Saturday, August 23, 2008

what the hell

Probably I will not be long for this job, and hopefully this world too, so I won't hold back on the names.

Background: When I joined this job more than a year ago, I actually joined Tanjong Pagar FSC. On the first day of work, I was seconded out to where I am currently. I was to learn a good half year later that the TPFSC actually earned money from this arrangement: my salary and CPF contribution came from them, but apparently they charged Home Help that amount plus plus. My Home Help manager said TPFSC claimed the plus plus was for training me; that's a load of bull. I only ever saw the TPFSC boss three times: once because I requested a meeting, the second time when he came to do the exit interview with Odie, and the last time at some Moral event. I have since left TPFSC and come under the payroll of Home Help. The Home Help boss is in charge of many many things other than Home Help, so the other time I have seen him is, once again, at official functions. But all's good until this week.

Some time ago I rejected a client on the grounds that he wasn't very homebound, to put it mildly. The client was referred by Moral Case Management, and the person who did the referral, let's call her SL, wasn't too pleased. She called the office repeatedly to request for a review. Now, usually I'm not in the office, so my colleague handles such calls and queries for me. My stance was clear: at his current functioning, the client is not eligible for home help services and any further assessment would be fruitless. My colleague communicated this to SL all the times that she called. Oneday SL called and demanded a written explanation.

I seethed. But I wrote the letter. And it was polite. And I thought that was the end of it.

But I was wrong. She wrote another letter, requesting for service on the grounds that client has COPD and some other heart conditions. And cc-ed to our boss. I called her to clarify with her, but apparently nothing got through her thick skull. She followed up with the following email to our boss:


"
Dear Boss,

Good morning. I have received a phone call from MSW Ling Shen (Moral Home Help West) at 12.14hrs while i was on home visit yesterday.

Ling Shen claimed that he has repeated many times to me that he has already discharged client Mr XXX and he would not consider opening the case. Reasons being client is not a home bound patient. When i checked with him that how come some cases who are also not home bound could receive the home help service such as escort service but he claimed that he did not know the previous cases as it was approved by other MSW as he only came 1 year ago. For him, he would not accept cases that are not approved by him. I requested him to consider escort services in view of client's medical condition but Ling Shen claimed that he would only consider re-opening the case if i could provide him with medical report and proved that client's condition has deteriorated. I have requested him to tell me the date of his review with client but he refused and said that he has seen him 2 to 3 weeks ago. Lastly, i requested Ling Shen to reply me with a letter again on the reasons but he claimed that he did not have such practice all along and also did not have the habit of reply since he has done once previously.

I have called the client later and client claimed that he had asked his friend to help him buy food sometimes and he could manage his laundry so far.

Please advice me on the whether i should refer client to home medical and home nursing services since the escort service from Moral Home Help West has been rejected?

"

-


The boss emailed me and my manager asking for an explanation so it's obvious whose side he's on. My manager is the easily ruffled sort so she decided to just offer the client our escort services anyway. I went down to see him, and here's my email reply:

"
1. Client was initially rejected because he was not homebound; Client himself mentions that he is always running around. I understand that he has a whole litany of heart problems; however, these are simply medical labels that say nothing about functional status.

2. Out of goodwill, I was instructed by my manager to offer him our escort services. That I did, but client was not home. I called him and learnt from him that he was at Potong Pasir, and he indicated that he did not need our services.

3. My manager has also called him this morning to offer him our food and escort services. Client rejected them as he indicated that our food usually comes at around 1 pm and he can't wait so long as he has to go out. He also indicated that he has a direct bus he can take from his home to the hospital.

4. I stand by my assessment. I am actually bewildered why client is even a candidate for home services.

5. With regards to written exposes detailing rejection, I hope you can understand that it is not practical or logical for me to have to answer to every rejection. I see so many clients every week it's hardly enough for me to catch my breath. Rejection is always hard for me, and already I am very liberal in my interpretation of home boundness, so you can be assured that rejections are not made wantonly.

6. With regards to approval, all cases need to be approved by me to be accepted into the service as I am the only social worker here. SL mentions a discrepancy where certain clients that seems to match disputed client's status were accepted into the service while Mr XXX was not. Indeed, those clients were assessed and approved by me, and I apologize for that, as I was lax in my assessment.

I wish to assure you and SL and the Moral Case Management team that I shall strive to be more rigid and stringent in my assessments.

Sincerely
Lingshen Chen

[addendum]
1. If SL would read the letter carefully, it states 'repeated numerously', which in no way implies I spoke to SL directly. What it does imply is my stand was made clear to her quite a few times.

2. I would also like to clarify if I have the right to reject clients.

"

-


Summary: Someone made a lousy referral, and was not willing to accept the subsequent and expected outcome which is actually kinda disrespectful to me, expects me to play by her mangly rules, and kicks up a ruckus about it.

No comments: