Maternity Nurses, Nannies and the Infant Sleep Industry
Connor Rand Excerpts(2 days, 20 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
Being a parent is the one of the greatest joys we can have in life, but let me be clear, it is also one of the hardest things we ever do. I remember the first year of my son’s life and the happiness those precious early moments brought me and my partner, but I also remember the less precious moments, with the daily battle every new parent has with their own anxieties as they ask themselves, “Why are they crying? Why are not they sleeping? Am I doing something wrong?” Those questions swirl around our heads at a time when we are sleep deprived, emotionally drained and totally unsure of ourselves—in other words, we are vulnerable.
What do we do in that situation? We seek out help, expertise and people we think we can trust. In the majority of circumstances, that is absolutely the right thing to do—health visitors and the vast majority of nannies who provide responsible care give parents vital support that helps them get by—but what if, when we turned for help, the person who responded was not someone we could trust? What if they were not the expert they claimed or seemed to be? What if they had no qualifications, no training and no accountability? When that happens, we run the risk of unimaginable tragedy.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this really good debate; I spoke to him about it last week. He will be aware that, as it stands today across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, anyone can buy a website domain, call themselves an infant sleep expert or a maternity nurse and charge vulnerable, sleep-deprived parents hundreds of pounds for unregulated, untested and potentially unsafe advice. Does he agree that sleep-deprived and vulnerable parents need to have security that the advice they are taking comes from a solid foundation, and that qualifications—or lack of qualifications—must be clear when advice is offered?
Mr Rand
I thank the hon. Member. The vulnerability that parents feel in that moment is one of the reasons why it is so important that we ensure adequate regulation in this area. At the moment, we run the risk of unimaginable tragedies day after day, and it is happening more and more as the support we used to provide for new parents has shrunk. In the gaps that has created, the infant sleep industry has boomed. The industry is currently a wild west where, as the hon. Member said, anyone can pose as an expert and give parents advice that puts their child’s life at risk. Sometimes, these people call themselves maternity nurses, practitioners or consultants. Sometimes they call themselves sleep trainers or specialists. Sometimes they provide care in the home. Sometimes they share their advice to vast and growing audiences on social media. In all cases, there is no requirement for them to have any medical training or qualifications to justify their title. In addition, there is also no legal accountability for advice provided and no recognised standard for support provided.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
As a new parent, this is hugely concerning to me and not something I was particularly aware of. Does my hon. Friend have any advice for new parents looking for support about what questions they should ask to ensure they are talking to experts and not so-called experts who, as the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said, are people without any qualifications at all?
Mr Rand
Yes, I will come to some of that. Whether parents are following advice or performing these duties themselves, it is important that they think about safe sleeping extremely seriously—that is what any parent should be doing. It is very important indeed to understand the qualifications and medical expertise of those providing advice.
In May, the BBC used undercover filming to expose two prominent figures in the infant sleep industry who were openly giving parents advice on safe sleep that could result in the death of their children. That is not just my opinion; the NHS clinicians who observed the BBC’s footage said that it was “horrifying”.
Mr Morrison
I thank the hon. Member very much for getting this debate on the Floor. He references the BBC investigation, and the things that were put out on that were absolutely horrifying. Talking of experts, the Lullaby Trust is a huge leader, particularly around safer sleeping. I was horrified by the lack of regulation—the wild west, as he describes it—so would he agree that we need a proper, legal, regulatory framework to make sure that these charlatans who are putting this bogus safe sleep advice out there on social media and other channels are held to account, and to ensure that parents and their children are protected from these groups of people?
Mr Rand
Yes, I completely agree. I know that the hon. Member has worked with the Lullaby Trust, and I am grateful to have met its representatives myself and to have had their input into my campaign on regulation in this area. Of course, the Government have already begun to set out—quite rightly, after his campaigning work—the approach we need to take forward in early years settings, but it is critical that the whole sector, including advice provided in the home, should have a sustainable legal framework.
The figures who were exposed by the BBC in their undercover filming have thousands of followers online and have published widely bought books. To any parent, they would ostensibly look like an expert. That such unqualified people can operate in that way without any oversight at all is terrifying. How can it be right that an industry dedicated to the care of babies is totally unregulated? We know the answer to that. It is not right and it must change, because without change, more children will die. I do not say that lightly; I say it because of what happened in my constituency.
Two years ago, a four-month-old baby from Trafford died after being placed in an unsafe sleeping position on the advice of a maternity nurse who had no medical qualifications at all. There was no legal accountability for this death because no laws had been broken, but a family had been broken. I cannot begin to imagine what the parents of that child have been through. There are no words to describe it, and I will not try to do so, but what I will try to do is ensure that change is the legacy of their tragedy. It is not just me that is calling for change. The senior coroner who worked on the case issued a prevention of future deaths order to the Secretary of State and, in doing so, called on infant sleep services to be urgently regulated.
What does this change look like? I have three main asks of the Government and the Minister today. First, will the Minister explore the introduction of mandatory minimum safeguarding training and qualification standards in the baby sleep industry and the nanny industry, as has been called for by the National Nanny Association, the Lullaby Trust and other organisations. I am sure that we can all agree on the reason to do this—namely, that people looking after children should have basic medical and early years training, including on safe sleep. This change could introduce standards and safeguards to an industry badly lacking in both.
This change would support the majority of people who provide responsible, home-based care for children while cracking down on the dangerous minority who do not. It would give parents peace of mind and minimum legal standards to hold providers against, and the introduction of mandatory training and standards could lead to the development of a national regulated framework or register for all those providing home-based childcare. With a register, we would strengthen safeguarding, give parents clarity and professionalise the sector.
My second ask is that we need stronger legal protections for the title of “nurse”, and in response to the tragedy in my constituency, the Government announced that they would protect the title of “nurse” so that it could be used only by someone with appropriate medical qualifications. That is a really important step forward that I very much welcome. However, people in the infant sleep industry are also calling themselves “practitioners” and “consultants”, so I urge the Government to explore legal protections for those titles too, because, like “nurse”, they imply a level of expertise that is often not there and that parents might rely on. When announcing that the Government would protect the title of nurse, the then Secretary of State committed to seeking wide input on the proposals to get them right. I appreciate that there have been changes since, but can the Minister update me on that work and set out a timeline for when we can expect action?
My third and final ask relates to the context in which the infant sleep industry has boomed. As I mentioned earlier, this is a sector to which parents are increasingly turning as the support that used to be provided by the state has been stripped back. The number of health visitors has almost halved in the last decade, and home visits are not happening consistently across the country, as overstretched staff battle caseloads of up to 1,000 families. That is the vacuum that causes parents to walk into the wild west of dangers. I would appreciate the Minister setting out the Government’s plan to invest in health visitors and infant care, so that we can protect children and their parents with the highest-quality support possible in our national health service.
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
I commend the hon. Gentleman’s excellent speech, particularly the three points that he has just made, with which I absolutely agree. I put on record my thanks to Maria Culley from the National Nanny Association, who has been working tirelessly on this issue, and who is a constituent of mine. I have met Children and Families Ministers under this Administration and previous Administrations and not managed to get too much traction, so I absolutely back everything that the hon. Gentleman is asking for.
Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is not only sleeping tutors and maternity nurses but nannies who are completely unregulated? We need Disclosure and Barring Service checks, a compulsory national register for nannies, and the minimum training standards that he is calling for. Finally, I would be over the moon to work with him to ensure that we can get those asks on the statute book.
Mr Rand
I appreciate the hon. Member’s support. We owe it to people who are working in the industry and behaving responsibly to ensure that those standards are in place right across the industry.
This Government are already doing vital work on safe sleeping. Safe sleep guidance in nurseries is set to become statutory, and Ofsted will now assess safe sleep practices during its inspections of early years settings. I pay tribute to the Campaign for Gigi, the Lullaby Trust and the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) for their role in securing these truly transformative steps. The Government must build on that progress. If we accept the urgent need for safe-sleep protections in early years settings, why would we not apply the same standards to care that is provided in people’s homes? This is about safety, accountability and support for every parent.
Of all the contributions that I have made in this place so far, this is the one I feel most strongly about. I know from experience the difficulty of being a new parent, and how vulnerable we are in that time of stress, fear and confusion. It is truly chilling that this vulnerability, combined with the desire we all have to do the best for our children, can lead us to seek support from those not fit to give it. But that is what is happening, and we have a responsibility to do something about that.
I hope that today can be the start of that journey. I look forward to meeting and working with Minister, the charities working on this issue, and all those across the House who want to see real progress to develop the solutions we need to protect children and their parents from unimaginable tragedy.
Maternity Commissioner
Connor Rand Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for securing the debate, and I thank everyone in Altrincham and Sale West who signed the petition.
I am especially grateful to those people who wrote to me to bravely share their often harrowing stories of maternity care failures. Their stories were worryingly similar: avoidable trauma, avoidable complications and, in many cases, avoidable tragedy. That is the reality of our maternity services and it is not good enough. There was a common theme behind each of the failings that my constituents suffered, and that was women not being listened to, their pain not being treated as urgent, and their worries being dismissed. That meant that they went without the compassion, care and understanding that they deserved.
Nobody wants better for women and babies than the thousands of NHS midwives and maternity staff who work so hard to ensure that the vast majority of births are safe. It is clear that the system is not working for too many mums, dads and babies. The experience of my constituent Lauren illustrates that. Lauren gave birth at Wythenshawe hospital in January. Her experience was a litany of failures and, in her own words, for all the hard work of NHS staff, she often felt like an afterthought during her own childbirth.
The failings started when Lauren discovered that her baby was in the breech position at 28 weeks. That was not followed up on. When she saw a midwife before the birth, they seemed too busy to check their notes and they thought that the baby was head down. It was not until Lauren was a good way through labour that her medical team were aware that the baby was breech. By that point, it had become an emergency. Lauren, who was in incredible pain, was suddenly surrounded by frantic doctors and midwives asking her questions that she was in no real state to answer, and she was told she had 10 minutes to make a decision on the birth of her baby. She had an emergency C-section, which was supposed to happen within 30 minutes but took two hours, and throughout that time she was without pain relief as overworked midwives desperately tried to care for others. I cannot begin to imagine what her experience was like—the pain, the panic and the unanswered questions leading into one of the biggest procedures that a person can have.
Thankfully, Lauren’s baby was born safely, but it was a birth that did not need to be such a traumatic emergency. Unfortunately, Lauren’s care only got worse after the baby was born. She was dumped in a C-section ward and her partner was forced to leave, meaning she was alone for hours at a time without any pain relief. She was barely able to move, unable to stand up, and unable to respond to her crying baby. At a time of maximum vulnerability she had minimal care. Doctors spoke about her, but they never spoke to her. She had no explanations, no support and, frankly, no one was listening. The ordeal has, completely understandably, put Lauren and her partner off ever having another baby.
Lauren’s experience speaks to so many of the problems that we have heard today: we have a system that is not putting mothers first, that is riven with inequalities and inconsistencies in care, and, for all the Government’s much-welcomed funding, in which staff are overstretched. As someone who works closely with the campaign group the Dad Shift, I also point out how Lauren’s ordeal highlights the way in which dads are often failed by maternity services, with their ability to support their partner undermined as a result. That is particularly true—as it was with Lauren—when mothers have had traumatic births and their partners are still sent home, leaving them without emotional or practical support when they are at their most vulnerable. I hope that the Minister and the Government are looking at that as part of the Government’s much-needed work to turn around our maternity services. I know that that work is progressing, not just through the investigation of Baroness Amos, as we have heard from others, but through the national maternity and neonatal taskforce and through greater funding, support and accountability for underperforming maternity units.
One of those units is at Wythenshawe hospital, which serves my constituents. I will forever be grateful for the care that my partner Catherine and I received at Wythenshawe, where my two sons were born, but I know that that has not been the experience for too many of my constituents.
Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)
The hon. Gentleman is doing right by his constituents, if I may say so; I am sure they will appreciate the account that he is giving. Would he agree that some of the issues with maternity departments can sometimes be much more mundane? For example, at Musgrove Park hospital in Taunton, water is coming through the ceilings and there are temperatures of 30°C in the summer.
Given that the Secretary of State said, when speaking about Musgrove Park hospital,
“if I can bring forward the timetables of these schemes…we will”,
must the Government not do everything they can to hasten their hospitals programme so that maternity services, and the conditions in which mums give birth and staff work, can be improved as quickly as possible?
Mr Rand
I absolutely agree. The environment and conditions within which maternity units are set are clearly of huge importance to mothers, their partners and babies—to the whole system of maternity care. This Government have made significant capital investment into the NHS estate, having inherited a hospital-building programme that had no funding and no clear timetable for building. I am sure the Minister is giving the hon. Gentleman’s request due consideration.
On Wythenshawe hospital, I am pleased that the Government will not tolerate a poor standard of care for my constituents and I am immensely grateful for the recently announced £40 million in funding that the hospital is set to receive to tackle the issues in its maternity care. However, the problems, both at Wythenshawe and across the country, go beyond funding. We are talking about systemic failings that have harmed women and their babies over an extended period. As others have said, in that time we have had countless scandals, reports and recommendations, but no progress. My constituents believe that a maternity services commissioner could contribute to the change we need, and I hope the Government will give that due consideration.
Oral Answers to Questions
Connor Rand Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wes Streeting
There is so much evidence to underpin the importance of continuity of care. I do not want to get ahead of the recommendations of the Amos investigation, but there is much to commend what the right hon. Gentleman says. Even with the best planning, the challenge for maternity units is that they are often both elective and emergency, with women arriving when they are not necessarily expected to, so we have to bear those considerations in mind, but the idea of women and partners knowing the team that will be responsible for their care in advance is a compelling one.
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
A four-month-old baby in my constituency died after being placed in an unsafe sleeping position by someone who called themselves a maternity nurse despite having no medical qualifications. The coroner who worked on the case has called on the Secretary of State to regulate the infant sleep industry urgently. As it stands, anyone can call themselves a maternity nurse and create the illusion of expertise, all while providing life-threatening advice on sleep for babies. I know that the Secretary of State is aware of this case and is working on this issue, but can he provide an update on what he is doing to prevent a tragedy such as the one in my constituency from ever happening again?
Wes Streeting
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that absolutely horrific case; my sincere condolences go to the family for the loss of this poor baby. No patient should ever believe that someone is a trained professional, only to discover that they have no formal qualifications. This Government are protecting the professional title of nurse, so that no other families have to endure the suffering of his constituents. We will shortly be seeking widespread input to get that right, and we will be making changes in this Parliament. We will absolutely be addressing the issues that have been raised as a direct result of this tragedy.
Sudden Unexpected Death in Childhood
Connor Rand Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) for securing this debate and speaking so powerfully, as he always does, about loss on these issues.
Frankie James Grogan lived in my constituency. He was three years old, and would have been 10 in January. Frankie was adored by his family, and everyone who met him said the same thing: that he was a joy to be around—always smiling, always laughing and always making his mum and dad proud. Frankie loved giraffes, as he loved most animals, and the only thing that could compete with them for his attention was his Lego.
Frankie was a special little boy, but in many other ways he was a normal little boy, like the millions of other toddlers who have just started nursery and have everything in life to look forward to. Then, one night, Frankie went to sleep and did not wake up: no explanation, no answers and, frankly, very little support—just an unimaginable loss. How does any parent come to terms with that? That is a question most of us cannot bring ourselves to even think about, but my constituent Sarah, who is with us today, had to face that reality. In a completely inspiring way, she turned her trauma into a movement for change, and working with SUDC UK she created Friends of Frankie, a brilliant local charity with a giraffe for its logo. The charity is dedicated to not just Frankie’s memory but his legacy, and that is the key point I want to raise today: Frankie’s legacy. When I have spoken to Sarah, she has articulated it better than I ever could: Frankie’s role now is to save other children and other parents too.
We need to make sudden unexplained death in childhood predictable, because when we can start to predict it, we can start to prevent it. First, as other Members have this morning, we need to recognise the scale of the issue and that these are not just isolated tragedies. We lose almost two children a fortnight to SUDC—in other words, more children than we lose to traffic accidents, fires and drowning. We work to keep children safe from those things—we have speed limits and fire alarms, and we teach children how to swim—but we do little to talk and think about or to research sudden unexplained death in childhood.
That is why we need action. As Members on both sides of the Chamber have discussed, we need a national plan with clear milestones for success that everyone can be held accountable for and that is based on research informed by quicker post-mortems, genetic data gathering and consistent, high-quality reviews. We can then start to understand, predict and prevent these deaths.
Take, for example, the link between febrile seizures and unexplained death. Frankie suffered 12 observed febrile seizures, yet the care he received for them was not informed by detailed research. One paramedic googled what a febrile seizure was in front of Sarah, shortly after Frankie had had one. I say to the Minister that we would not accept that lack of information—that ignorance—in any other part of children’s medicine, and we should not tolerate it when the consequences can be as tragic as these. Other Members have talked about how effective research has been when dealing with SIDS. If we had the same success here, we could save the lives of 32 children a year, which is surely as good a call to action as anyone can make.
It is great to see the Minister here so early in her new role, and I warmly welcome her to it. I urge her to meet SUDC UK as soon as possible and to pull the scientific experts together to agree a national plan that provides safety for every child and answers for every parent. That must be Frankie’s legacy—it is what Sarah and all friends of Frankie deserve.
ADHD Diagnosis
Connor Rand Excerpts(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Bill Esterson
I will give way to both my hon. Friends in a moment.
A key element of the discussion is that we have to be really careful what we are calling for. That situation partly explains some of the delays: at the moment, a specialist is the only person who can give a diagnosis because of the complexities that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) just referred to.
Mr Rand
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. I met Matty on a number of occasions, like many who sit on the Labour Benches representing the north-west, and he certainly made a lasting impression on me from the few opportunities when we met.
We know that when faced with lengthy waits for an NHS diagnosis, some people with ADHD turn to shared care, receiving a private diagnosis before their care transfers back to the national health service. I have a constituent who tried to do that for her son, but her GP refuses to accept the private diagnosis and provide treatment, meaning that my constituent now faces huge treatment costs, yet just a few years earlier her other son secured a shared care arrangement with the same GP practice. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to address some of the inconsistencies in ADHD care that are caused by long waiting times?
Bill Esterson
I am glad that my hon. Friend raised that point, because one of my asks to the Minister is to iron out those inconsistencies.
Terminal Illness: Mental Health Support
Connor Rand Excerpts(6 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered mental health support for people with terminal illnesses.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I am here today because of my constituent Mike, who I am pleased to say is in the Gallery to watch the debate. In 2019, Mike experienced the devastating grief of losing a partner, but out of the trauma he is pushing for change and campaigning for better mental health support for those with terminal cancer. I pay tribute to Mike: he is a remarkable man. I thank him for bravely sharing his story with me, and I will try my best to do it justice today.
In 2016, Mike’s wife, Sarah, started to suffer with terrible pain in her back, and by the end of that year she was in constant agony. In early 2017, they found out that Sarah had lung cancer, which had spread to her spine, and she was given six months to live. A course of gruelling treatment followed, including major spinal reconstruction surgery and targeted therapy. In September 2019, Sarah succumbed to her illness, passing away a week before her 53rd birthday.
Sarah lived more than a year longer than doctors had initially predicted, and in that sense her treatment was a success, but that does not tell the whole story. There was a gaping hole in Sarah’s treatment: the lack of appropriate mental health support. Not having that support had a huge impact on Sarah’s quality of life, as well as her family and her family’s quality of life. Following her terminal diagnosis, as the devastating impact of cancer started to take its toll on her body, Sarah became deeply depressed and suffered with anxiety.
We know about the physical symptoms of cancer, such as nausea, crippling pain or a loss of mobility, and just how horrendous those symptoms are, but we talk less about the mental health effects, even though they are as common and sometimes the most crushing consequence of this awful illness. That was certainly the case with Sarah. A previously happy, outgoing and vibrant woman, who loved design, gardening and reading books, she became a shell of her former self—unwilling to go outside, not even to sit in the garden she had so lovingly cared for. She cried every day, sometimes all day, and could not eat, could not read a book and did not know what pleasure felt like. As Mike said to me the very first time we met, “Sarah disappeared into herself.” I cannot begin to imagine how hard that was or the toll it took on Sarah, Mike, her entire family and her friends.
Shamefully, Sarah never saw a psychologist or psychiatrist, and she never had a serious or rigorous mental health assessment. Sarah was offered counselling and cognitive behavioural therapy by Macmillan Cancer Support and local NHS services, but we all know the issues with those services. Waiting lists can be months long, and when Sarah did get therapy, it was often for just a few weeks at a time, before she was back on another waiting list.
Too often, as in this case, the kind of therapy offered is not appropriate for the needs of the patient. Sarah would leave her CBT sessions clutching leaflets that she was supposed to go away and read, even though she could not even look at a newspaper. She was once told to go and do some gardening when the debilitating effects of her cancer had already taken that big joy out of her life. What was needed was treatment by a psycho-oncologist—someone who would offer specialist psychological care for someone affected by cancer—but the one psycho-oncologist at her local hospital was badly overstretched and the appointment never came.
As Mike has so eloquently said, this is not a criticism of our dedicated NHS or care staff. They are not to blame for a health culture that has always been more interested in the physical than in the psychological. That deficiency, in reality, is unlikely to change without more scientists and funding bodies devoting time and cash to researching therapies to support the mental health of those with terminal illnesses. From my perspective, there seems to be precious little work being done in this area; I spoke to Macmillan and other charities ahead of this debate, and they said the same. That deficiency is despite the fact that 17% of cancer patients will be diagnosed with depression and anxiety, but almost half will not receive the treatment that they need—that must change.
I ask the Minister to seriously consider the policy suggestions made by Mike: more funding to map service provision across the national health service to identify good and bad practice, including an assessment of the effectiveness of current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on mental health support for the terminally ill; more funding to recruit more psycho-oncologists to work in our palliative care system; a commitment to an immediate baseline mental health assessment for patients upon their diagnosis with a terminal illness and, if needed, a clear pathway for referral to an experience psycho-oncologist on diagnosis of terminal illness. I believe that those are practical and, I hope, achievable steps that could make a real difference to cancer patients.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
I thank the hon. Member for giving us an opportunity to talk about this incredibly important issue. I agree 100% with the recommendations that he is making. I also point to the important work that hospices do. A lot of hospices, such as Weldmar and Julia’s House in West Dorset, provide mental health-led hospice services to communities, yet, at the same time, are under extraordinary funding pressures. Weldmar has a £1 million deficit; Julia’s House gets just 8% of its funding from the NHS, yet it is relieving pressure on the NHS. Does the hon. Member think that, along with his recommendations, a sustainable funding model for hospices providing the kind of care that he is talking about is important?
Mr Rand
I am sure that there is recognition on both sides of the House of the incredibly important work that hospices do to support patients in our communities. I am sure that the hospices that the hon. Member mentioned will be grateful for the recognition of their important work. Of course we need to ensure sustainable funding. As he will be aware, this Government have already invested a significant amount in hospice care, but I appreciate the pressures that many hospices still find themselves under.
I would be grateful if the Minister would meet Mike and me to discuss Mike’s policy recommendations in more detail and to see if they could form part of the Government’s welcome review of palliative care services and the framework that has been announced. It feels particularly pressing at this juncture, as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill progresses through Parliament. Although I support that legislation, I worry about the prospects of those with a terminal diagnosis. I am sure that the Minister will want to reflect on that in his response.
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for sharing the story of Sarah and Mike—he did it justice. It is really important to think about the whole care of people going through a terminal diagnosis—both the patient and their loved ones. We should make sure that the mental health of those people who are supporting the person going through a terminal illness is also considered in this conversation.
Mr Rand
I could not agree more that throughout treatment we need a whole-person approach. It is the stated aim of the Government to develop that offer in our communities and in our national health service. The extraordinary toll it takes on friends and families is something that our health system should think more about, and we should give more consideration to.
The issue is so important that if we do not get it right, as I think Members across the House would reflect, the consequences may be tragic for people going through their most difficult times and experiences. For Sarah and Mike and the countless other people touched by cancer, I urge the Minister to work with me and Mike on improving mental health support for those with a terminal diagnosis.
Sir Jeremy Wright (in the Chair)
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for opening the debate. I say this mostly for the benefit of those in the Public Gallery, but we are expecting votes in the main Chamber soon. If that happens, I will suspend the sitting and we will reconvene when the votes are complete. I call Jim Shannon.
Sir Jeremy Wright (in the Chair)
The hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale West may have a very brief word.
Mr Rand
I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate in a really constructive way, and I hope that we can work together on both sides of this House to tackle this important issue. I am incredibly grateful to the Minister for his response, and for offering a meeting with myself and Mike. Of course, my last thanks go to Mike for sharing his story with me in such a personal and considered way.
Sir Jeremy Wright (in the Chair)
I am very grateful to the hon. Member.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered mental health support for people with terminal illnesses.
Budget Resolutions
Connor Rand Excerpts(6 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Gerald Jones (Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare) (Lab)
I rise to welcome the Budget. We know that we have experienced difficult economic times of late, but despite that we have a Budget that is both solid and fair. Wages have grown more since the start of this Parliament than since 2010, and interest rates have gone down five times since the general election.
I particularly welcome the measures that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has taken to help with the cost of living and energy bills—and, of course, the decision to scrap the two-child benefit cap and raise half a million children out of poverty. Earlier this year I hosted a roundtable discussion with key stakeholders in Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare. Housing providers, Citizens Advice, food banks and others came to Merthyr Town football club to meet me and my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Alison McGovern), who was at that time the Employment Minister and consulting on the child poverty strategy.
The key message from that event was that the single most important thing the Government could do to alleviate child poverty was scrap the cap. I am so pleased that the Chancellor listened and took action. In my constituency alone around 2,590 children face a better future and will have better life chances due to this decision.
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
Like my hon. Friend, I have heard relentlessly from organisations about this. Trafford South food bank, G-Force and other organisations in my constituency, and national charities, have all spoken about the importance of lifting children out of poverty and the impact that the measure will have, including for 1,000 children in my constituency. Does my hon. Friend find it surprising that Conservative Members have not heard those calls from their constituency organisations?
Gerald Jones
I thank my hon. Friend and could not agree more. All I can say is, we see that every day in our constituencies, so they must be walking around with their eyes closed and their ears shut. Action needed to be taken, and I am so glad that this Labour Government have taken that action. In addition, freezing fuel duty, increasing the minimum wage and the living wage and increasing pensions by 4.8% in April will help reduce the pressures on many of my constituents.
Over many months, I have been working with dozens of my constituents and the coalfield group of MPs to make the case for changes to the British Coal staff superannuation scheme. The £2.3 billion transferred back to the pension pot will mean about £100 a week for around 376 BCSSS members in Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare, building on the decision in last year’s Budget to right a similar injustice with the mineworkers’ pension fund. Mineworkers powered our country and many Welsh communities for decades. I am proud that this Labour Government are doing right by them.
Oral Answers to Questions
Connor Rand Excerpts(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Kinnock
I am very pleased that the measures we have taken have provided financial support. I absolutely recognise the challenging financial position, and I would of course be more than happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that further.
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
The Minister for Secondary Care (Karin Smyth)
We are committed to transforming cancer care, having already invested £70 million in new radiotherapy machines to help patients to be treated more quickly. We are investing £26 million in the NHS, opening community diagnostic centres in the evening and at weekends to catch cancer early, and our national cancer plan will have patients at its heart—from referral to diagnosis, treatment and ongoing care.
Mr Rand
My constituent Mike lost his wife to cancer, but as well as battling the physical symptoms, she faced devastating mental health effects, becoming deeply depressed after her terminal diagnosis. Despite that, she never received appropriate mental health support, and this significant issue for cancer patients should be addressed as part of our welcome reforms to palliative care. Could the relevant Minister meet me and Mike to discuss his campaign to improve mental health support for those with a terminal diagnosis?
Karin Smyth
Of course, I am sorry to hear about the loss of my hon. Friend’s constituent’s wife, and our thoughts are with him and his family. My hon. Friend raises an excellent point, and we are supporting people with cancer who are experiencing poor mental health care by expanding access to psychological therapies through NHS talking therapies. I am sure that the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), will be happy to talk to him as she develops her cancer plan to ensure that these issues are incorporated.
Stephen Kinnock
We have the interim reforms, and our response on those will be published very soon. We are working on the long-term reform of the NHS dentistry contract with the British Dental Association, and I would be happy to keep the hon. Lady updated on our progress.
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
International Men’s Day
Connor Rand Excerpts(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
It is great to contribute to this debate and follow so many powerful speakers. I commend the Government for marking International Men’s Day by launching their men’s health strategy. This initiative will not just change lives but save lives. As part of International Men’s Day, like many of my hon. Friends I have been working with the group Dad Shift, which is campaigning to improve the UK’s paternity leave offer—which quite frankly is itself a bad joke as the worst in Europe.
Speaking of bad jokes, I will follow on from some of my hon. Friends, though I have to admit to being slightly hesitant to include a dad joke in my speech, because the last time I tried a joke it went badly wrong. It was a joke about Chewbacca, but I messed it up. It was Wookie error, and one that I will not repeat. [Laughter.] I know what Members are thinking: “Stick to the day job!”
I am lucky enough to have two amazing jobs. One is being the Member of Parliament for Altrincham and Sale West, and the other is being a dad to two young boys. The latter was made so much easier by having access to paternity leave. It meant that in those early, formative and precious—and slightly less precious—moments that come with fatherhood, I could be there as a new parent for my boys and my partner Catherine. We were a team on that journey together.
However, one third of new dads do not take any leave at all when their children are born, and we have to be frank and honest about why that is. It is because they cannot afford it. Our statutory paternity leave of just two weeks at less than half the minimum wage, and with nothing for the self-employed, shows a system and a settlement that is fundamentally broken. I am delighted that this Government have the chance to fix that, through both the Employment Rights Bill, with the granting of the day one right, and the parental leave review. We must fix it for mums, who are shouldering an unequal caring burden and responsibility, and we must fix it for dads, who are having to lose out on time with their new children.
Some 90% of dads want to play a more active role in their children’s lives, but as polling from More in Common reveals, too many men believe that a life where hard work means security for their family is out of reach. What better way to tackle disillusionment than by improving paternity leave and showing that Governments not only listen but can make the lives of men across our country better? Supporting dads to be the best parents that they can be will go some way to creating the role models that younger boys need when growing up. In a world of Andrew Tates, online misogyny and grievance politics, that feels more important than ever. We should want young boys to grow up with fathers who are active in their lives, who are comfortable enough to embrace being a truly equal co-parent and who feel like hard work brings rewards, support and security for their family as part of the social contract in our country. The Government have a responsibility to help to create these conditions.
On International Men’s Day, I pay tribute to all the dads out there doing their best, to all the organisations across Altrincham and Sale West, such as Andy’s Man Club and Home-Start, and to all the organisations across our country who are helping dads to be the best they can be. I urge us all to work together on creating a society to support dads to be the best possible role models for their children.
Eating Disorders: Prevention of Deaths
Connor Rand Excerpts(9 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)
First, I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley) on securing this debate and—if he will permit me—on his strength and resilience as a parent.
There have already been many profoundly moving contributions, and I think everyone here understands that the care and support for those with eating disorders, and for their families, are not good enough. The average wait of three and a half years between onset and start of treatment is not acceptable. In the Government’s 10-year plan for the NHS, where we are delivering record investment and groundbreaking reform, we must ensure that eating disorder services are part of that agenda.
There are great services out there, leading the way in showing what change for patients could look like. I am fortunate to have one of those in my constituency. The ABBI eating disorder clinic in Altrincham is an outstanding facility offering specialist day care and intensive out-patient services. It is an alternative to far more costly in-patient care, and in practice it means that patients remain at home with their family support networks around them. That is what patients want and what their families want—and it is what works. Such services change lives and save lives, but they face huge issues with highly fragmented commissioning. This disjointed commissioning creates significant inefficiencies; we need a change in commissioning to ensure proper pathways for patients and early intervention.
In this debate, we must also look at what young people are exposed to online, with one in three adolescents saying that they have engaged in disordered eating behaviours due to social media content. I look forward to hearing the Minister set out in more detail the good work the Government have already done, and what we will be doing to build on that success to prevent tragic deaths caused by eating disorders.