Here is the decision regarding the matter of the Department of
Corrections and their medical treatment and record keeping, which is a
damning indictment on the care of prisoners in this country, and the
outrageous incompetence of prison staff regarding this man's medication
and treatment and the standard of information recording, which was
described by an expert witness as demonstrating "a level of incompetence to a standard that is professionally embarrassing", and not only did it fall below acceptable standards, but that "the nursing care in relation to safe medical administration was a severe departure from the expected standards." That's putting it mildly.
The decision can also be read at this link in a clearer format than the embedded file below.
Paragraph 17 states that prison custodial staff are permitted to issue prisoners with over the counter (OTC) medication such as Ibuprofen and Paracetamol, but paragraph 18 states "At Auckland Prison custodial staff are reluctant to administer (OTC) medication." No explanation is offered for this statement, but it has been established that this is based on prison policy, a policy amounting to breach of human rights, and torture.
Under the heading "Documentation", paragraphs 21 to 23 list the requirements for recording information regarding the administration of medication to prisoners. These requirements are clear, explicit and extensive.
Paragraphs 24 and 25 show that these requirements were apparently ignored:
From paragraph 26 onwards this report from the Human Rights Review Tribunal is harrowing reading. The level of carelessness regarding the administration and recording of the medication prescribed for "Mr E" is truly shocking. The Department of Corrections has a duty of care to prisoners, the 'care' afforded "Mr E" and other prisoners is completely and utterly unacceptable.
Roger Brooking is one of the few people documenting this, raising awareness of it and calling for change - this affects everyone. His website documents a litany of similar damning information and provides a particularly thorough investigation of other cases of similar treatment.
Prisoners are released every day after they've been "corrected" by the Department of Corrections, they return to our communities and live among us, their children go to school and play with ours. The Department of Corrections has a duty of care, and a duty to correct. Treating people like this doesn't foster empathy, and no doubt contributes to the unacceptably high child abuse statistics in 'New Zealand'. It's callous, negligent, careless, and it demonstrates very well just how badly our prisons are being run, and it also indicates that the system is broken - the fact that Mr E had to go to the Human Rights Review Tribunal indicates that he first had to jump through hoops at the Privacy Commission and/or the Health and Disability Commission, Human Rights Commission, etc. Lucky he had a lawyer - the vast majority of people in his position don't, Criminal Bar Association v Attorney General makes it perfectly clear that lawyers avoid doing work for legally-aided clients or the poor.
The decision regarding Mr E, the Department of Corrections and
their medical treatment and record keeping is a damning
indictment on the Department, and the standard of governance in general.
The outrageous
incompetence of prison staff regarding this man's medication and
treatment and the standard of information recording was described
by an expert witness, at paragraph 28, as demonstrating "a level of incompetence to a standard that is professionally embarrassing", and not only did it fall below acceptable standards, but that "the nursing care in relation to safe medical administration was a severe departure from the expected standards."
Read more at Roger Brooking's Brookingblog.
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
The war on drugs - Department of Corrections:
Labels:
Department of Corrections,
Human Rights Review Tribunal,
Office of Human Rights Proceedings,
Prisons
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment