The formal public consultation on the future of Springboard Resource Centre has begun. Springboard provides very special services, helping people with mental health problems and learning difficulties, and is based at Tolworth hospital. Springboard is threatened with closure as the local NHS struggles to resolve its financial problems. This consultation is the result of determined campaigning by users, relatives and local Conservatives (not least Cllr Mary Clarke) to ensure the centre gets a proper hearing, but the consultation seems to be heavily biased against Springboard.
The consultation sets out three options – (1) Keep Springboard, (2) Turn Springboard into a charity or social enterprise, (3) Invest in the Early Intervention Service for young people and direct users of Springboard towards other mental health services and community activities.
The consultation documents indicate that Springboard is a failing service, and particularly that it fails to secure employment for its users. From time to time, Springboard Users are transferred to Kingston Employment Service and may successfully gain employment, having benefitted hugely from their time at Springboard. Other service users are not in a position to consider employment and for these people Springboard provides valuable social contact and activity.
Staff and relatives believe that for many of Springboard’s users, there will be no equivalent service if the centre is closed. There is a risk that some may end up in an acute psychiatric ward within weeks, as the loss of the service could trigger a severe relapse in their health. This would be a tragedy for the individuals concerned (and at the same time very expensive for the NHS).
Helen has raised the following concerns about the consultation
· Is the consultation being sufficiently widely disseminated?
· The consultation documents seem to demonstrate a strong bias against Springboard – does this invalidate the consultation?
· The consultation document does not fully set out the options and does not give any indication of the sums of money involved – it therefore lacks critical information necessary to an informed public debate and decision
· There seems to be a substantial gap between the costs of the proposed alternatives to Springboard and the saving made through closing the centre.
Helen Whately will continue to campaign for Springboard, alongside Cllr Mary Clarke and the users and relatives of Springboard. She welcomes all supporters to join the campaign and to help save Springboard.
Helen said
“I was very disappointed to discover that the consultation seems to be biased strongly against Springboard. The document suggests that the best outcome for all Springboard users would be employment, overlooking the fact that for some users this is not a real option.”
“I have written to the Chief Executive of Kingston Primary Care Trust and the Patient Support Officer asking them to address the flaws in the consultation, particularly the impression given that Springboard is failing in the service it provides. I would also like to see the costs and potential savings set out in full in the consultation so local people can be fully informed about the options and where the money is going”
“The Chief Executive of Kingston Primary Care Trust has previously stated that one of the reasons for the cuts is that they are focusing on national targets. Is this the root of the problem? Our NHS should be focusing on local needs, here in Kingston, not national targets.” |
