RE: RCN consultation response

[Guest guest]

I am not certain that the RCN's Public Health Forum has any remaining

HV members, but they're so secretive, even I can't find out.

I think this consultation went out to a wide mix of assorted nursing

members of the RCN as well as those very few members with HV

registration, let alone consulting just HVs in practice and other

relevant roles.

Given these circumstances, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised at the

ill informed nature of the responses. But it does give the RCN

policy people carte blanche to characterise HVs as 'New Baby Nurses',

alongside some of the other infelicitous euphemisms they've tried in

the past.

Time to stuff my vestigial membership into the round file, I think!

I only kept it up for the library access anyway...

From: Cowley <sarahcowley183@...>

Date sent: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 10:50:53 +0000

Subject: RCN consultation response

Send reply to:

The RCN have posted a short summary of responses to their

consultation document about health visiting and public health

nursing, see

http://www.rcn.org.uk/development/communities/rcn_forum_communities/ch

ildren_and_young_people_field_of_practice/cyp_healthy/news_stories/hea

lth_visiting_services_and_public_health_nursing_-

_summary_of_responses_to_discussion_paper

It reads:

The RCN had previously published two UK position papers: Pillars of

the Community on developing the registered workforce in the community

and a principles position paper on health visiting. Members had

raised further questions about the invaluable contribution others had

in meeting the public health agenda which required further

consideration. The discussion paper `Health visiting services and

public health nursing´ developed by members for members therefore

intended to stimulate thinking beyond the role of health visitors and

signal the need for all nurses to adopt a new approach to maintaining

the concept of building community capacity which ultimately achieves

the aims of good public health.

Responses to the discussion paper were received from across the UK.

While member views varied there was considerable consistency in key

areas. There was overwhelming support for the role of the health

visitor in relation to young children and their families, with many

advising that the concept of health visitors providing a `cradle to

grave´ was somewhat fifteen or more years out of date. The majority

of respondents clearly advocated that health visitors should

concentrate on leading and delivering the healthy child programme or

equivalents in each of the four countries of the UK, with contact pre-

birth and intensive support for vulnerable families in the early

years of a child´s life. Many respondents however reported concerns

about workload and complexities of caseload. Some respondents felt

that the health visitor may not always be the best person to lead the

management of some children´s/families care advocating that health

visitors needed to recognise the limitations of health visiting

service provision especially where there are serious safeguarding

issues or mental health issues.

There were mixed views about the need for a new/additional public

health nurse role to cover the adult age population, although there

was clear recognition of the needs of vulnerable older people. Many

members reported that there were specific roles already in place such

as occupational health nurses for those in employment and others

highlighted the crucially important role of practice nurses or

specialist district nurses in many areas in respect of the health of

older people. There was generally recognition that to meet the needs

of the whole population would encompass a range of nursing roles as

well as skill-mix within the team, including support staff.

It is clear from the responses received that there is a lack of

recognition, prominence and awareness of the public health nursing

roles already in existence for adults and older people, as well as

inconsistency in the level of provision and access across the

country. Some members in their responses highlighted particular gaps

for the most vulnerable and hard to reach groups, as well as the need

for such post holders to work collaboratively with health visiting

and school nursing services to meet the public health needs of the

population.

All respondents felt that public health ought to be part of every

nurses business, while not detracting from the need to also having in

place specialists in public health roles. Most respondents referred

to the new NMC pre-registration nurse education standards reporting

upon the greater emphasis on public health for all future

undergraduate nursing education programmes. There was however also

the recognition that culture change was required within services and

a move in the focus of provision.

The findings will be considered by the RCN Public Health Forum at

their strategic planning meeting in March 2012

best wishes

Cowley

sarahcowley183@...

http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn

[Guest guest]

Thanks for postings this – it was interesting to read and in some ways it shows how confused we have become in recent years – since I guess the establishment of the 3rd part of the register as a specialist public health one – about roles and responsibilities. The push to increase Hv and hopefully SN numbers now means we are looking again at early intervention and prevention and the importance of health promotion at that time and maybe despite my feeling that there is a lack of understanding of the HV role at the RCN – we certainly do need to clarify what we mean by public health nursing and not as the NMC did just lump HV, SN, occupational health etc. . all together. Margaret From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 21 January 2012 10:51 Subject: RCN consultation response The RCN have posted a short summary of responses to their consultation document about health visiting and public health nursing, see http://www.rcn.org.uk/development/communities/rcn_forum_communities/children_and_young_people_field_of_practice/cyp_healthy/news_stories/health_visiting_services_and_public_health_nursing_-_summary_of_responses_to_discussion_paperIt reads:The RCN had previously published two UK position papers: Pillars of the Community on developing the registered workforce in the community and a principles position paper on health visiting. Members had raised further questions about the invaluable contribution others had in meeting the public health agenda which required further consideration. The discussion paper ‘Health visiting services and public health nursing’ developed by members for members therefore intended to stimulate thinking beyond the role of health visitors and signal the need for all nurses to adopt a new approach to maintaining the concept of building community capacity which ultimately achieves the aims of good public health.Responses to the discussion paper were received from across the UK. While member views varied there was considerable consistency in key areas. There was overwhelming support for the role of the health visitor in relation to young children and their families, with many advising that the concept of health visitors providing a ‘cradle to grave’ was somewhat fifteen or more years out of date. The majority of respondents clearly advocated that health visitors should concentrate on leading and delivering the healthy child programme or equivalents in each of the four countries of the UK, with contact pre-birth and intensive support for vulnerable families in the early years of a child’s life. Many respondents however reported concerns about workload and complexities of caseload. Some respondents felt that the health visitor may not always be the best person to lead the management of some children’s/families care advocating that health visitors needed to recognise the limitations of health visiting service provision especially where there are serious safeguarding issues or mental health issues.There were mixed views about the need for a new/additional public health nurse role to cover the adult age population, although there was clear recognition of the needs of vulnerable older people. Many members reported that there were specific roles already in place such as occupational health nurses for those in employment and others highlighted the crucially important role of practice nurses or specialist district nurses in many areas in respect of the health of older people. There was generally recognition that to meet the needs of the whole population would encompass a range of nursing roles as well as skill-mix within the team, including support staff.It is clear from the responses received that there is a lack of recognition, prominence and awareness of the public health nursing roles already in existence for adults and older people, as well as inconsistency in the level of provision and access across the country. Some members in their responses highlighted particular gaps for the most vulnerable and hard to reach groups, as well as the need for such post holders to work collaboratively with health visiting and school nursing services to meet the public health needs of the population.All respondents felt that public health ought to be part of every nurses business, while not detracting from the need to also having in place specialists in public health roles. Most respondents referred to the new NMC pre-registration nurse education standards reporting upon the greater emphasis on public health for all future undergraduate nursing education programmes. There was however also the recognition that culture change was required within services and a move in the focus of provision.The findings will be considered by the RCN Public Health Forum at their strategic planning meeting in March 2012 best wishes Cowleysarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn

[Guest guest]

Thanks Margaret and , you're right, there is a lot of ill-informed thinking about. I have great concern about the idea that every separate job needs a 'part' on a register - and an even greater concern about the idea that health visiting is only one job, ie, maintaining a caseload of pre-school children only. We have to be more extensive and inclusive to justify the claim that health visiting is a 'profession'. I suspect that is why RCN like to see it that way, because they like to think of health visiting as a 'nursing job,' with nursing as the profession, not health visiting.best wishesOn 21 Jan 2012, at 14:31, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Thanks for postings this – it was interesting to read and in some ways it shows how confused we have become in recent years – since I guess the establishment of the 3rd part of the register as a specialist public health one – about roles and responsibilities. The push to increase Hv and hopefully SN numbers now means we are looking again at early intervention and prevention and the importance of health promotion at that time and maybe despite my feeling that there is a lack of understanding of the HV role at the RCN – we certainly do need to clarify what we mean by public health nursing and not as the NMC did just lump HV, SN, occupational health etc. . all together. Margaret Cowleysarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn

[Guest guest]

This is an interesting thread of thought and I am thinking that we could usefully use the work the DH is doing around HV and the implementation plan to push the idea of how wide the Hv role is – the more I think about it – I become clearer that we will not make the Hv developments happen unless we recognise the wideness of the role and thus the skills required. Then we will attract and keep people with good ability as the job will remain rewarding for them. Margaret From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 21 January 2012 16:01 Subject: Re: RCN consultation response Thanks Margaret and , you're right, there is a lot of ill-informed thinking about. I have great concern about the idea that every separate job needs a 'part' on a register - and an even greater concern about the idea that health visiting is only one job, ie, maintaining a caseload of pre-school children only. We have to be more extensive and inclusive to justify the claim that health visiting is a 'profession'. I suspect that is why RCN like to see it that way, because they like to think of health visiting as a 'nursing job,' with nursing as the profession, not health visiting. best wishes On 21 Jan 2012, at 14:31, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Thanks for postings this – it was interesting to read and in some ways it shows how confused we have become in recent years – since I guess the establishment of the 3rd part of the register as a specialist public health one – about roles and responsibilities. The push to increase Hv and hopefully SN numbers now means we are looking again at early intervention and prevention and the importance of health promotion at that time and maybe despite my feeling that there is a lack of understanding of the HV role at the RCN – we certainly do need to clarify what we mean by public health nursing and not as the NMC did just lump HV, SN, occupational health etc. . all together. Margaret Cowleysarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn

[Guest guest]

I've been thinking exactly the same thing Margaret. If our profession doesn't offer clarity we can't expect others to.CheryllSent from my iPhoneOn 22 Jan 2012, at 11:03, Margaret Buttigieg <margaret@...> wrote:

This is an interesting thread of thought and I am thinking that we could usefully use the work the DH is doing around HV and the implementation plan to push the idea of how wide the Hv role is – the more I think about it – I become clearer that we will not make the Hv developments happen unless we recognise the wideness of the role and thus the skills required. Then we will attract and keep people with good ability as the job will remain rewarding for them. Margaret From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 21 January 2012 16:01 Subject: Re: RCN consultation response Thanks Margaret and , you're right, there is a lot of ill-informed thinking about. I have great concern about the idea that every separate job needs a 'part' on a register - and an even greater concern about the idea that health visiting is only one job, ie, maintaining a caseload of pre-school children only. We have to be more extensive and inclusive to justify the claim that health visiting is a 'profession'. I suspect that is why RCN like to see it that way, because they like to think of health visiting as a 'nursing job,' with nursing as the profession, not health visiting. best wishes On 21 Jan 2012, at 14:31, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Thanks for postings this – it was interesting to read and in some ways it shows how confused we have become in recent years – since I guess the establishment of the 3rd part of the register as a specialist public health one – about roles and responsibilities. The push to increase Hv and hopefully SN numbers now means we are looking again at early intervention and prevention and the importance of health promotion at that time and maybe despite my feeling that there is a lack of understanding of the HV role at the RCN – we certainly do need to clarify what we mean by public health nursing and not as the NMC did just lump HV, SN, occupational health etc. . all together. Margaret Cowleysarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn

[Guest guest]

You're right. It is curious that the nursing register should've

retained its historically fragmented groups like mental health and

learning disabilities, adult and child branches. Meantime, there's

this constant desperate striving to incorporate health visiting as

part of 'mainstream' nursing (adult branch) whilst trying to tell us

we're actually just baby clinic nurses. The whole thinking seems

inconsistant.

Nobody in adult branch mainstream is trying to tell mental health or

learning disabilities nurses to limit the scope of their practice,

but they're trying to deny the scope of health visiting and trim down

our role.

It's very peculiar. You'd think that the scandals in the care of

older patients would've totally preoccupied nursing bodies, but it's

almost as if they're hoping it'll go away. If they brought a

fraction of the sustained attention they've given to squashing and

denying health visiting work to the elderly care problems, I'd face

my own old age with more confidence!

From: Cowley

<sarahcowley183@...> Date sent: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 16:00:53

+0000 Subject: Re: RCN consultation response Send reply

to:

Thanks Margaret and , you're right, there is a lot of ill-

informed thinking about.

I have great concern about the idea that every separate job needs a

'part' on a register - and an even greater concern about the idea

that health visiting is only one job, ie, maintaining a caseload of

pre-school children only. We have to be more extensive and inclusive

to justify the claim that health visiting is a 'profession'. I

suspect that is why RCN like to see it that way, because they like to

think of health visiting as a 'nursing job,' with nursing as the

profession, not health visiting.

best wishes

On 21 Jan 2012, at 14:31, Margaret Buttigieg wrote:

Thanks for postings this - it was interesting to read and in

some ways it shows how confused we have become in recent years -

since I guess the establishment of the 3rd part of the register as a

specialist public health one - about roles and responsibilities.

The push to increase Hv and hopefully SN numbers now means we are

looking again at early intervention and prevention and the importance

of health promotion at that time and maybe despite my feeling that

there is a lack of understanding of the HV role at the RCN - we

certainly do need to clarify what we mean by public health nursing

and not as the NMC did just lump HV, SN, occupational health etc. .

all together.

[Guest guest]

The problem seems to stem from a lack of consultation with HVs on

health visiting professional issues. The RCN only seem to have

nurses in their PH forum so they have no relevant experience to draw

upon as far as I can tell - members can't find this stuff out easily

and they've been surprisingly evasive when I've asked.

It's a bit like the UKCC vote: if you ask nurses and midwives to vote

on whether there ought to be a health visiting register, they

wouldn't see the point of it. And they don't.

" " < >

From: Cheryll <cheryllma@...>

Date sent: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 11:17:48 +0000

Subject: Re: RCN consultation response

Send reply to:

I've been thinking exactly the same thing Margaret. If our profession

doesn't offer clarity we can't expect others to.

Cheryll

Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Jan 2012, at 11:03, Margaret Buttigieg

<margaret@...> wrote:

This is an interesting thread of thought and I am thinking that

we could usefully use the work the DH is doing around HV and the

implementation plan to push the idea of how wide the Hv role is - the

more I think about it - I become clearer that we will not make the Hv

developments happen unless we recognise the wideness of the role and

thus the skills required. Then we will attract and keep people with

good ability as the job will remain rewarding for them.

Margaret

From: [mailto:SENATE-

HVSN ] On Behalf Of Cowley

Sent: 21 January 2012 16:01

Subject: Re: RCN consultation response

Thanks Margaret and , you're right, there is a lot of ill-

informed thinking about.

I have great concern about the idea that every separate job needs a

'part' on a register - and an even greater concern about the idea

that health visiting is only one job, ie, maintaining a caseload of

pre-school children only. We have to be more extensive and inclusive

to justify the claim tha

[Guest guest]

From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 21 January 2012 10:51 Subject: RCN consultation response The RCN have posted a short summary of responses to their consultation document about health visiting and public health nursing, see http://www.rcn.org.uk/development/communities/rcn_forum_communities/children_and_young_people_field_of_practice/cyp_healthy/news_stories/health_visiting_services_and_public_health_nursing_-_summary_of_responses_to_discussion_paperIt reads:The RCN had previously published two UK position papers: Pillars of the Community on developing the registered workforce in the community and a principles position paper on health visiting. Members had raised further questions about the invaluable contribution others had in meeting the public health agenda which required further consideration. The discussion paper ‘Health visiting services and public health nursing’ developed by members for members therefore intended to stimulate thinking beyond the role of health visitors and signal the need for all nurses to adopt a new approach to maintaining the concept of building community capacity which ultimately achieves the aims of good public health (A relevant consideration to all practitioners- again if you look at meta paradigms from nursing practice you can see connections, community capacity impacts wider than one area anyway)Responses to the discussion paper were received from across the UK. While member views varied there was considerable consistency in key areas. There was overwhelming support for the role of the health visitor in relation to young children and their families, with many advising that the concept of health visitors providing a ‘cradle to grave’ was somewhat fifteen or more years out of date. The majority of respondents clearly advocated that health visitors should concentrate on leading and delivering the healthy child programme or equivalents in each of the four countries of the UK, with contact pre-birth and intensive support for vulnerable families in the early years of a child’s life. Many respondents however reported concerns about workload and complexities of caseload. (This varies across geographical areas although even within areas a particular niche could be highly complex –given the numbers and the issues regarding not just education of but the need for continued education and/or time out to reflect/care & consider for people ( not just the clients/staff/ etc/it’s not an assembly line to state the obvious)Some respondents felt that the health visitor may not always be the best person to lead the management of some children’s/families care advocating that health visitors needed to recognise the limitations of health visiting service provision especially where there are serious safeguarding issues or mental health issues.There were mixed views about the need for a new/additional public health nurse role to cover the adult age population, although there was clear recognition of the needs of vulnerable older people. Many members reported that there were specific roles already in place such as occupational health nurses for those in employment and others highlighted the crucially important role of practice nurses or specialist district nurses in many areas in respect of the health of older people (didn’t this provision get reduced a lot… variable numbers across) There was generally recognition that to meet the needs of the whole population would encompass a range of nursing roles as well as skill-mix within the team, including support staff. (Agree the comments below)It is clear from the responses received that there is a lack of recognition, prominence and awareness of the public health nursing roles already in existence for adults and older people, as well as inconsistency in the level of provision and access across the country. Some members in their responses highlighted particular gaps for the most vulnerable and hard to reach groups, as well as the need for such post holders to work collaboratively with health visiting and school nursing services to meet the public health needs of the population.All respondents felt that public health ought to be part of every nurses business, while not detracting from the need to also having in place specialists in public health roles. Most respondents referred to the new NMC pre-registration nurse education standards reporting upon the greater emphasis on public health for all future undergraduate nursing education programmes. There was however also the recognition that culture change was required within services and a move in the focus of provision.The findings will be considered by the RCN Public Health Forum at their strategic planning meeting in March 2012 best wishes Cowleysarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn University Campus Suffolk is the trading name of University Campus Suffolk Ltd. Registered in England and Wales, company number: 05078498.

Registered Address: Waterfront Building, Neptune Quay, Ipswich, IP4 1QJ