Options

Hospital receptionist who took prank Royal call has committed suicide

1141517192067

Comments

  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 32
    Forum Member
    Come on, do you honestly think the two DJ's sat down and said said "I know, let's get someone deliberately sacked"
    Oh please!!!:rolleyes:

    When you make a prank call you should consider whether it will cause real humiliation or distress. Broadcasting a call that showed someone making a mistake at work so that everyone one could laugh at them would obviously cause distress.They knew that if they suceeded then staff members would have had to have made a serious mistake in a hospital that prides itself on discretion and confidentaility for famous patients. They knew therfore that broadcasting said mistake would humiliate the staff worldwide, make them look useless and stupid and possibly lose ther job. The very purpose of their call was to obtain confidential medical information , they knew if they got it someone would have breached serious confidentiailty guidelines and they would then broadcast that someone's honest mistake to the whole world.
  • Options
    BelligerenceBelligerence Posts: 40,613
    Forum Member
    Ads wrote: »
    Or maybe its a fairly small station that doesn't have a PR dept running in the middle of the night?
    It's owned by a fairly large network based in Melbourne. Who probably deal with that sort of thing.

    Nearly twilight in Sydney.
  • Options
    MarellaKMarellaK Posts: 5,783
    Forum Member
    Posters keep repeating that hospital staff are not allowed to give out any information by phone. As an NHS nurse who has also worked as an RCN rep, I can confidently state that staff are not allowed to give out any confidential details about patients such as test results, diagnoses and prognoses but all staff are allowed to give general updates such as happened in this particular case. We get bombarded with phone calls every day by concerned relatives, we're not so rude as to say sorry we can't say anything at all to you. Most of the people we talk to on the phone say how they're related and we need to accept what they say at face value, we haven't got time to go through an MI5 style interrogation just to give them a very general update. Of course, we give out a certain amount of information such as the patient has not vomited today, has kept down fluids etc. Why do people consider this to be 'confidential' information, particularly since, in this case, it was already in the public domain.:confused:

    Neither of these nurses would have faced disciplinary action in an NHS hospital. It's not their fault they were victims of a silly prank. I believe the King Edward Hospital management who claim they were not going to discipline the nurse - because they really had nothing to discipline her for.

    However, I can believe how mortified and embarrassed the nurses have been made to feel. I saw a thread here a few days ago calling for the nurses to be sacked for revealing such 'confidential' information. Such posts were probably made by the same type of people who are extremely rude and belligerent to me on the phone when I refuse to give any more than a general update to them about their sick relative under my care.

    I hope the DJs face some disciplinary action. Hoax calls are not particularly funny and nearly always have repercussions for somebody.
  • Options
    MargMckMargMck Posts: 24,115
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Very sad if this turns out to be the thing that tipped someone over the edge.
    The world is such a harsh place at times these days, where some people think tricking others to give out private medical details is actually funny.
  • Options
    stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 71,044
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    spookyLX wrote: »
    Am surprised the station has not put out a statement yet tbh , maybe they aren't all that bothered

    still the early hours of the morning in Australia although the twitter accounts of the DJ's have been pulled. Think the radio station is likely to be seeking legal advice before making a statement. Either that or are busy basting the DJ's for tomorrows barbie.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,084
    Forum Member
    spookyLX wrote: »
    Am surprised the station has not put out a statement yet tbh , maybe they aren't all that bothered

    not bothered? you must be joking..

    the djs were still joking about it on their last show so im thinking the station will be in chaos mode when everyone at the station finds out.
  • Options
    MargMckMargMck Posts: 24,115
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MEW TOWN wrote: »
    Mel Greig has apparently erased her face book page.
    Guilty bloodied track covering.
    still the early hours of the morning in Australia although the twitter accounts of the DJ's have been pulled. Think the radio station is likely to be seeking legal advice before making a statement. Either that or are busy basting the DJ's for tomorrows barbie.

    Yes. Time to remove all the smug satisfaction and whoops at putting someone in the position where they could well feel their career was in danger.
  • Options
    occyoccy Posts: 66,457
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Did the Hoax call cause her death? How come? Could those DJ's be sacked for this?
  • Options
    Lordy LordyLordy Lordy Posts: 1,683
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Kiyli wrote: »
    When you make a prank call you should consider whether it will cause real humiliation or distress. Broadcasting a call that showed someone making a mistake at work so that everyone one could laugh at them would obviously cause distress.They knew that if they suceeded then staff members would have had to have made a serious mistake in a hospital that prides itself on discretion and confidentaility for famous patients. They knew therfore that broadcasting said mistake would humiliate the staff worldwide, make them look useless and stupid and possibly lose ther job. The very purpose of their call was to obtain confidential medical information , they knew if they got it someone would have breached serious confidentiailty guidelines and they would then broadcast that someone's honest mistake to the whole world.

    Read what I was commenting on before writing your drivel.

    They never sat down KNOWINGLY saying let's get someone sacked. Have I made it plain enough for you?

    Some people on this Forum:mad:
  • Options
    swehsweh Posts: 13,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Meilie wrote: »
    The call wasn't live, it was recorded. 2Day FM didn't have to play it on air.

    Ah, but they did get through.

    I honestly didn't see anything wrong with it.
  • Options
    EspressoEspresso Posts: 18,047
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's 1AM in Perth, probably won't hear anything until the morning when they've had a chance to sit down and discuss a response, if any.

    I don't imagine for one second that anyone at that radio station is still asleep, though. They'll all have been hauled in for an emergency meeting.
  • Options
    Sarah.1987Sarah.1987 Posts: 1,332
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I see all Twitters and Facebook pages have been pulled for these DJ's. Probably for the best, I'd like to have said my piece to these 2 people but I'll live, unlike the poor lady who they tipped over the edge.
  • Options
    LARulzLARulz Posts: 34,289
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How do you know if the management or the \Royal Family have hounded her? Until her death, even her name was not known.

    The same way everyone knows that she's killed herself over this.... Its an assumption. Explain to me though (based on the assumption that she was of a stable mind before the call), why would she kill herself based on one phone call if nobody was pressuring her? It my not be the management but the other staff who could have been mocking her etc.

    I find it extremely difficult to believe that somebody would kill themselves based on a prank call, and a prank call only. If there was nothing made of it by anyone at work at all levels then maybe she was not in the most stable of minds.
  • Options
    roland ratroland rat Posts: 13,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    BBC news:

    laywers had cleared for the prank call to be made, and now theyre looking at the decission they made

    Thats really shocking, if there lawyers were involved, so must be the directors of the station
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 122
    Forum Member
    sweh wrote: »
    Ah, but they did get through.

    I honestly didn't see anything wrong with it.

    They should have the common sense to realise that playing it on air could cost someone there job. They didn't care, only about there own fame.
  • Options
    LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,709
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    Did the Hoax call cause her death? How come? Could those DJ's be sacked for this?

    Depends on Australian law. It could be that being fired is the least of their worries.
  • Options
    MargMckMargMck Posts: 24,115
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MEW TOWN wrote: »
    2DAYFM are still playing the commercial for the "Prank Call" live on air now! ?

    Unbelievable :confused:

    The station's probably on auto play, run by a computer overnight.
  • Options
    Flat MattFlat Matt Posts: 7,023
    Forum Member
    Oh well, I suppose the people who thought this nurse should be fired and publicly flogged will feel happy now.

    It's probably the complete overreaction to this story that left this poor woman feeling like public enemy number one.

    I dare say everyone will blame the Australian DJs for this, but the media and the senseless overrreaction to this silly prank is what cost this woman her life.
  • Options
    Sarah.1987Sarah.1987 Posts: 1,332
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Read what I was commenting on before writing your drivel.

    They never sat down KNOWINGLY saying let's get someone sacked. Have I made it plain enough for you?

    Some people on this Forum:mad:

    You're thick aren't you. They made the call, not expecting to get through, but they still carried on. The moment information started exchanging parties, they should have known a job was at stake as it was confidential information and should have hung up.

    Not only that, the prank call WAS NOT LIVE. They STILL chose to air it, knowing that it would get ALOT of people in trouble.

    Reply with your own 'drivel', I don't care.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 122
    Forum Member
    Sarah.1987 wrote: »
    You're thick aren't you. They made the call, not expecting to get through, but they still carried on. The moment information started exchanging parties, they should have known a job was at stake as it was confidential information and should have hung up.

    Not only that, the prank call WAS NOT LIVE. They STILL chose to air it, knowing that it would get ALOT of people in trouble.

    Reply with your own 'drivel', I don't care.

    spot on!
  • Options
    stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 71,044
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    LARulz wrote: »
    The same way everyone knows that she's killed herself over this.... Its an assumption. Explain to me though (based on the assumption that she was of a stable mind before the call), why would she kill herself based on one phone call if nobody was pressuring her? It my not be the management but the other staff who could have been mocking her etc.

    I find it extremely difficult to believe that somebody would kill themselves based on a prank call, and a prank call only. If there was nothing made of it by anyone at work at all levels then maybe she was not in the most stable of minds.

    I have absolutely no idea about her state of mind or any other background circumstances but if it was me I would have felt humiliated, mortified and totally embarrassed, not just because of the prank itself but because it received worldwide attention. Think I would find it difficult to face colleagues, even if they were totally supportive.
  • Options
    Glawster2002Glawster2002 Posts: 15,218
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I am sure the two DJs involved will feel very upset by the news, however to blame them is ridiculous.

    It could be argued they should never have made the call in the first place but the nurse who took the call should have had a procedure to follow if such a call is made and followed that procedure and not taken the caller at face value.

    I saw on the news the hospital were very quick to condemn the two DJs, as many on here have been, but the security services would be appalled the hospital security was so easily breached by a poor impersonation of The Queen.

    The two DJs will have to live with the consequences of what they did for the rest of their lives but the real blame here lays with the hospital management, who it appears haven't ensured their staff were adequately trained to deal with such incidents.

    I was in the RAF 20+ years ago, and I doubt things have changed that much in cases like this, the procedure was to take the name of the person and say the person they were asking for would call them back. Calls like this are done all the time by the security services to test military establishments security.
  • Options
    Sarah.1987Sarah.1987 Posts: 1,332
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    spot on!

    Thank you. Some people's lack of common sense astounds me.
  • Options
    Flat MattFlat Matt Posts: 7,023
    Forum Member
    Sarah.1987 wrote: »
    I see all Twitters and Facebook pages have been pulled for these DJ's. Probably for the best, I'd like to have said my piece to these 2 people but I'll live, unlike the poor lady who they tipped over the edge.

    It wasn't the DJs that cost this nurse her life. It will have been the idiotic overreaction and the slagging off/calling for her head that tipped her over the edge.
  • Options
    roland ratroland rat Posts: 13,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    LostFool wrote: »
    Depends on Australian law. It could be that being fired is the least of their worries.
    Austriala has brodies law, which refores to bully who cause someones death through suicide, could the dj be charged under thius law, I dont know

    as for any other law, there could be something to charge them with only time will tell, and the fact laywers are now involved again raises some questions
This discussion has been closed.