I have it in writing from The Alfred that if I am able to secure a neuro referral, I can continue my vascular treatment (as I've already been diagnosed by venogram, and have commenced a vascular maintenance plan with them).
I also have it in writing that The Alfred are not able to treat a new vascular problem I suffer, behind my knee. This is because I have MS. The letter strongly implies I will need a neuro referral for this too.
All in writing from The Alfred...not just Frayne's throwaway words that she drizzles out to patients behind closed doors.
I personally know of one person (an Alfred liberato...already liberated...just seeking follow up treatment) who has accessed angioplasty at The Alfred in recent weeks as was able to secure a neuro referral (from a semi-retired neuro who is not accepting new patients).
Either Frayne has crossed wires, or the Interventional Radiology team does. It's amazing that Frayne says she knows so much about what was decided in this meeting, if she made herself absent at the criticial time.
I'd really like her to get online and blog, or contribute to some of the public discussion - really stand by her opinions. Put them out there in black and white.
Anyway - thanks for the snapshot into how the members at The "Ethics Committee" operate. They need to get used to explaining themselves...they'll be feeling some heat shortly
BTW - love your blog, thanks for sending the link. I'll keep reading this in the future