Search Telecare Aware
Like it? Share it!
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
sponsorship banners general advertising *special: sponsor a conference report* |
3 Febuary edition of the Telemedicine Reporter International Edition (PDF) for download thanks to US Tele-Medicine. To be emailed when the next is released email their media dept. |
|
| The gist is...If you have a serious comment to make anonymously...email it, don't just post it. |
Truly anonymous comments - where the writer is unknown - are not published unless they are unexceptional.
Comments or articles where the authorship is known but are offered for publication anonymously are considered on their merits. (Email Steve or Donna in confidence.) There are some circumstances where it is necessary to be close to a particular situation to be able to throw light on it but to write about it publicly would jeopardise the author's position. In that case, the decision to publish an item anonymously hinges on the question of whether or not it is informed opinion that will add insight to, or might start, a debate on a particular topic.
Unsubstantiated allegations of illegal behaviour or substandard products, for example, would not be posted unless they could be independently verified, in which case we would probably publish them ourselves.
Just because a post, article or comment, etc. is published on Telecare Aware readers cannot and should not infer that the editors agree with the author, anonymous or not.
Steve Hards
Donna Cusano
Editors
steve.hards@telecareaware.com
donna.cusano@telecareaware.com
Further to Britain's Got Pendants |
| Thursday, 04 June 2009 07:44 |
|
Now that the comments on this item have trailed off, perhaps it is time to make it clear where I stand on the questions I posed. First though, it is interesting that it was not until Kevin Doughty's comment that anyone challenged my rather negative premise. While there are good things happening in places, it would appear that my doubts about progress struck a chord. I believe that the original telecare vision was undermined when the decision was made within the Department of Health to include 'community alarms' in the definition of telecare in the 'Building Telecare in Britain'*. I suspect it came about because there were severe doubts (probably justified) regarding the ability of councils to deliver 160,000 truly new telecare users - the target set for the Preventative Technology Grant by the Treasury. Many of us thought at the time that this would be the escape hatch through which councils would slither and allow them to count new users using the old, comfortable technology. It now looks as though those predictions were correct and a lot of what has happened (or not) since then hinges on that unfortunate decision. * Page 8: What is Telecare?"...It can be as simple as the basic community alarm service…" |
