Society and members' fury at Holby City clangers
 SoR members and the Society have complained to the BBC about the content of a recent edition of Holby City which, in the words of one member, "was entirely inappropriate".
Two scenes in the episode of the popular BBC1 drama screened on 6 June have caused radiographers to act with fury. Richard Evans, the Society's chief executive officer, has written to the programme's executive producer and made a protest through the Corporation's complaints procedure.
"The most serious error was during the scene when a nurse lay down with a child in a CT scanner," Richard pointed out in his letter. "No member of staff should ever be allowed to do this under any circumstances. The nurse would be exposed to an unnecessary dose of radiation, which is not allowed under the regulations that govern the use of radiation in a healthcare or medical setting."
The chief exec's concern and that of members who have contacted the Society is that whilst the storyline is contrived to provide a 'twist' to the drama, it sends a highly inaccurate message to anxious parents and young patients. In his letter, Richard points out that "If a qualified radiographer had been present to operate the CT scanner, which is what happens in real life, they would not have allowed the nurse to take the action that she did."
The other scene in the show that was incorrect was an operating theatre sequence where a nurse was asked to undertake fluoroscopy by the maverick surgeon (Adrian Edmondson), who was acting incorrectly and
unethically on a number of levels. Richard comments, "I am sure the Holby City script writers would point out that a breach of the radiation exposure regulations was just another of his misdemeanours but, to be fair to the nursing profession and the other health and medical professionals present, it is is extremely unlikely that someone would not have challenged and, ultimately, stopped the procedure. In addition, in real life a radiographer should have been present to have undertaken the fluoroscopy."
Richard Evans finishes his letter to the BBC by saying, "My over-riding impression was of how far the standards of BBC hospital drama have fallen. There was a time when health professionals used to be impressed by the standards of script and detail.
"The sad thing is that many viewers will have their expectations shaped by what they see. Do you still employ advisers to provide technical knowledge and to ensure scripts are accurate? If so, it is time to employ some new or additional ones. The people involved in this instance are either unable to advise appropriately on the use of x-rays in imaging, or their views were totally disregarded in the interest of dramatic effect."
Members who contacted the Society were as scathing in their condemnation of the programme. Sue Morgan at the University of Central England commented, "Will patients now expect 'two for one' on all CT scans? What a way to reduce waiting lists! Once more, radiographers have been ignored and insulted by a hospital drama. Members of the public will yet again see us purely as button pushers whose role could be undertaken by any doctor or nurse who happens to be passing."
Her comments were echoed by a senior radiographer: "We as a profession and within the NHS work hard to keep the public informed about radiation safety, the need for proper procedures and general patient care. Unfortunately, 20 minutes of a well watched drama was so inaccurate, particularly the CT episode."
The Society is waiting for a response from the BBC.
Is it really that important how the work of radiographers is depicted in a soap opera?
Dominic Deeson, the publisher of Synergy, puts the alternative view that may be everyone is getting excited about not very much.
'Holby City' is a soap. It's drama, not a documentary. It's entertainment pure and simple (or stultifyingly banal, depending on your taste). Hollywood is infamous for throwing accuracy out with the bath water in film after film after film. They have short changed every profession, rewritten the rules of science, changed the course of history and cheesed off every religion there is. Should we be that worried if the Beeb doesn't let the facts get in the way of a 'good story'? Would any of us actually be that interested if the police service jumped up and down claiming 'foul' over the frankly ridiculous notion that batty Miss Marple would be invited to trample across a crime scene, whilst the incompetent in charge puffs on his old briar, shakes his head and smiles indulgently at the old girl's antics?
We know that these are cheap dramas, frequently with a storyline that is as thin as the production budget. If the BBC (and other channels) took notice every time a profession throw their arms and voices up in righteous indignation, the cumulative effect would be boring programmes. Because that's what 'real life' is: very boring. Doesn't matter whether you are a rocket scientist, brain surgeon, dustman, or radiographer, the day-to-day is pretty darn humdrum. And humdrum doesn't make good telly.
I do understand the concern that patients and carers may "get the wrong idea" and think that a pretty nurse will lie down with them if they are feeling a bit scared but we all know what patients can be like, with or without the help of BBC scriptwriters. They get crazy ideas either because they've seen it on the telly, or because their next door neighbour swore blind that's how her daughter's CT scan was done. What do you do in such circumstances? You gently tell them that that is not how a CT procedure is carried out and they don't really believe everything they see on the 'box', do they?
Every single edition of 'Holby City', 'Casualty', 'House', 'Emergency Ward 10', 'Dr Kildare' and 'ER' have been and are factual disaster areas. The Society and numerous members have highlighted the two radiography related clangers in 'Holby', but there were at least a dozen others in that hour episode and there are every week. The 6 June show was not a special case. Every member of the radiography profession should be grateful because there were no 'radiographers' present during either scene. The absence of an IR(ME)R trained professional actually gives credibility to what happened.
Finally, what about the professionals who, week after week on 'Holby', are presented as loud-mouthed, clinically incompetent, immature, bed-hopping, cowardly slovens? Funny thing is that doctors and nurses consistently top public polls as being two of the most loved and highly regarded professions, in spite of 'Holby', Casualty' and all the other fantasies on prime time television.
Has Dominic got a point - or has he missed it completely? Tell the Society and other members what you think. E-mail holby@sormail.co.uk. We'll use the best comments on sor.org and print them in Synergy News.
Back | Top
|
