The Ombudsman said today there were significant problems in people’s dealings with the Health Service Executive (HSE).
Emily O’Reilly criticised the organisation and social services over “shocking and unacceptable” complaints passed on to her office.
Here are examples of some of the complaints she dealt with last year:
* Beaumont Hospital apologised to a family over the lack of care given to a father. The cancer patient's daughter alerted staff that he was in desperate need of treatment in a ward after appearing to vomit faecal like matter on the August Bank Holiday in 2004.
No-one came to check him, nothing was done to ease his distress and he was taken into intensive care the next day and died 10 days later.
Five years passed before the family asked the Ombudsman for help after failing to get the hospital to address their concerns. The family claimed a report on the hospital’s internal review contained inaccuracies and did not reflect relative’s worries. They asked for changes to be made but were refused.
After the Ombudsman stepped in, Beaumont’s chief executive met the family to apologise for shortcomings in their father’s care and treatment. A detailed letter of apology was also handed over.
The Ombudsman said there were communications failings in the hospital and the father should have got care when the family asked.
A new system has been put in place in Beaumont since to allow for formal hand-over of acutely ill patients from a primary treating consultant to an on-call doctor.
* The Ombudsman reported her hands were tied after a mother, who works full-time and cares for her sick son full-time, was refused special Government support.
She applied for the €1,700-a-year respite care grant but the Department of Social and Family Affairs turned her appeal down on the basis that she worked outside the home for 38 hours - more than double the 15 hour limit.
Ms O’Reilly said it highlighted a regrettable anomaly and a potential poverty trap.
“By working full-time and caring for her son, my complainant is contributing to and benefiting the state in financial terms but is losing out on a financial gain herself,” she said. “If the woman gave up her job, it is likely that she would receive one parent family payment and half-rate carer’s allowance, as well as the respite care grant.”
If she stopped caring for her son, the State would be left to foot the bill for expensive treatment, she added.
* The same department did not refer on detailed medical evidence to allow officials to properly rule whether a woman should being given a carer's benefit to look after her aunt and uncle. The Dublin woman was given approval for a grant to care for her uncle but not her aunt.
When the Ombudsman investigated, she discovered full files - which showed the extent of the aunt’s condition - had not been passed on to the Medical Adviser and Deciding Officer to rule on the benefit claim.
The woman who complained was awarded €12,000 in backdated carer’s benefit arrears.
* Waterford Regional Hospital apologised over care given to a pregnant woman who endured a traumatic labour and birth in the maternity unit in 2007. She claimed she was deprived of pain relief because a midwife did not recognise she was in labour.
It took two years for her complaint to the HSE to be examined and officials found she suffered neglect. Hospital staff met the woman after the Ombudsman intervened but did not apologise or offer any financial compensation.
Ms O’Reilly stepped in a second time and the general manager agreed to write a full letter of apology, offer full, private counselling and pay €1,000 as a gesture of goodwill.