A day later, via a letter to the editor, DHB doctors claimed the story's headline was inflammatory. It was, "unjust" and "inaccurate".
Such a response can be described as face-saving.
The distinction between "capacity" and the now unutterable "cuts", is a handy one in press releases. Yet to patients classified as low clinical priority, the distinction doesn't exist. The effect on them is the same.
Our headline, the board said, caused "unnecessary anxiety for patients".
That was Dr Jolly's concern to a tee. Maybe the board and doctor are on the same page after all. But it illustrates that the best of DHB intentions can get lost in Ministry mandated (and financially rewarded) guidelines on waiting lists. Such stiff demands from the Ministry and competitive nationwide table targets have prompted an absurd game of ducks and drakes.
Chairman of the board Kevin Atkinson rightly expressed dismay at Wednesday's meeting that a doctor didn't feel comfortable talking to the board and went to the media. I'd hazard the good doctor did so because his previous complaints were met with the same type of DHB response we saw in yesterday's letter.
The snubbing of his fears can only have come as an insult. This man's instincts on the health of the health system have been formed over 34 years of practice. More importantly, his fears are simply those of his patients, those of the community.
It's important to note this paper sought additional comment from Health Minister Tony Ryall, yet received the same treatment. We'd written a "beat up", according to his press secretary. There was something altogether disparaging about watching the Ministry circle its wagons quicker than the Amish.
Who are these people protecting?
Kudos Dr Jolly for courageously thumping that tub. I've no doubt the man responsible for the oath you swore, Hippocrates, would have spoken up too.
Maybe now's the time for the Ministry to draft an oath of its own.
