To : The Editor (30/03/10)
Dear Sir
re Podiatry Services

Podiatry, many will ask what this is but many elderly people will be only too aware of this essential foot care service. It's so important that the Department of Health website describes podiatry thus: "Adequate foot care services not only lessen the pain and discomfort of large numbers of elderly people but increase the mobility of many, thus preventing dependence and the ensuing demands on other services. Therefore foot care services should be regarded as an economy rather than an expense.".

It's strange then that from 4 October last the busy Day Clinics in Peel and Laxey have been closed and patients now have to go to Douglas. The Peel Day Centre close to the Corrin Memorial Home provided an easy access point for I believe several hundred people: now these patients have either to find their way to Douglas or take advantage of free transport provided by the government in cases of difficulty.

These changes we are told are a result of a review to ensure services are fit for purpose and are aimed at significant efficiency improvements and higher standards. To date, patients I've spoken to have noticed no difference in the excellent service but are suffering great inconvenience at having to attend the remote clinic in Douglas, via either protracted public transport or relying on relatives, or indeed the state, to get them there. What was once an easy visit has now become far more complex and time-consuming.

In addition to this, despite the government's much vaunted green credentials how can it make sense that instead of one person, presumably driving from Douglas to Peel to man the clinic, 300+ people on a two or three-monthly cycle now have to find their way to Douglas, many using private or subsidised transport.

Podiatry is not rocket science and I suspect no savings accrue to these changes. In fact it will probably cost more and may deter a number of elderly patients from attending the clinic, which may have adverse and more costly consequences for the Department of Health. Surely it would have been right to consult the people affected before arbitrarily removing the service.

As of last week the Department of Health website had not been updated and a number of individuals I have spoken to received no advice on availability of free transport, just the fact their appointments were now in Douglas. If this is the way government is setting about making efficiency savings then I am in fear of the outcome.

Geoffrey Boot
Ballagarraghyn
St Johns