Hospital refutes patient’s claims about abuse at the institution
The Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation has denied an allegation contained in an article carried in the Sunday edition of this publication which stated that a patient was being beaten by police.
It was stated in the article that 26-year-old Randy Charles, who is a patient of the Male Surgical Ward, was complaining that police ranks have been physically abusing him over the past few days to the extent that they have inflicted serious wounds across his body.
However, the hospital stated that an investigation was conducted and the findings were totally different from the man’s claims.
According to the investigation by the hospital, Charles was indeed a patient as a result of sustaining a gunshot wound to his left thigh.
“It was stated that Charles was under police guard and the protocol is for such patients to be handcuffed to the bed. It was stated in the findings that for some reason Charles was not handcuffed.
“It was also noted that Charles was constantly abusive towards staff including doctors and nurses.”
According to the hospital, this was documented in the ward’s log book.
In addition, the hospital claims that on the night of May 17, 2011, it was reported that the he threw a bed block in the direction of a nurse, which damaged property and prompted the police to be summoned to ensure the safety of the staff and other patients in the ward.
“The following morning, police ranks came and attempted to handcuff the patient however he resisted and had to be physically restrained.
The patient was reportedly surrounded by the police officers and as such, no one present (both patient and staff who were interviewed) claimed to have seen him being struck by the police.”
It was further stated that contrary to the patient’s statement, the doctor was informed of his request to have an X-Ray performed; however upon examination, the doctor found no cause to have any x-ray done.
With regards to the patient being denied his medication, the hospital said that this was untrue. Instead it was recorded that he refused his medication because, according to him, it was late.
“This patient expected to receive his medication at the strike of the clock, on a ward that catered to over 30 patients and as a result of this not being done, he reportedly created a ruckus”.
“It must be noted, finally, that management and staff are concerned about the use of the nurses’ (and doctors’) names in this and previous publications.