In a book called, “How to Motivate People,” it’s author, Michael Le Boeuf, Ph.D., described as an “Internationally Renowned Management Educator,” claims that this is the “The greatest management principle in the world” – “THE THINGS THAT GET REWARDED GET DONE.”
That in every situation there is what can be called a “reward system” which determines the things that get the most rewarded through to the things that get the least rewarded.
After more than 20 years studying these matters, we’re convinced that, when it comes to health care in New South Wales, we have a reward system under which it’s the worst things that get the most rewarded and the best things that get least rewarded – it’s virtually corrupt.
Surely the experiences of one of our readers, who, for convenience we’ll call XXX, about which we have written extensively, illustrates this.
XXX was experiencing what is called the “frequency problem,” common in seniors, he was having to get up 2 or 3 times a night to urinate, and when he consulted his GP, Dr Chris Grant, about this, he recommended that he seek help from A/Prof. Andrew Brooks, Urologist. Prior to going ahead with Brooks, XXX wrote to A/Prof. Paul Sved, Urologist, outlining his symptoms and seeking his advice, and Dr Sved’s response was that there were many things to be considered that might help with his symptoms before surgery. But, in the end, XXX decided to trust Dr Grant and Dr Brooks and go ahead with Brooks – obviously to his profound regret, almost daily. For Brooks, surgery was the first option! His diagnosis was that XXX’s bladder had become muscular, and therefore smaller, down to a capacity of about 200 mils, from years of having to force his urine past partial blockages in his urinary tract, and that if he had the treatment he recommended, surgery called the TURP, in which any partial blockages were removed, his bladder would soon be back to a more normal size, say, 330 mls in capacity, certainly within 3 to 6 months, and he would no longer have the frequency problem.
(Brooks had his nurse carry out the tests to back up this diagnosis, for which XXX was charged more than a fully qualified Urologist would have charged, and Brooks has absolutely refused to release copies of the results of her tests, despite the fact that XXX is entitled to them by law – even when he sought the help of the NSW Privacy Commissioner to try and get them, who, incidentally, was completely useless, Brooks still wouldn’t release them.)
So XXX had Brooks’ TURP – which didn’t help him in any way, as Brooks himself has admitted in writing. He still had, and, in fact, still has, the frequency problem exactly the same, AND, it damaged him for life in a highly personal way, something which didn’t just happen sometimes, it’s ALWAYS a consequence of the TURP, and can’t be reversed.
Some 5 months later, as XXX still had the “frequency problem,” he consulted A/Prof. Vincent Tse, Urologist, who had been recommended to him by Dr Sved. Dr Tse went to a great deal of trouble, showing him graphs and so on, showing that his bladder then had a capacity of about 33o mls, but explaining that the fact that he still had the “frequency problem” was because his bladder had become weak, as is often the case with seniors, so that a fair bit of urine was still left in it after he’d urinated, meaning it was sooner before it was full again – about which nothing could be done! No wonder Brooks has refused to release the results of his nurse’s tests – the suspicion is that how XXX’s bladder was, when he consulted Tse, is exactly how it was when he consulted Brooks, 5 months before, when his nurse carried out her tests, and that all Brooks’ talk about his bladder being small and muscular was fairy tales, put forward so he could justify, at least in his mind, surgery for which he would get $3,2oo for less than an hour’s work. But, and this is crucial, Brooks had claimed that his treatment would take the capacity of XXX’s bladder from about 200 mls to a more normal size, say, of about 330 mls, which would mean he would no longer have the frequency problem, but here it was , with a capacity of about 330 mls, and he still had the frequency problem???!!!
But our main point in all this is this, who was the most rewarded? – Dr Sved, who charged a couple of hundred dollars for his help, Dr Tse who charged $750 for all his testing and advice, or Dr Brooks, from his fee of $3,200 for less than an hour’s work.
XXX claims that afterwards, when he made the comment, in general conversation, that he thought Brooks was about putting together a “nest egg” for his retirement, Grant just laughed, saying, “I would have thought Dr Brooks had lots of “nest eggs” already” – in other words, that he thought that he was filthy rich.
But wait, there’s more.
XXX claims that over the years, Brooks has had henchmen ring him on 7 different occasions, one in the last few days, on about 10 Aug. 2021, making all sorts of threats, “you might be sued for defamation,” “you might end up in gaol,” etc. etc. etc. if he didn’t take his descriptions of his experiences, his side of the story, down from the internet, while, at the time, steadfastly refusing to tell his side of the story in any way. (Let us repeat again, what we’ve said so often, that we would be happy to put up on the internet Brooks’ side of the story to anything and everything we’ve ever written.) And XXX further claims that one of these henchmen happened to mention that Brooks, from time to time, made “contributions,” (bribes?”) to GPs to help them in running their businesses, which he described as being a “norm” for the industry. And further, that when XXX emailed Grant asking if he’d ever received one of Brooks’ “contributions,” not only did he not respond, but he took action to prevent XXX from sending him any more emails ever again.
So readers, get the picture. Bad specialists making more money, perhaps much more money, than the good specialists, and GPs making more money if they refer patients to the bad specialists than if they refer them to the good specialists.
To us it seems that this is the “reward system” that exists in New South Wales. It makes it difficult for us, the people, to find doctors we can trust.
Unquestionably, Commissioner Sue Dawson and her people in the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission play a big part in bringing this reward system about. When complaints are made to them about people like Brooks, the people who do it find it’s been a complete waste of their time and effort, because they are told they have no basis to complain, and it’s implied that they’ve been stupid in ever thinking that they might have had a basis to complain. The result is that people like Brooks know they can virtually get away with murder!!!
But in the end, the top people in the Berejiklian Government – like Elizabeth Koff, Secretary, NSW Health, Brad Hazzard, Minister for Health, and Premier Berejiklian herself, and others, are the problem. They are the ones who recently appointed Dawson to another 5 years as Commissioner. They ignore all emails about the problem – we’re yet to get evidence that Premier Berejiklian ever responds to any emails from anybody about this. And if anything, all that’s probably happening it that we’re probably just endangering our lives, and the lives of our families, by putting stuff like the above up on the internet. And certainly, we’re getting no thanks from the people.
99 Responses to When it comes to Health Care, the REWARD SYSTEM in New South Wales