Full paper text [PDF 3515k] - New Zealand Parliament

CASE STUDY:
Dental care – is this the right child?
A 5-year-old girl received dental treatment
on two consecutive days without
permission or even the knowledge of her
grandparents who are her legal guardians.
The child suffered lip trauma from the
dental treatment. The grandmother’s
enquiries revealed the child had been
treated in error and that they had initially
been misled by the therapist.
They received a response advising that a
full investigation would be undertaken
and an offer to meet to discuss the matter.
The grandmother sought advocacy help
to prepare for and attend the meeting
with them. At the meeting the provider
apologised and advised a full investigation
was being undertaken by the Quality
Team. The complainant received full
details of the treatment provided plus
an acknowledgement that the child was
mistaken for another and should not have
received any treatment.
The grandmother requested a written
apology from the therapist, and to have
all future dental care provided by a private
dentist. The meeting concluded with
the provider saying they would send the
results of the investigation to
the grandparents.
Following receipt of the investigation
report the grandmother asked the
advocate to support them at another
meeting with the provider. The outcome
from that meeting confi rmed that the
provider will fund the child to have free
dental care with a private dentist outside
of the DHB’s Oral Health Service until the
end of year 8. It was also agreed that a
letter of apology from the therapist would
also be sent to the child.
CASE STUDY:
Loss of speech following multiple strokes
The son of a rest home resident who
is unable to speak or write following
multiple strokes contacted an advocate,
as she appeared to him to be unhappy
at the rest home. The advocate agreed to
visit the resident. Through a combination
of signs, writing and yes/no questions, she
told the advocate that she is very unhappy
that she can’t live at home but knows that
it is not practical for her to go back there.
Although she was generally happy with
the way the staff at the rest home treated
her, she did fi nd it distressing when they
spoke to each other over her head as if
she couldn’t understand them. She asked
the advocate if it would be possible to
organise a meeting with the manager
while the advocate was present.
The manager was happy to meet and the
advocate assisted the resident to relay her
concerns about how staff spoke about her
rather than to her. The manager agreed
to address these communication issues
with the staff. The contact details for the
advocate were placed on her notice board
with a copy on her fi le in case she
HDC ANNUAL REPORT 2012
To prevent this from happening again,
protocols are being developed to ensure
the correct child is treated. In the
meantime a system has been put in place
where the teacher must receive a note
from the therapist requesting the child,
and the teacher must tick a register to
confi rm the correct child has been sent
for treatment.
The grandparents were happy with the
outcome of the investigation and that
systems had been put in place to ensure
the right child received the right
treatment in future.
needed advocacy assistance in the
future. The resident was very pleased
with this outcome.
Rest home staff have contacted the
advocate on two occasions after the
consumer presented them with the card
left by the advocate. At the second visit
the resident introduced the advocate to a
staff member who she can communicate
well with. Her subsequent complaints
have not related to communication,
which she describes as working well
since the meeting.
19
CASE STUDY