Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 madman12367 wrote:
The video states that the hospital was helping her through the traumatic time but she would have commited suicide over messing up so bad to the queen.

I think they found a note.

 AustonT wrote:
Ok well I was hoping to avoid blaming the victim but...
What kind of idiot believes Mrs. Doubtfire is the Queen and second is so broken up about being the butt of a joke that she should have crushed had she had even mild competency or respect for patient privacy. Wha fething idiot tells any caller at all about the condition of a patient, let alone a public figure, regardless of who the caller is.
To crank that to 11 and commit suicide over wha is, all in all, not that big of a deal really just says she was too fragile to be in a caregivers position in the first place and points to larger mental health issues. She wasn't bullied or harrased, she was weak.
There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

No, actually I'm inclined to agree with you.

 AustonT wrote:
Ok well I was hoping to avoid blaming the victim but...
What kind of idiot believes Mrs. Doubtfire is the Queen and second is so broken up about being the butt of a joke that she should have crushed had she had even mild competency or respect for patient privacy. Wha fething idiot tells any caller at all about the condition of a patient, let alone a public figure, regardless of who the caller is.
To crank that to 11 and commit suicide over wha is, all in all, not that big of a deal really just says she was too fragile to be in a caregivers position in the first place and points to larger mental health issues. She wasn't bullied or harrased, she was weak.
There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

Ah yes suicide trolls. Now you guys do deserve the outrage.

When the BBC report the story on the radio, they always say at the end, "the hospital, which had been helping her through some difficult times..." which suggests to me that this may simply have been the straw that broke the camel's back, rather than the only thing that caused her death...

 AustonT wrote:
Ok well I was hoping to avoid blaming the victim but...
What kind of idiot believes Mrs. Doubtfire is the Queen and second is so broken up about being the butt of a joke that she should have crushed had she had even mild competency or respect for patient privacy. Wha fething idiot tells any caller at all about the condition of a patient, let alone a public figure, regardless of who the caller is.
To crank that to 11 and commit suicide over wha is, all in all, not that big of a deal really just says she was too fragile to be in a caregivers position in the first place and points to larger mental health issues. She wasn't bullied or harrased, she was weak.
There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

People with mental health issues are "weak," huh?

gorgon wrote:


People with mental health issues are "weak," huh?

In this case, a resounding yes.

weak-minded wrote:

Definition of weak-minded
adjective

lacking determination, emotional strength, or intellectual capacity.

gorgon wrote:

 AustonT wrote:
Ok well I was hoping to avoid blaming the victim but...
What kind of idiot believes Mrs. Doubtfire is the Queen and second is so broken up about being the butt of a joke that she should have crushed had she had even mild competency or respect for patient privacy. Wha fething idiot tells any caller at all about the condition of a patient, let alone a public figure, regardless of who the caller is.
To crank that to 11 and commit suicide over wha is, all in all, not that big of a deal really just says she was too fragile to be in a caregivers position in the first place and points to larger mental health issues. She wasn't bullied or harrased, she was weak.
There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

People with mental health issues are "weak," huh?

Is a person who is missing two arms strong? People dealing with disease or loss or other serious issues are going to be weakened. Pretending otherwise doesn't fix the problem, it just ignores the facts.

Speaking as someone who deals with patient identifiable data all the time, strictly speaking you should never give out (or indeed accept) any information over the telephone as you can never be certain of the identity of the person calling. However, since that would make it impossible to do anything, you have to take all reasonable precautions when dealing with information requests made by phone.

Some people in the NHS are better at this than others - some will pretty much tell you anything if you give even the vaguest patient details, while others will employ much stricter protocols, both in how they identify the caller, and how they pass out the information.

Sadly I think a combination of the fame of the patient and the "identity" of the caller overwhelmed the person taking the call and caused her to give out information she shouldn't have without properly checking the caller's identity.

I don’t know if it is a crime to impersonate next of kin in order to obtain confidential medical information, but it is far from an ethical thing to do in any circumstances, and the defence that “we weren’t very good at it” won't wash.

That said, obviously it wasn’t a deliberate attempt to harm the nurse. She is merely road-kill, or collateral damage, in the push by modern media to “entertain” the public.

There isn’t a defined line, but these DJs have stepped over it nonetheless, and will suffer consequences. The people are fickle. They demand sacrifices.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I don’t know if it is a crime to impersonate next of kin in order to obtain confidential medical information, but it is far from an ethical thing to do in any circumstances, and the defence that “we weren’t very good at it” won't wash.

That said, obviously it wasn’t a deliberate attempt to harm the nurse. She is merely road-kill, or collateral damage, in the push by modern media to “entertain” the public.

There isn’t a defined line, but these DJs have stepped over it nonetheless, and will suffer consequences. The people are fickle. They demand sacrifices.

They are suspended I believe and probably will lose their show, but I doubt they'll be out of work long.

 Albatross wrote:

Palindrome wrote:

 Albatross wrote:
Remove emotion for a second: Where's the crime?

Harassment? There will be a crime here somewhere.

Why? Because it upsets you? It was a joke. As someone else has already opined, there was clearly no attempt to cause the woman to kill herself, or even to particularly distress her. I'm not saying it was funny, because Australians aren't, but there's no crime here. What's more, I find it slightly sinister that people would go out of their way to find something, anything, to nail these two DJs on. That's not what the law is for, and it's not the type of society I want to live in. It's like people are letting sentiment win the day. That's not my Britain.

Unfortunately Albatross both you and I know that "Trolls" and "Trolling" are currently one of the press buzzwords at the moment which they simply do not know what it means. Trolling=/=being abusive to someone on the Internet. (weirdly in this case they'd be using it correctly. Go figure.) So the unruly masses of The Sun, Daily Star etc. will try to get some kind of prosecution. I expect to see some kind of cut out voucher in the next few days like they had with Savile* to send to the PM.

The Sun will find *something* to do them for, as they are a group that the tabloids attempt to vilify.



N.B.* What Savile supposedly did needed to be investigated. It was just the most recent example that popped in my head and the group he allegedly belongs to needs vilifying. Just thought I'd clarify before anyone tries to call me out on it.

Well heaven forbid I not jump to conclusions people XD

 AustonT wrote:

There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

Your welcome. Now go over in the corner and wait your time out

Sadly I think a combination of the fame of the patient and the "identity" of the caller overwhelmed the person taking the call and caused her to give out information she shouldn't have without properly checking the caller's identity.

Am I the only person who actually read the op? The woman who died isn't the one who gave out information. She just put the call through while filling in at the reception desk. She is literally on that recording for all of five seconds. A different nurse (who is still alive) is the one who gave out confidential information.

 AustonT wrote:
Ok well I was hoping to avoid blaming the victim but...
What kind of idiot believes Mrs. Doubtfire is the Queen and second is so broken up about being the butt of a joke that she should have crushed had she had even mild competency or respect for patient privacy. Wha fething idiot tells any caller at all about the condition of a patient, let alone a public figure, regardless of who the caller is.
To crank that to 11 and commit suicide over wha is, all in all, not that big of a deal really just says she was too fragile to be in a caregivers position in the first place and points to larger mental health issues. She wasn't bullied or harrased, she was weak.
There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

I actually agree with this.

 LordofHats wrote:
Well heaven forbid I not jump to conclusions people XD

 AustonT wrote:

There now Im the bad guy. Thanks a lot.

Your welcome. Now go over in the corner and wait your time out

Sadly I think a combination of the fame of the patient and the "identity" of the caller overwhelmed the person taking the call and caused her to give out information she shouldn't have without properly checking the caller's identity.

Am I the only person who actually read the op? The woman who died isn't the one who gave out information. She just put the call through while filling in at the reception desk. She is literally on that recording for all of five seconds. A different nurse (who is still alive) is the one who gave out confidential information.

Really? But still Should she have not have checked first?
But then again if i read it right it was a night, If it was night and i was working, and It was possible i would be getting a call from the queen i might just pass the call.

It was 5:30 in the morning. I'm usually pretty clocked out at 5:30 in the morning and I sleep during the day.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I don’t know if it is a crime to impersonate next of kin in order to obtain confidential medical information, but it is far from an ethical thing to do in any circumstances, and the defence that “we weren’t very good at it” won't wash..

Impersonation to get confidential information is known as blagging in the UK press and we've just had a lengthy public inquiry about it. Nevertheless, had they been respecting patient confidentiality they wouldn't have given those details to anyone, regardless of their identity. Your parent in law is not privy to that info, even if they are the queen of England.

 Glorioski wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
Wow... That's just... The height of trolling in every sense of the world...

But the article doesn't say the Nurse died because of the call. Just that she's been since found dead and that it isn't suspicious. Sounds more like this is just a coincidence (that she died so recently).

This may be a British thing but when police say they aren't treating death as suspicious that means it's not a criminal investigation. It could very well be a suicide.

And it is likely to be that.

MCOT Modernine TV called the two Ozzie Deejays who phoned that Indian nurse "Swindlers". If there's any judical case against them. they should be charged with swindle.

 LordofHats wrote:
Am I the only person who actually read the op? The woman who died isn't the one who gave out information. She just put the call through while filling in at the reception desk. She is literally on that recording for all of five seconds. A different nurse (who is still alive) is the one who gave out confidential information.

Did someone give out information? Yes. Therefore they didn't adequately check the identity of the caller, probably for the reasons I was suggesting.

I wasn't actually talking about the person who died, just the handling of patient information in general.

Ah my mistake.

 LordofHats wrote:
Ah my mistake.

No worries