welsh work - but also very much a nurse and wouls be an excellent opponent. She is going to think about her supporter. I told her it was most likely on 17th Novemebr but we will need to confirm detials and venue. It looks like we are moving on. Margaret Re: Debate > > > > Dear , > > > > Will try to book one of the new lecture rooms at UCL: need > > confirmation of the date before I go to the college > > (very near Euston, walking distance from King's Cross and St.Pancras > > stations, but do not try to drive to UCL as parking is extremely > > limited and expensive in WC1). > > Do we have a high level speaker lined up for the " health visitors are > > just like every other nurse and not remotely a group distinguished by > > professional skills and ethics " side of the debate ? s > > springs to mind... or perhaps Colin from the Cardiff medical > > school ? The only person I know who ever tried to make a truly > > professional case for having just one generic community nurse was > > A.Fawcett-Henesy when she was Director of Nursing & Quality for the > > old South East Thames Region, but I am not sure where Ainne is now- > > the WHO perhaps ? > > > > Woody. > > > > > > > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now > > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > > before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities > > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the > > end of the week. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2000 Report Share Posted October 2, 2000 I've just spoken to who is getting a bit jittery about not getting a date from . However she has just written him a letter and will get her son to fax it to him tomorrow from her MPs office. We will need a flyer by the weekend, though. Anyone got any design ideas. Re: Debate > > > > > > > Dear , > > > > > > Will try to book one of the new lecture rooms at UCL: need > > > confirmation of the date before I go to the college > > > (very near Euston, walking distance from King's Cross and St.Pancras > > > stations, but do not try to drive to UCL as parking is extremely > > > limited and expensive in WC1). > > > Do we have a high level speaker lined up for the " health visitors are > > > just like every other nurse and not remotely a group distinguished by > > > professional skills and ethics " side of the debate ? s > > > springs to mind... or perhaps Colin from the Cardiff medical > > > school ? The only person I know who ever tried to make a truly > > > professional case for having just one generic community nurse was > > > A.Fawcett-Henesy when she was Director of Nursing & Quality for the > > > old South East Thames Region, but I am not sure where Ainne is now- > > > the WHO perhaps ? > > > > > > Woody. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now > > > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > > > before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities > > > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > > > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > > > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > > > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the > > > end of the week. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2000 Report Share Posted October 5, 2000 Dear , Lecture Theatre 2 in the Cruciform building (the old UCH brick building in Gower Street, newly refurbished) holds up to 112 people and has been booked for 5.30-930 on Friday 17 November 2000. It transpires that UCL are likely to charge me £95 for a booking where external people are coming - any chance of my being reimbursed ? Best wishes, Woody. > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now > > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > > before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities > > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the > > end of the week. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 5, 2000 Report Share Posted October 5, 2000 Thank you so much for booking UCL. The date unfortunately has now been confirmed as 16th November. I wonder if you can change the date of the booking? I certainly hope so. You will, of course be reimbursed the £95 booking fee. Flyer is in process of being designed. Re: Debate Dear , Lecture Theatre 2 in the Cruciform building (the old UCH brick building in Gower Street, newly refurbished) holds up to 112 people and has been booked for 5.30-930 on Friday 17 November 2000. It transpires that UCL are likely to charge me £95 for a booking where external people are coming - any chance of my being reimbursed ? Best wishes, Woody. > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now > > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > > before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities > > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the > > end of the week. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Dear Woody, The date for the debate is now definitely the 16th November. Dame June has agreed to debate with but she cannot make it from Wales until 7pm so we would want the venue from 6pm to 9.30 pm. Please can you confirm that this is OK and that we can go ahead with this venue ASAP. is going great guns with he flyer but until we have a venue we cannot go ahead. I do hope that the venue can still be confirmed for the 16th. Thanks for your help Re: Debate Dear , Lecture Theatre 2 in the Cruciform building (the old UCH brick building in Gower Street, newly refurbished) holds up to 112 people and has been booked for 5.30-930 on Friday 17 November 2000. It transpires that UCL are likely to charge me £95 for a booking where external people are coming - any chance of my being reimbursed ? Best wishes, Woody. > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! Now > > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > > before. University of London? Could you explore the possibilities > > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by the > > end of the week. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2000 Report Share Posted October 11, 2000 > > > > Some good news! Dobson has agreed to chair our debate! > Now > > > we need a central London venue. Woody, I know that you offered > > > before. University of London? Could you explore the > possibilities > > > for us? We need to confirm a date with yet but we could be > > > looking at 17th November. We need a room that could hold 50- 100 > > > people from about 5.30pm-9.30pm. This is to allow time for > > > preparation and clearing away etc. Date should be confirmed by > the > > > end of the week. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2000 Report Share Posted October 31, 2000 Dear and , Thanks for this update. Pity Dobbo dropped out. I need fairly urgently to know if coffee/tea/cookies for 100 has to be ordered from UCL, or if other catering is planned for the 16th. I will have to put the room money up front and promise that the HVSN Senate will not commit any unseemly behaviours in UCL. I trust the Senate will cover me on this ! I will also request a wheelchair ramp, for access to the Lecture Theatre (it is up a short flight of stairs). Best wishes, Woody. RSVP. > The debate for the 16th November will be chaired by Jane Salvage. It will take place at UCL, Anatomy Lecture Theatre(Entrance Gower Street) at 7pm. Flyers will be available from early next week. Invite and send flyers to everyone you think will be interested. There have been all sorts of delays in getting this one off the ground but hopefully we will be better prepared for the next event in the Spring. Look forward to meeting everyone there, > and Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2000 Report Share Posted October 31, 2000 News Flash: Sorry, and , I have just discovered that UCL catering cannot lay on any refreshments for us in the Anatomy Lecture Theatre (the change of venue from 17/11/00 has interfered with this). If people are coming from a distance and desperate for a coffee before the Debate, I would suggest they go to the coffee shop in the basement of Waterstone's in Gower Street, about one minute due South of the Anatomy Lecture Theatre, which is open till 8pm. Cheers, Woody. > > The debate for the 16th November will be chaired by Jane Salvage. > It will take place at UCL, Anatomy Lecture Theatre(Entrance Gower > Street) at 7pm. Flyers will be available from early next week. > Invite and send flyers to everyone you think will be interested. > There have been all sorts of delays in getting this one off the > ground but hopefully we will be better prepared for the next event in > the Spring. Look forward to meeting everyone there, > > and Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2000 Report Share Posted October 31, 2000 Woody, thank you for hosting this event and you forebearance with the changes. Is it allowed for us to bring refreshments, or are they banned from the lecture theatre? Please will you send your bill to our treasurer Toity Deave (newly, Dr Toity Deave; completed this month) at: Institute of Child Health Royal Hospital for Sick Children St 's Hill Bristol BS2 8BJ Toity.Deave@... Best wishes woody@... wrote: > News Flash: > > Sorry, and , > I have just discovered that UCL catering cannot lay on any refreshments for us in the Anatomy Lecture Theatre (the change of venue from 17/11/00 has interfered with this). > > If people are coming from a distance and desperate for a coffee before the Debate, I would suggest they go to the coffee shop in the basement of Waterstone's in Gower Street, about one minute due South of the Anatomy Lecture Theatre, which is open till 8pm. > > Cheers, > Woody. > > > > > The debate for the 16th November will be chaired by Jane Salvage. > > It will take place at UCL, Anatomy Lecture Theatre(Entrance Gower > > Street) at 7pm. Flyers will be available from early next week. > > Invite and send flyers to everyone you think will be interested. > > There have been all sorts of delays in getting this one off the > > ground but hopefully we will be better prepared for the next event in > > the Spring. Look forward to meeting everyone there, > > > and > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 31, 2000 Report Share Posted October 31, 2000 Dear , It sounds as though we are not supposed to eat and drink in that part of UCL (no wonder Anatomy is full of skeletons... ). I won't turn away anyone who brings sandwiches, but I cannot be seen to encourage this, hence my suggestion about Waterstone's nearby. All the best, Woody. > > > > The debate for the 16th November will be chaired by Jane Salvage. > > > It will take place at UCL, Anatomy Lecture Theatre(Entrance Gower > > > Street) at 7pm. Flyers will be available from early next week. > > > Invite and send flyers to everyone you think will be interested. > > > There have been all sorts of delays in getting this one off the > > > ground but hopefully we will be better prepared for the next event in > > > the Spring. Look forward to meeting everyone there, > > > > and > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2000 Report Share Posted November 17, 2000 Dear , June, Margaret and Ros, The Times Higher today (17/11/00) has on page 3 an article 'Health groups work together to overcome " tribal barriers " '. Jill Macleod- is leading this QAA initiative for the Universities for a 'core curriculum' on behalf of 'nursing, midwifery and health visiting'. Apropos last night's Debate (and both speakers' visions of the future) would it not be advisable for a specifically HV voice to be added to this QAA benchmarking ? Best wishes, Woody. > Dear and June, > > Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the debate last night and > the call for action from June. It was good to see so many people > there. > > Thank you Margaret and for your message - I got my bag > back this morning and apologies to Sue for hysterics on the tube! > > Ros Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2000 Report Share Posted November 17, 2000 Well spotted Woody; I would like to see the report. I understand there are three working groups; one each for nursing midwifery and health visiting. I was told the names of the people involved, but can't remember who; about 8, a majority are HVs. I know that Dianne Watkins from University of Wales College of Medicine (Cardiff) is one, because she told me about it; she is HV and community programme leader there. I think Jill Macleod is quite interested in the idea of direct entry to HV training. June's impassioned speech after the debate about the change to the statutory instrument was fascinating, wasn't it? I came home this evening to a message from a Nursing Times reporter wanting more information, so they may be going to pick it up and the Nursing Standard reporter who was present was clearly suddenly interested at that point! For those who were not there, June accused the UKCC of acting 'ultra vires' because the statutory instrument that was approved at the end of August was primarily about the changes needed to reflect the Peach report and pre-registration nurse training, and about which there had been wide consultation. On the back of that, the UKCC added in changes to statute governing health visitor education without any consultation, which June suggests is beyond their lawful remit. She raised a loud rallying cry for letters to MPs, UKCC etc and hopes someone will mount a legal challenge. There were three changes; one was to alter the statute so that nurses from any part of the register, and direct entry midwives can now enter health visitor training. It used to be part 1 of the register only, or 'such other nursing qualification that the UKCC may in particular case approve'. That meant that all Project 2000 nurses, and anyone not trained as an adult nurse had to be approved as a 'particular case', and midwives could not become health visitors, unless they were nurse trained as well. Second, the requirement for all entrants to HV training to have a school leaving qualification in English, Welsh or history has been removed; no one is going to mourn the loss of that! Third, the length of training was formerly set at 51 weeks, although the Council was able to approve modified courses of a shorter duration. That is effectively what happened when the Community Health Care Nursing framework was implemented between 1995 and 1998. All courses that followed the requirements of that framework were officially 'modified courses' under the statute and only needed to be a minimum of 32 weeks. Now, the statute says 32 weeks as a minimum, so courses are about one third shorter than they were. This has not actually changed anything in educational practice NOW. Not that I remember the profession being consulted about the 32 week minimum standard when it was published back in 1994 either; there had been two earlier documents and the third was just brought in. However, it does mean the official length of the programme has been reduced in law, just as we have had a whole batch of research and reviews showing how many problems the shorter course is creating (e.g. the report Margaret, and I did for the UKCC, the Review carried out by June and Margaret for the Welsh Assembly; also the large study carried out by ine Pearson and team, commissioned by the ENB). It is because the change flies so obviously in the face of this evidence, and ignores the statutory requirement for the UKCC to have regard to the views of the professions it regulates (which may mean it should consult them) that June was so angry. She thinks we (who?) should mount a campaign. What do people think? woody@... wrote: > Dear , June, Margaret and Ros, > > The Times Higher today (17/11/00) has on page 3 an article 'Health groups work together to overcome " tribal barriers " '. Jill Macleod- is leading this QAA initiative for the Universities for a 'core curriculum' on behalf of 'nursing, midwifery and health visiting'. Apropos last night's Debate (and both speakers' visions of the future) would it not be advisable for a specifically HV voice to be added to this QAA benchmarking ? > > Best wishes, > Woody. > > > > Dear and June, > > > > Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the debate last night and > > the call for action from June. It was good to see so many people > > there. > > > > Thank you Margaret and for your message - I got my bag > > back this morning and apologies to Sue for hysterics on the tube! > > > > Ros > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2000 Report Share Posted November 19, 2000 Thanks for summarising the facts on the education changes to health visiting so clearly. and janette had asked me to do it and when we went to the e-mail - there it was - most grateful. is going to have a think round a template letter as we did before which will be great. In terms of the debate - i thought it went really well so well done to everyone and many thanks to , June and jane for their participation. Just to let you all know, we collected £148 whcih i ahve sent to Toity our treasurer. We shoudl be able to pay our debts with this and look toward arranging something else. Margaret Re: Re:debate > Well spotted Woody; I would like to see the report. I understand there are three working groups; one each for nursing midwifery and health visiting. I was told the names of the people involved, but can't remember who; about 8, a majority are HVs. I know that Dianne Watkins from University of Wales College of Medicine (Cardiff) is one, because she told me about it; she is HV and community programme leader there. I think Jill > Macleod is quite interested in the idea of direct entry to HV training. > > June's impassioned speech after the debate about the change to the statutory instrument was fascinating, wasn't it? I came home this evening to a message from a Nursing Times reporter wanting more information, so they may be going to pick it up and the Nursing Standard reporter who was present was clearly suddenly interested at that point! > > For those who were not there, June accused the UKCC of acting 'ultra vires' because the statutory instrument that was approved at the end of August was primarily about the changes needed to reflect the Peach report and pre-registration nurse training, and about which there had been wide consultation. On the back of that, the UKCC added in changes to statute governing health visitor education without any consultation, which > June suggests is beyond their lawful remit. She raised a loud rallying cry for letters to MPs, UKCC etc and hopes someone will mount a legal challenge. > > There were three changes; one was to alter the statute so that nurses from any part of the register, and direct entry midwives can now enter health visitor training. It used to be part 1 of the register only, or 'such other nursing qualification that the UKCC may in particular case approve'. That meant that all Project 2000 nurses, and anyone not trained as an adult nurse had to be approved as a 'particular case', and midwives > could not become health visitors, unless they were nurse trained as well. > > Second, the requirement for all entrants to HV training to have a school leaving qualification in English, Welsh or history has been removed; no one is going to mourn the loss of that! > > Third, the length of training was formerly set at 51 weeks, although the Council was able to approve modified courses of a shorter duration. That is effectively what happened when the Community Health Care Nursing framework was implemented between 1995 and 1998. All courses that followed the requirements of that framework were officially 'modified courses' under the statute and only needed to be a minimum of 32 weeks. Now, the > statute says 32 weeks as a minimum, so courses are about one third shorter than they were. This has not actually changed anything in educational practice NOW. Not that I remember the profession being consulted about the 32 week minimum standard when it was published back in 1994 either; there had been two earlier documents and the third was just brought in. > > However, it does mean the official length of the programme has been reduced in law, just as we have had a whole batch of research and reviews showing how many problems the shorter course is creating (e.g. the report Margaret, and I did for the UKCC, the Review carried out by June and Margaret for the Welsh Assembly; also the large study carried out by ine Pearson and team, commissioned by the ENB). > > It is because the change flies so obviously in the face of this evidence, and ignores the statutory requirement for the UKCC to have regard to the views of the professions it regulates (which may mean it should consult them) that June was so angry. She thinks we (who?) should mount a campaign. > > What do people think? > > > > > woody@... wrote: > > > Dear , June, Margaret and Ros, > > > > The Times Higher today (17/11/00) has on page 3 an article 'Health groups work together to overcome " tribal barriers " '. Jill Macleod- is leading this QAA initiative for the Universities for a 'core curriculum' on behalf of 'nursing, midwifery and health visiting'. Apropos last night's Debate (and both speakers' visions of the future) would it not be advisable for a specifically HV voice to be added to this QAA benchmarking ? > > > > Best wishes, > > Woody. > > > > > > > Dear and June, > > > > > > Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the debate last night and > > > the call for action from June. It was good to see so many people > > > there. > > > > > > Thank you Margaret and for your message - I got my bag > > > back this morning and apologies to Sue for hysterics on the tube! > > > > > > Ros > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2000 Report Share Posted November 20, 2000 I agree - I found the debate really interesting especially as the audience included some non-health visitors and those working with children with special needs. I think on balance from the comments around the room does suggest a whole re-think about direct entry. If direct entry midwives who are not nurses can access health visiting courses now - what does this mean in terms of registration in future? In message <002a01c052b8$28d85460$1e2d893e@home>, Margret Buttigieg <margret@...> writes >Thanks for summarising the facts on the education changes to health >visiting so clearly. and janette had asked me to do it and when we >went to the e-mail - there it was - most grateful. > >is going to have a think round a template letter as we did before >which will be great. > >In terms of the debate - i thought it went really well so well done to >everyone and many thanks to , June and jane for their participation. >Just to let you all know, we collected 148 whcih i ahve sent to Toity our >treasurer. We shoudl be able to pay our debts with this and look toward >arranging something else. > >Margaret > > > Re: Re:debate > > >> Well spotted Woody; I would like to see the report. I understand there >are three working groups; one each for nursing midwifery and health >visiting. I was told the names of the people involved, but can't remember >who; about 8, a majority are HVs. I know that Dianne Watkins from University >of Wales College of Medicine (Cardiff) is one, because she told me about it; >she is HV and community programme leader there. I think Jill >> Macleod is quite interested in the idea of direct entry to HV >training. >> >> June's impassioned speech after the debate about the change to the >statutory instrument was fascinating, wasn't it? I came home this evening >to a message from a Nursing Times reporter wanting more information, so >they may be going to pick it up and the Nursing Standard reporter who was >present was clearly suddenly interested at that point! >> >> For those who were not there, June accused the UKCC of acting 'ultra >vires' because the statutory instrument that was approved at the end of >August was primarily about the changes needed to reflect the Peach report >and pre-registration nurse training, and about which there had been wide >consultation. On the back of that, the UKCC added in changes to statute >governing health visitor education without any consultation, which >> June suggests is beyond their lawful remit. She raised a loud rallying >cry for letters to MPs, UKCC etc and hopes someone will mount a legal >challenge. >> >> There were three changes; one was to alter the statute so that nurses from >any part of the register, and direct entry midwives can now enter health >visitor training. It used to be part 1 of the register only, or 'such other >nursing qualification that the UKCC may in particular case approve'. That >meant that all Project 2000 nurses, and anyone not trained as an adult nurse >had to be approved as a 'particular case', and midwives >> could not become health visitors, unless they were nurse trained as well. >> >> Second, the requirement for all entrants to HV training to have a school >leaving qualification in English, Welsh or history has been removed; no one >is going to mourn the loss of that! >> >> Third, the length of training was formerly set at 51 weeks, although the >Council was able to approve modified courses of a shorter duration. That is >effectively what happened when the Community Health Care Nursing framework >was implemented between 1995 and 1998. All courses that followed the >requirements of that framework were officially 'modified courses' under the >statute and only needed to be a minimum of 32 weeks. Now, the >> statute says 32 weeks as a minimum, so courses are about one third >shorter than they were. This has not actually changed anything in >educational practice NOW. Not that I remember the profession being >consulted about the 32 week minimum standard when it was published back in >1994 either; there had been two earlier documents and the third was just >brought in. >> >> However, it does mean the official length of the programme has been >reduced in law, just as we have had a whole batch of research and reviews >showing how many problems the shorter course is creating (e.g. the report >Margaret, and I did for the UKCC, the Review carried out by June and >Margaret for the Welsh Assembly; also the large study carried out by ine >Pearson and team, commissioned by the ENB). >> >> It is because the change flies so obviously in the face of this evidence, >and ignores the statutory requirement for the UKCC to have regard to the >views of the professions it regulates (which may mean it should consult >them) that June was so angry. She thinks we (who?) should mount a campaign. >> >> What do people think? >> >> >> >> >> woody@... wrote: >> >> > Dear , June, Margaret and Ros, >> > >> > The Times Higher today (17/11/00) has on page 3 an article 'Health >groups work together to overcome " tribal barriers " '. Jill Macleod- is >leading this QAA initiative for the Universities for a 'core curriculum' on >behalf of 'nursing, midwifery and health visiting'. Apropos last night's >Debate (and both speakers' visions of the future) would it not be advisable >for a specifically HV voice to be added to this QAA benchmarking ? >> > >> > Best wishes, >> > Woody. >> > >> > >> > > Dear and June, >> > > >> > > Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the debate last night and >> > > the call for action from June. It was good to see so many people >> > > there. >> > > >> > > Thank you Margaret and for your message - I got my bag >> > > back this morning and apologies to Sue for hysterics on the tube! >> > > >> > > Ros >> > >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2000 Report Share Posted November 20, 2000 Ros, So glad to hear of the safe return of your bag. The whole carriage was concerned for you! Sue debate > Dear and June, > > Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the debate last night and > the call for action from June. It was good to see so many people > there. > > Thank you Margaret and for your message - I got my bag > back this morning and apologies to Sue for hysterics on the tube! > > Ros > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2000 Report Share Posted November 21, 2000 Woody and _ i would also like to see the report! There is a very strong push from QAA (and beyond!) to identify core ares of learning across several health disciplines. I am also a member of the HV group which consists of a mix of educationalists,practitioners and managers.(Like Dianne, I am health visiting pathway leader here at UHerts and Professional leader for Primary health care Nursing). The group is currently working to finalise the HV statement which will be circulated for widespread consultation. I am unsure of the time frame for this but will be able to let you know fairly soon . Thank you for your discussion of the debate - how I wish i could have been there! >Well spotted Woody; I would like to see the report. I understand there >are three working groups; one each for nursing midwifery and health >visiting. I was told the names of the people involved, but can't >remember who; about 8, a majority are HVs. I know that Dianne Watkins from >University of Wales College of Medicine (Cardiff) is one, because she told >me about it; she is HV and community programme leader there. I think Jill >Macleod is quite interested in the idea of direct entry to HV training. > >June's impassioned speech after the debate about the change to the >statutory instrument was fascinating, wasn't it? I came home this evening >to a message from a Nursing Times reporter wanting more information, so >they may be going to pick it up and the Nursing Standard reporter who was >present was clearly suddenly interested at that point! > >For those who were not there, June accused the UKCC of acting 'ultra >vires' because the statutory instrument that was approved at the end of >August was primarily about the changes needed to reflect the Peach report >and pre-registration nurse training, and about which there had been wide >consultation. On the back of that, the UKCC added in changes to statute >governing health visitor education without any consultation, which >June suggests is beyond their lawful remit. She raised a loud rallying >cry for letters to MPs, UKCC etc and hopes someone will mount a legal >challenge. > >There were three changes; one was to alter the statute so that nurses from >any part of the register, and direct entry midwives can now enter health >visitor training. It used to be part 1 of the register only, or 'such >other nursing qualification that the UKCC may in particular case approve'. >That meant that all Project 2000 nurses, and anyone not trained as an >adult nurse had to be approved as a 'particular case', and midwives >could not become health visitors, unless they were nurse trained as well. > >Second, the requirement for all entrants to HV training to have a school >leaving qualification in English, Welsh or history has been removed; no >one is going to mourn the loss of that! > >Third, the length of training was formerly set at 51 weeks, although the >Council was able to approve modified courses of a shorter duration. That >is effectively what happened when the Community Health Care Nursing >framework was implemented between 1995 and 1998. All courses that >followed the requirements of that framework were officially 'modified >courses' under the statute and only needed to be a minimum of 32 weeks. >Now, the >statute says 32 weeks as a minimum, so courses are about one third >shorter than they were. This has not actually changed anything in >educational practice NOW. Not that I remember the profession being >consulted about the 32 week minimum standard when it was published back in >1994 either; there had been two earlier documents and the third was just >brought in. > >However, it does mean the official length of the programme has been >reduced in law, just as we have had a whole batch of research and reviews >showing how many problems the shorter course is creating (e.g. the report >Margaret, and I did for the UKCC, the Review carried out by June and >Margaret for the Welsh Assembly; also the large study carried out by >ine Pearson and team, commissioned by the ENB). > >It is because the change flies so obviously in the face of this evidence, >and ignores the statutory requirement for the UKCC to have regard to the >views of the professions it regulates (which may mean it should consult >them) that June was so angry. She thinks we (who?) should mount a >campaign. > >What do people think? > > > > >woody@... wrote: > >> Dear , June, Margaret and Ros, >> >> The Times Higher today (17/11/00) has on page 3 an article 'Health >>groups work together to overcome " tribal barriers " '. Jill Macleod- >>is leading this QAA initiative for the Universities for a 'core >>curriculum' on behalf of 'nursing, midwifery and health visiting'. >>Apropos last night's Debate (and both speakers' visions of the future) >>would it not be advisable for a specifically HV voice to be added to this >>QAA benchmarking ? >> >> Best wishes, >> Woody. >> >> >> > Dear and June, >> > >> > Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed the debate last night and >> > the call for action from June. It was good to see so many people >> > there. >> > >> > Thank you Margaret and for your message - I got my bag >> > back this morning and apologies to Sue for hysterics on the tube! >> > >> > Ros >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2000 Report Share Posted November 21, 2000 I did enjoy the debate, reminded of old ideas and introduced to new ones It was however rather like watching ones past go before you , virtually every place of emlpoyment for the last 25 years was represented ! Val Thurtle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2000 Report Share Posted November 21, 2000 How do the non attenders get hold of a copy of the debate? I have read with interest all the comments and I have some questions to ask, however I do not want to embarass myself if the questions were answered during the debate. Sasha Re: debate > I did enjoy the debate, reminded of old ideas and introduced to new ones > > It was however rather like watching ones past go before you , virtually > every place of emlpoyment for the last 25 years was represented ! > > Val Thurtle > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2000 Report Share Posted November 22, 2000 My poor secretary has been working very hard to transcribe as fast as she could; unprompted, she has edited out all references to dyed hair! That apart I think the transcript is a faithful overall representation of the debate. Apologies if any of the names are wrong; there were many familiar faces but some very welcome new ones whose names I could not recognise. Let the debate recommence! carl best wrote: > How do the non attenders get hold of a copy of the debate? I have read with > interest all the comments and I have some questions to ask, however I do not > want to embarass myself if the questions were answered during the debate. > Sasha > Re: debate > > > I did enjoy the debate, reminded of old ideas and introduced to new ones > > > > It was however rather like watching ones past go before you , virtually > > every place of emlpoyment for the last 25 years was represented ! > > > > Val Thurtle > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 23, 2000 Report Share Posted November 23, 2000 Re: debate > > > > > I did enjoy the debate, reminded of old ideas and introduced to new ones > > > > > > It was however rather like watching ones past go before you , virtually > > > every place of emlpoyment for the last 25 years was represented ! > > > > > > Val Thurtle > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.