Kevin, thanks for the telehealthcare challenge

Kevin, thanks for the challenge and the opportunity to elaborate my view and intention in raising the point.

First, the word. 'Telehealthcare' seems to me an unnecessary addition to a field which, we agree, is beset with too many loosely defined terms. It is, in my opinion, an ugly conglomeration in which health predominates ('telehealth' and 'healthcare') at the expense of the 'telecare' element, which is split.

Second, who should use it? I am happy to concede that anyone can label their efforts anything they wish, and I have been pointing to organisations other than Tunstall which have used the term, some for a considerable time. However, it is noticeable that the term has only gained ground in the UK since Tunstall started to use it and, as no other major suppliers use it, they have succeeded in owning it in the way that a team which has the ball in its possession 'owns' the ball.

Third, why have I featured it? Part of the mission for Telecare Aware is to be a 'critical friend' to the industry and, as I saw it, I was just flagging up to anyone who thinks that using the term is a good idea that it now comes with implications which need considering. If they have thought about those and decided to go ahead, well and good. It's not the first time I have flagged up apparent naivety in this sector. Remember the ICE-T example?