health and safety
Petition to Ken Wyatt, Malcolm Turnbull
Mandate aged care staff/resident ratios. Stop the neglect
This is my darling mum, Phyllis, she had dementia and died in March 2012. Her aged care facility did not care about her. Food is a very important part of care, and often the only thing residents have to look forward to, for many it's the focus of their day. The facility served food that she and others found unpalatable and inedible, cheap junk food, hot food often served cold AND badly cooked to boot! At times she’d go without anything from midday till 8am the next day - that’s 20 hours without food. And she would have starved if I hadn’t intervened, Mum feared complaining because she’d be told off like a child and once was slapped by a staff member. When I complained, the aged care facility threatened me with an intervention order and ten years jail for stalking. And when I spoke out about THAT, people got in touch sharing horror stories of neglect and abuse and thankedme for speaking out – the common thread was shortage of staff and inadequate basic care leading to neglect. Many of the elderly and their families won’t complain for fear of retribution. This is when I realised the lack of staff ratios was a huge problem. With no mandated staff / resident ratios in aged care facilities across Australia, our elders are at risk of abuse and neglect. What I see is a system that needs changing. Over-worked staff are stressed and undervalued. In many aged care homes, one staff member can care for 20 or more residents with residents waiting for long periods to receive the care they urgently need by overstretched carers and nurses who feel that they can never get the job done. Ken Wyatt, if you really care about elderly Australians mandate staff/resident ratios for all aged care facilities across Australia, to protect our elders, to keep them safe,respected and valued.
Petition to Greg Hunt MP, Scott Morrison
We need government rebates for the new FreeStyle Libre Glucose Monitor
The New Abbott FreeStyle Libre, (and similar) is a game changer for people with diabetes. This device will save the lives of people with diabetes as well as their sight and limbs. Not to mention the millions (or billions) of dollars it will save in future hospital bills, social services and the social cost of having people with diabetes going blind and losing their limbs. However, the device currently costs the user about $50 per week ($2600 per year). The Abbott FreeStyle Libre is not currently subsidised by the Australian Government, and this means that it is not affordable to thousands of Australians who could benefit from the device. The Abbott FreeStyle libre continually monitors the Blood Glucose Levels of people with diabetes. Helping them better manage their diabetes and prevent some of the horrible effects of this condition. Please sign this petition and help get this device and any other similar device more affordable for people with diabetes. Diabetes is not a lifestyle choice; people with diabetes don’t choose diabetes. Its handed to us on a platter and we need to deal with it the best we can. This device (and similar) will help us do that. So if you are only going to sign one petition today, please pick this one as it could help save a life. I have no affiliation with the "Abbott" company and this petition is not a promotion for them or their products. I am a person with type 1 diabetes who wants this device available for all Australians no matter what their income. This petition is supported by Diabetes Australia
Petition to Daniel Andrews
Victorian Ambo Assault!
We demand the sentencing be reviewed! Mandatory is Mandatory.
We’re meant to have mandatory sentencing laws for violent crimes, but two women who brutally attacked a paramedic while he was resuscitating an unconscious man just dodged jail time. Paul Judd, is the brother of a good mate and a great bloke. As a paramedic he devotes his life to keeping us alive and safe. Paul and his colleague Chenaye were viciously attacked as they were trying to save a life. Two women jumped Paul, punched him repeatedly and broke his leg. Despite the law saying that violent crimes have mandatory prison sentences, they got off scot free. That’s why I’m asking you to join me in calling for a review of the court’s decision. While these women get on with their lives, laughing and swearing outside the court, Paul has still not been able to return to work after three operations. It’s gross injustice and we, the people of Victoria, will not stand for it. We’ve had enough of this leniency and not feeling safe in this state. Our emergency services workers deserve better - we demand the courts to impose the mandatory sentencing required by law to show this appalling behaviour is unacceptable in all cases.
Petition to Greg Hunt MP, Greg Hunt
Provide a rebate for Salt Therapy as it is changing 1,000's of Australians lives!
Salts of the Earth has started this petition to rally support from our clients and from people who have experienced salt therapy that have long term respiratory and skin conditions. Nearly every one of our clients ask if there is a Medicare rebate or if salt therapy is covered by private health insurance. In 2016, Salts of the Earth had 16,000 new clients with 205,000+ appointments in our 19 centres. We have structured our business to the best of our ability to ensure we have affordable options for the people of Australia to use salt therapy on a regular bases as they deserve. Now is your chance to show how important this therapy is to your health and add your name to this petition so the Minister for Health can see our support. The outcome of this petition could see a rebate put in place assisting the Australian public to live a healthier life, which means more productivity, activity, and less congestion in our hospitals. That would be a great relief for Government.
Petition to Greg Hunt MP, Tony Bartone
Make 'My Health Record' OPT-IN
The new 'My Health Record' is an online database of all your health data, owned by the Australian Government, and created without your express consent. Instead, if you do not take the necessary steps before 15 October, after an opt out period of only 3 months, your health records will automatically be copied, stored and shared. The My Health Record program must be made OPT-IN before the 15th of October, and its many flaws fully and satisfactorily addressed in legislation. We deserve to make an informed choice about whether the limited benefits justify the substantial risks to our sensitive information. The opt-out consent mechanism goes against global best practice - and our own federal privacy regulator’s guidelines. For the use of our personal health information, every participating individual should have been asked for express, fully informed consent. With My Health Record, the government disregards those principles. We are not be fully informed. There is no national television, radio or print media campaign to advertise the MHR scheme, which many Australians have misunderstood in the past. The government has not and will not even send you a letter to tell you about this scheme, let alone its very serious risks. What risks? Let's start with the fact that it can’t be relied upon as a clinical record. As the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) points out: "The My Health Record system contains an online summary of a patient’s key health information; not a complete record of their clinical history." In an emergency, an unreliable record is a distraction, not a help. It also creates a security risk. The Australian Digital Health Agency (ADHA) itself states that this system has risks associated with its use. Health records are valuable as a means of identity theft due to the wealth of personal information they contain, and storing them digitally with online access greatly increases their accessibility for criminals, hackers and snoopers. And it won’t just be your doctor who has access to your private information. Under the current legislation, law enforcement agencies and government departments can access your medical information without a warrant or subpoena. Rather than getting the help they need, drug users, people with stigmatised illnesses and other vulnerable members of our community may avoid doctors for fear of being targeted and persecuted, because of My Health Record. Furthermore, anyone in a government overseen field would have access to their full medical records (including their sexual, reproductive and mental health) given to their bosses, potentially as basis for a 'pre employment screening'. Employers in health, government departments and law enforcement may breach equal opportunity law and deny employment, for example, to a woman undergoing IVF, or someone with a past history of depression who is now stable, with no consequences. The My Health Record program must be made OPT-IN before the 15th of October, and its many flaws fully and satisfactorily addressed in legislation. We deserve to make an informed choice about whether the limited benefits justify the substantial risks to our sensitive information. If you wish to join those boycotting My Health Record, opt out here.
Petition to Google, Apple, Nic Hopkins
Google & Apple: stop road deaths and injury from mobile phones
Pictured is my cycling teammate Graham. He was a paramedic and a cyclist. Our team would go cycling every Sunday. Recently, that all changed forever. On one of those cycle trips, a driver became distracted using her mobile. Graham was as far left to the shoulder as he could safely be. But her four wheel drive catapulted him off his bike from behind almost killing him. Graham is now a lifelong paraplegic. This picture is the day he was released from hospital 6 months after the accident. He is devastated. It’s heartbreaking. He recently said: "It's the simple things in my life that I miss the most, like holding my wife's hand when we go for a walk. I miss a full body hug.” His life had changed forever. All because the driver was distracted while using their mobile phone. 70% of drivers now admit to using their mobile phone while driving. Distracted drivers from mobile phone use is now regarded as the #1 safety issue on our roads globally. These accidents are completely preventable. Apple and Google have the power and the technology to change this. They could auto-enable their existing “Do Not Disturb” function on their smartphones, which can activate as soon as a vehicle starts moving. You could still use maps and Bluetooth. You just wouldn’t be distracted by notifications or text messages. The current "opt-in" setting isn’t working due to our severe addiction to these devices - so it needs to be opt out, or people won’t use it. If users opt out, then cause death or serious injury, this could then be logged in court. Smartphone distraction on our roads is killing people and ruining lives like Graham’s. We take drink driving seriously. It’s time for our technology companies, Apple and Google, to take responsibility and stop causing deaths and injury by not acting on this.
Petition to Greg Hunt MP, Jill Hennessy MP, Catherine King, Daniel Andrews, Mary Wooldridge
Stop medical gaslighting, ignorance of non-consent & wrongful alteration of documents.
At a glance : Prioritise evidence based care. Introduce measures to prevent any doctor overriding a patient’s reported medical history, drug interactions, allergies or diagnoses - especially for rare conditions, disabilities or conditions that they have no expertise or specialist training in - without first conducting the appropriate testing, consulting or research. Respect a patient's non-consent, and give patients control over what is done to their body while they are under anaesthesia. Stop normalising the altering of a patient’s medical documents. Ensure that fraudulent alterations to medical records cannot be so easily disguised as being simply ‘not best practice’. STOP medical gaslighting. Why should you sign this petition?We as a society place our lives in the hands of medical professionals on a daily basis. We or our loved ones would all require medical advice or treatment at some point in our lives. Most people in this world would be putting their trust in doctors at one time or another, indiscriminate of race, age, gender or socioeconomic status. This is an issue that affects us all. Even doctors will become patients at some point.Mistakes happen. But doctors need to be aware of the power they have. A bad day on the job for a doctor, could be the end of life as they know it for the patient.More and more stories are emerging from around the world of medical blunders that could have been avoided if such provisions were in place, and of people not being heard or being mistreated. More and more stories are coming out as we become more connected and our ability to share this information increases.Doctors can falsely claim that verbal consent for a (surgical) procedure or the administration of drugs while patients are anaesthetised was given during preoperative consultations. In cases where there is a negative outcome for the patient due to negligence or malpractice, it then becomes a “Dr said, Patient said' circumstance and is nearly impossible for patients to prove their case.This outrageous situation is exacerbated due to the existing position of State and Federal legislation and is an unacceptable imbalance of power.Informed consent must be better understood by all medical practitioners. Non-consent must be respected and documented. There are already best practice guidelines and mandatory reporting laws. However, nothing can be done when these laws are breached or broken, as the onus of proof falls on the patient and there are no provisions to ensure the necessary evidence exists. It is far to easy for these guidelines to be stepped over and far too hard for anything to be proven. A wall of silence protects those who do wrong in the medical industry disproportionately to any other occupation. Good doctors are many in this world, and we should all be grateful for them. But our respect and admiration for those who excel and listen and heal, should not blindly protect those who use their position and power carelessly or who put their patients in harm's way. What we are proposing: We want legislation and regulations to be changed/added so no procedure or drug that has not been signed off on by both the patient and all relevant doctors prior to the patient being anaesthetised can be performed or administered. No changes to treatments may be permitted that have not been consented to prior to surgery - outside of a legitimate medical emergency. It should be a requirement for detailed surgical and analgesic plans, including all potential drugs and procedures to be listed and signed off on by both parties prior to any treatment or procedure. All patient history to be listed in relation to each drug and initialled/signed by the patient. Any and all changes should be initialled and dated by both parties. Any potential additional procedures need to be discussed and signed off on prior to surgery in order for patients to be protected against procedures being carried out without consent etc. If any further procedures are required, these should be undertaken at a later date, after the patient has been given a chance to give informed consent. A list of all procedures and drugs that a patient does explicitly not consent to, needs to be completed and signed by both the practitioner and the patient prior to any surgery or procedure. No drug listed on a patient's allergy form can be consented to without the appropriate tests first being carried out to prove that no adverse reaction will be experienced by the patient. If the patient still does not consent to these drugs, they must not be administered. Consent cannot be obtained by misinformation, or incomplete information. Consent must be fully informed, and proof of the information provided to the patient in obtaining consent must be documented in their records and signed off on by the patient and the doctor. All patients to receive a carbon copy of signed documents and final consent forms to prevent any changes being made after the fact. A copy of these should also be forwarded to the patient's GP or referring doctor. If moves towards electronic/paperless systems are made, co-signing and provision of documents should be done electronically via a tablet, signature pad or other hardware. Additional steps medical institutions and state/federal governments should enforce to put ‘Patient Safety First’: Lists of drugs, all their alternate names, ‘layman's’ terms for them, the conditions they may have been used for, to be collated within an Australian database so that doctors can access it and talk more openly and with patients about it. Mandatory training on patient-centred, evidence based care and efforts to change the culture that exists currently where patient's are not heard or listened to by heath care professionals. Rules are required to make it mandatory that if a doctor disagrees with a past diagnosis or reported condition/reaction - the appropriate tests must be run, previous doctors contacted or further investigation required before any contradictory treatment is administered. If this means ensuring these conversations occur before the day of surgery, or postponing surgery should this issue arise on the day, then that is what must occur. Some stories that inspired this petition: Authorities knew disgraced surgeon Emil Gayed had harmed women over decadesA woman who suffered anaphylaxis and was put into an induced coma after routine surgery in a Melbourne hospital alleges staff gave her medicines that were listed on her allergy forms.Medical students are performing intrusive exams on unconscious patients The hundreds of horrifying and heartbreaking stories from some #doctorsaredickheads on Twitter. Extended information : Why this is a serious problem.Due to the nature of medical indemnity insurers and the large teams of lawyers employed by such corporations and institutions, the power imbalance widens even further and the power of the patient to address any issues or malpractice slips away. This contributes further to the marginalisation of the disadvantaged. Insurers will attempt to prevent disadvantaged patients from accessing any kind of resolution or assistance through government complaint or regulatory bodies, instead trying to herd them into courts, where they know many will be unable to proceed due to the immense costs of legal action. This kind of behaviour from insurers in the public sector is especially unacceptable - as Medical Indemnity Insurers for public institutions in most, if not all, Australian states and territories, are actually government bodies. Unfortunately, government agencies in states like Victoria that were created to mediate, investigate and help to keep the public safe, such as the Health Complaints Commission, have proven to be failed enterprises- especially and particularly when dealing with the public health system. Self-regulation between government institutions in this way does not work, leaving the injured person to fight to be heard through multiple layers of government departments, lawyers and insurance companies. These processes are therefore incapable of remaining impartial and regularly fail to be transparent and protect the public. There is either no authority or no interest to create a fair and open dialogue in such scenarios, where massive imbalances of power exist by default.When ordinary individuals who attempt to circumnavigate the bureaucratic minefield of “Yes, Minister” style organisational double-talk, legalese, departmental buck-passing; or the lost-in-the-system, nepotistic public servant merry-go-round of these institutions, it becomes apparent that they do little to address any individual complaint made. Instead compounding the harm to potential victims of serious medical negligence through their inaction, deliberate lack of transparency, past relationships to the medical institutions mentioned in complaints and stonewalling of complaints for inexplicable reasons.Accessible and transparent legal and administrative provisions need to be actively put in place to protect patients in a situation that unavoidably marginalises and further victimises those who have suffered at the hands of negligent medical practitioners and healthcare institutions. Difficult-to-treat patients, those with rare or little understood conditions, or those who do not have the ability to provide informed consent must be given greater authority and respect than they currently are. Thorough testing, trust, and collaborative care efforts need to be at the centre of treatment plans for such patients. Doctors need to understand that(that they are not expected to be experts in every field but to seek additional consult on issues they are unsure of. Decisions must not be made in opposition or contradiction to reported and recorded reactions, allergies or diagnoses of any patient, even if the doctor does not agree with the patient.If there are doubts about any allergy, reaction or diagnosis - these must be fully assessed and tested for. Doctor’s should not proceed with any treatment based on their own assumptions without any medical testing or evidence. Without exception - any change in, or dispute to, a diagnosis should be backed up by the appropriate testing and consultations.
Petition to The Honourable Mark Bailey, The Honourable Grace Grace, The Assessment Manager
Stop the petrol station and fast food development opposite our primary school in Maleny
A development application for an 8 bowser, 2 fast food outlet petrol station is currently before the Sunshine Coast Regional Council (MCU18/0111). The development is directly across the road from Maleny primary school, with the closest classrooms only 40 metres away. We oppose this application for the following reasons: it is too close to the school, where over 400 primary school children attend there will be increased traffic congestion, which would impact on the safety of students, staff and parents for the primary school and high school that is just up the road there would be potential negative health effects from emissions from the petrol station it does not maintain the integrity of Maleny's brand, which is its uniqueness, character and heritage. We need to make our voices loud and clear that we do not want this type of development on this site, so close to our primary school children. If a developer wants to build a petrol station in Maleny, there has to be a better site. We already have over 600 letters to the Minister for Transport and Main Roads that concerned people have signed opposing this development. Now we need your help to ensure the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, Minister for Transport and Main Roads and the Minister for Education know how inappropriate a petrol station and fast food outlet development is for that close to a primary school. Your voice counts. Let it be heard!