Health and Community Services Complaints Commission Report on Investigation of Royal Darwin Hospital Security Arrangements for the protection of Children and Infants Paediatric Ward 5B Volume 1
Tabled paper 163
Tabled papers for 11th Assembly 2008 - 2012; Tabled papers; ParliamentNT
Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
19. Mr Phil Bates the DHCS (DHF) Security Manager was subsequently asked if he had been requested to attend any risk assessment, security or safety meetings held at RDH. He responded that he was not aware that any such meetings had or were occurring. Alan McEwan Operations Manager commented as follows It is correct that there have not been any staff meetings since Phil (Bates) was appointed (June 2006) as manager (DHCS Security Manager based at RDH) as with a small workforce and many working out of business hours, it is difficult to get staff together. In addition, many of the staff would want overtime to be paid as time in lieu is not readily available as they have appointed fulltime shifts to work and thus cannot easily be released to take their time off. In light of the above, I do not accept that DHCSs response that Police have been asked to attend security/safety meetings is accurate. The Police were not aware of such meetings and since 2006 safety/security meetings have not been held, nor has the RDH Security Manager been invited to attend or provide any training or advice on security. On the 2 August 2007 NAAJA and the infants mother expressed their disappointment at the response provided by DHCS (DHF) of 25 July 2007. Both parties stated that they had hoped for a sincere response. They sought a detailed explanation and consideration of the issues that the rape raised for Royal Darwin Hospital. I agree that the response was not open disclosure according to the National Standard on Open Disclosure in Public and Private Hospitals following an adverse event in health care. This standard was promulgated by the Australian Council for Safety and Quality in Health Care (now the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care). The standard was published in July 2003. A summary of the process involved is attached as HCSCC 3. Steps 10, 10.5, 13, 14, 14.2 and 16 have not occurred or, if they have, no records of them have been produced to this investigation. In regard to hospital security, NAAJA noted that the response provided on behalf of DHCS (DHF) failed to give an adequate explanation of how the measures referred to by Doctor Tarun Weeramanthri addressed the issues raised. Australian Standard 4485.2-1997 Section 11.7 refers to Post Incident Management. Strategies should include: (c) procedures for providing support to any person(s) involved in or affected by the incident eg. victim, family, witnesses. Section 11.7 of the Australian Standard expands further on what action is deemed appropriate. No record or information was provided by DHCS (DHF) or RDH during this investigation explaining or suggesting that the family and/or staff received support and it is clear that no procedure was documented. I have made recommendations about RDH and DHF remedying the failure to comply with this standard.