‘He’ll never meet his unborn son’: Mother’s heartbreak after partner dies from meningitis that was dismissed as ‘swollen joints’
A mother has spoken of her heartbreak that her partner will never meet his unborn son, after he died from meningitis.
Marciano Nolan, 46, contracted a rare form of the disease last month but medics dismissed his symptoms as swollen joints and later said it was simply a virus ‘doing the rounds’. His condition rapidly deteriorated and he died four days after he first felt ill.
The devoted father leaves behind three children and his partner of 14 years, Clare Streeter, who is 22 weeks pregnant with the couple’s fourth child.
She told MailOnline: ‘The 20-week scan a couple of weeks ago broke my heart. I could see the baby’s face on the scan and it looked exactly like Marciano.
Marciano Nolan, 46, died after contracting a rare form of meningitis that was dismissed as a virus. His partner Clare today spoke of her heartbreak that he will never meet his unborn son
‘It was like seeing a ghost. He should have been there and I am heartbroken he will never meet his little boy.’
Mr Nolan died at Glan Clwyd Hospital in Rhyl, North Wales, on January 6 from meningococcal septicaemia.
Mr Nolan, who worked in the catering industry, fell ill on January 2. He complained of severe headaches, dehydration and aversion to light as his condition worsened.
The next day, his joints had become swollen and painful, so much so that he was unable to get dressed or brush his teeth.
Ms Streeter, 29, sent him to Glan Clwyd’s A&E department in Rhyl, North Wales. She said: ‘My friend took him to the accident and emergency department who sent him away, as they said he wasn’t an emergency. Instead, he was sent to an out of hours doctor.
‘The doctor agreed he had swollen joints and sent him home with very strong painkillers.
‘He went to bed when he got home and about an hour later, I went up to see if he wanted any food or drink.
‘He said he had a headache and had didn’t want the light on.’
By mid afternoon, Mr Nolan began vomiting for a number of hours.
‘I thought it was simply a side-effect of the medication he’d been given,’ recalls Ms Streeter.
When his condition began to deteriorate further in the middle of the evening, she dialled 999.
‘By the time they arrived, Maz was very confused, dehydrated and still vomiting and had a temperature of 39.9. It was terrifying,’ she said.
‘Even then, they were unsympathetic and still didn’t want to take him to hospital – they said there were a lot of viruses going around. Eventually, they agreed.
‘At 11pm I rang the hospital to see how he was and they told me to ring in a couple of hours as he was still waiting to be seen.
‘By 1am, I just knew something was wrong and rushed up to the hospital, where I saw him being rushed in for a CT scan.
‘The doctors then came and told me he was in ITU.
‘I sat with him all night and they tried so hard to save him, but it was just too aggressive. I could tell he was gone.
Mr Nolan died in the early hours of Sunday, January 6th.
‘They told me he had died from meningococcal meningitis and septicaemia and brain stem cell damage,’ Ms Streeter said.
Father, 49, died from heart attack after GP failed to investigate chest pains THREE times
A father who repeatedly went to his GP with chest pains could have been saved if a doctor had read his tests properly, an inquest heard.
Dr Adekemi Osadiya [a Nigerian name] failed to examine George Black, 49, after a practice nurse flagged up abnormalities on his ECG examination.
Mr. Black attended the Temple Hill Surgery, in Dartford, Kent, three times complaining of chest pain but was each time sent away without being properly investigated.
North Kent Coroner’s Court heard he died from a heart attack just eight days after his final visit to the practice on January 9, 2012 complaining of indigestion.
Coroner Roger Hatch said the surgery’s lead GP, Dr Arun Kothari, had agreed further tests should have been arranged – and at the very least it should have been arranged for Mr Black to go to the local hospital. However ‘this, for whatever reason, was not done,’ said the coroner.
The inquest heard how the practice nurse at the surgery carried out an ECG examination on Mr Black. Dr Osadiya admitted this showed an abnormality to Mr. Black’s heart.
His records also showed that both his parents and his two brothers had suffered heart problems.
The coroner told Dr Osadiya: ‘You knew of the complaints of chest pains, and that he had complained about it before. ‘We also know there was an abnormality found by you in the ECG.’
Dr Osadiya replied: ‘I am sorry, but he came in for a medical. Looking through the medical records I do not have any record he had had chest pains before.’
Mr Hatch asked: ‘Didn’t you think you should have asked for further tests to be conducted?’
Dr Osadiya said she would have checked the results of the blood tests carried out that day but didn’t because she only worked at the surgery for three weeks.
She added she hadn’t spoken to the patient about his condition, she said the practice nurse had provided a ‘very good history’ of what he had.
The nurse had told her Mr Black had complained of chest pain three or four times a day.
Mr Hatch replied: ‘She is not a doctor. Why not take two minutes to go and ask him?’
Dr Osadiya added that her opinion was that the chest pain was caused by a lung disease identified at the post mortem as possibly mesothelioma (cancer of the lining of the lung due to asbestos exposure).
The coroner said: ‘I am recording a verdict of misadventure as the result of the failure to further investigate the ECG, given the family history and the chest pains about which he complained in November, on December 19 and on January 9.’
Mr. Black’s family later said staff at the surgery should be ‘hung out to dry’.
His daughter Kelly-Ann Black, 31, from Dartford, Kent, said: ‘My dad is lying is his grave because they didn’t check properly. Someone should deal with that. They should be hung out to dry.’
The family is now considering making a formal complaint to the General Medical Council and they are also taking legal advice.
But after the inquest Dr Osadiya said that with the benefit of hindsight she would have done exactly the same again.
She said: ‘There was no evidence of heart disease apart from tension which could be due to slightly enlarged heart.’ ‘I would still have done the same thing going by his history.’
British pupil, 13, excluded from school for wearing ‘dangerous’ traditional tie instead of a clip-on
A schoolboy has been punished for refusing to wear a clip-on tie because he wants to wear a smarter traditional one – which breaches ‘health and safety rules’.
Max Richmond, 13, was put into isolation for a day, for wearing the proper tie at Colne Community School in Brightlingsea, Essex.
The 1,438-pupil school insists pupils wear clip-on ties for health and safety reasons – but Max says the clip-on ones are uncomfortable and childish.
He prefers to wear a traditional tie of exactly the same design, given to him by a neighbour.
He was given work to complete on his own in a small cubicle for continuing to wear the tie.
Max, of Waterside, Brightlingsea, said: ‘It seems bizarre and unnecessary especially over something like the tie I was wearing. ‘I like wearing a real tie because it feels proper.
‘People have worn them for generations, and if you are not wearing one during secondary school then you are never going to learn the necessary skills for when you go into the world of work.
‘When you are wearing a clip-on tie it is hard to be taken seriously, especially when you go to competitions against other schools – it feels foolish, and childish.’
On their website in 2009, the Health and Safety Executive said it was a ‘myth’ that health and safety bans traditional school ties.
The school has agreed to review the policy.
Nardeep Sharma, headteacher, said the rule was introduced about three years ago to support the health and safety of young people. He said: ‘This was in line with the practice in most secondary schools nationally. ‘The policy can only be changed by governors and a parent has requested the governors review this policy, which the school has agreed to do.’
Max said he welcomed the review and hoped the governors would take his points on board.
Roger Bibbings, occupational safety adviser for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said schools can make pupils wear clip-on ties, but should not cite health and safety grounds.
He said: .It might be a sensible precaution if a school insists on pupils wearing ties while handling rotating machinery, such as in a school workshop, but for any other reason you cannot say this policy was required under health and safety law.’
The Health and Safety Executive’s website says: ‘Quite rightly, few parents would see wearing school ties as a safety issue. ‘After all, millions of kids have been wearing ties for years without any real problems.
‘Taking simple precautions during laboratory work or around machinery makes sense. But if the concern is about kids fighting, although clip-on ties may help, the real issue is discipline.
‘So no, we don’t ban school ties – it’s down to the school to make decisions about uniform, not HSE.’
A spokesman for the Health and Safety Executive added: ‘It seems to us to be a disproportionate response.’
Linda Painter, of the Schoolwear Association, said that producers had reported a ‘strong trend’ in school opting for clip on ties, largely because every tie looks uniform and neat, but also because it means that the ties do not get wrapped around students’ necks.
She said: ‘Lots of school do have clip on ties, it’s a strong trend. It’s not definitively about health and safety.
‘Obviously they can come off quite easily and don’t get stuck round children’s necks, but clip-ons do mean that all the students’ ties look the same and look smart.’
Town torn over celebrations of Enid Blyton’s ‘racist’ work
Blyton will still be delighting children long after the nonentities criticizing her are dead. She was not a social critic. She just wrote as a person of her times — times that were not as hypersensitive as Leftist do-gooders have made them today
Enid Blyton’s home town is split over a planned festival to celebrate her books, with some locals claiming they are racist and offensive.
Organisers are planning a week of activities honouring the writer who died in 1968, aged 71, and want to erect a plaque where her house once stood.
But critics are opposing the move to honour the woman who became famous for her Noddy and Famous Five books.
Many of her 600 books have, since her death, been branded as racist or sexist and have had to be updated.
The golliwog owner of the Toytown garage in her Noddy Books has been replaced by a “Mr Sparks,” while her work The Three Golliwogs is now The Three Bold Pixies.
The festival is being held in June in Beaconsfield, Bucks to mark the 75th anniversary since she moved to the town.
One opponent is architect Anthony Mealing, 63, who has described some of Blyton’s work as “racist and offensive.”
He is campaigning to stop the festival going ahead. He said: “My grandmother, Annie Grigg, taught at a school near here where they had rather racist Enid Blyton stories issued free by the author to all the pupils in the 1950s.
“The moral of one of the stories is: Don’t leave any money around if there are any black children about as they will steal it. “She was anti-semitic and very racist. People don’t believe me because she is too high an icon, but she was.”
Mr Mealing, from High Wycombe, said he did not want to see a plaque erected. He urged residents: “Research the subject as you might find things you did not expect.”
Mr Mealing’s view was criticised on the internet, with one resident writing: “Enid Blyton was a fantastic story writer who deserves her place in history.
She should be celebrated.” But a supporter of Mr Mealing wrote: “For years there have been persistent rumours, based on recollections by some now elderly folk, that Enid B wasn’t a very nice lady.
“One of her daughters also had a lot to say, criticising her too. Two TV documentaries about her also cast doubt about her character.” Former librarian Kari Dorme, the coordinator of the festival being organised by the Beaconsfield Society, says Blyton’s original works should be accepted for the time in which they were written.
She said: “In the early 1990’s, some of her publishers made certain text changes – mostly to bring her stories into line with modern thought and sensitivities, particularly with regard to what some construed as snobbish, racist or sexist attitudes.
“Even names were modernised. You have to accept them in the time in which they were written, which was at least 60 years ago.
“Her books still sell at the rate of six to seven million copies a year, in more than 40 languages. Enid Blyton is a marvellous story teller — a real page turner.
“I feel that recognition should be given to the great contribution that she has made to children’s literacy.”
Blyton first moved to a house in the town called Green Hedges with her husband, Major Hugh Pollock.
The author, who later divorced and remarried, spent most of her life there until she moved into a London nursing home, where she died.
The house was demolished in the early 1970s and the site is now called Blyton Close.
I resigned for linking Nazism to Socialism… but it’s true
Rachel Frosh resigned earlier this week for linking Nazism to Socialism, but here she makes the case that it remains very much a valid view. Rachel Frosh has been a doctor in the NHS for over 20 years. Until her resignation, Frosh was also the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner in Hertfordshire
I have been frustrated in the last two days that I have not been fully able to answer the press and Twitter enquiries about that retweet – where I retweeted someone else’s link to Nazism and Socialism.
I am conscious that the Police and Crime Commissioner needs to have constructive working relations with local politicians of all parties. Working for him has made it difficult to answer the questions about why I retweeted the comment in the first place. So I have therefore resigned – because he needs to get on with his job, and I want to answer these questions, and also be able to comment on national political issues.
So, my full answer is this:
First of all, I don’t remember retweeting it, and I do believe most Labour politicians to be honourable decent people who do not have any truck with the politics of hate. The modern Labour party bears no resemblance to the BNP or similar parties.
However, there is an accepted mainstream view that the origins of Nazism lie in Socialism, or that they have common roots. Nobel Prize winning economist Friedrich Hayek described this his book “The Road to Serfdom”. Even the Wikipedia entry says on the topic “Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism was a capitalist reaction against socialism, instead arguing that fascism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and the power of the state over the individual.”
The subtitle of the 1976 edition of The Road to Serfdom, is “A Classic Warning Against the Dangers to Freedom Inherent in Social Planning.” Hayek argued that socialism undermines human liberty and, if pursued far enough, must result in tyranny.
Other articles on the roots of Nazism and Hayek’s commentary are here, here, here and more on Hayek himself here.
This matters because in recent years we have seen some electoral gains by the BNP, even winning two European parliamentary seats. It is important to understand why, to prevent it from happening again. Commentators state that most BNP votes come from disaffected Labour supporters, not from other parties. It is important to make sure that this doesn’t happen again.
Others such as Iain Dale argue that the BNP is a left wing fascist party. His full comments on it in 2009 were:
“In a Tweet earlier this morning Plaid Cymru AM Bethan Jenkins described a comment by Michael Rock., chairman of Conservative Future, that the BNP is “left wing”, as a “disgrace”. I looked up Rock’s comments and can’t really see how any sane person could disagree with them.
“The consistent miss-labelling of extremist parties is very damaging to liberal democracy, as it creates false tensions and misaligns people with causes they do not understand fully. I’ve yet to meet a Tory who believes in clamping down on free-trade and the nationalisation of private companies. The BNP are both racist and fascist: all fascist parties have left wing tendencies as they predominantly believe in nationalisation, collectivism and forbid free expression, which makes fascism the very antipathy of right-of-centre politics.”
I can understand why those on the left don’t wish to be branded in the same political mindset as the BNP. Now they know how those of us on the right feel. But the fact remains that BNP beliefs DO have more in common with Socialism than with Conservatism – centralised command control, trade tariffs, state owned businesses … I could go on. I struggle to think of a single issue which joins the BNP and mainstream conservatism. The Nazis were called National Socialists for a reason. Fascism is invariably described as a creed of the right. It isn’t. As with the BNP, fascism has far more in common with the left, at least in political theoretical terms.
I say this not to whip us some “you’re more fascist than me” type argument between left and right, but merely to explain to Bethan Jenkins why I am bemused by her disgust.”
Iain Dale has a point.
My considered view is that the origins of Nazism do lie in traditional socialism, and when the BNP do well, it is with disaffected Labour voters.
That does not mean that people in the Labour party or any other mainstream party have views that are in any way akin to the BNP or other racist parties. They should be placed apart from other parties on the spectrum – but it is still important to understand the origins of any support they have, or used to have to ensure such parties never gain power again.
Yes to free trade with the US – no to all the other EU guff
An EU trade deal with America would demonstrate the pointless nature of European bureaucracy
No wonder the British economy is struggling. Aggregated figures released yesterday by the European Commission show that even the mighty German economy contracted by more than ours in the final quarter of last year, with the eurozone as a whole down 0.6 per cent on the previous quarter.
Desperate for initiatives that might provide growth and jobs, European politicians are prepared to clutch at anything. The prospect of a “game-changing” trade pact with the US is one such straw. Anyone would think they’d found the Holy Grail, to judge by the squeals of delight emanating from the EU’s high command. “Together we will form the largest trade zone in the world,” trumpeted José Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission. “It is a boost to our economies that doesn’t cost a cent of taxpayer money.” That there might actually be opportunities for growth that don’t involve hosing the economy down with vast amounts of public money seems to have come as a revelation to Mr Barroso, but let’s not be churlish.
Free trade with the US is a goal Britain has long championed, and with the breakdown of more global, multilateral trade liberalisation talks, this seems a very welcome second best. To see the EU finally back the cause with such enthusiasm is indeed a breakthrough. From an inward-looking, defensive approach to the challenges of globalisation, Europe seems finally ready to embrace the 21st century.
Yet even assuming the talks are successful, don’t expect anything transformational. The European Commission estimates that agreement “could” bring an overall increase in EU GDP of 0.5 per cent a year by 2027. This is plainly not to be sneezed at, but it is hardly going to revolutionise Europe’s prospects, still less is it going to lift either continent out of the present economic funk.
As it happens, the sort of full-frontal trade barriers immortalised by the notorious Smoot-Hawley tariffs of the inter-war years don’t exist any more – at least between Europe and the US. Today’s protectionism takes subtler forms; it’s mainly in discriminatory regulation and state subsidy. To get genuine free trade, you need common regulation and either an end to subsidies for agriculture and industry or at least a shared framework for them. Understandably this has proved hard to achieve – or as Simon Evenett, Professor of International Trade at the University of St Gallen in Switzerland, puts it: “There has never been much appetite from business for bearing the costs of switching to a rival set of rules.”
What gives some reason to suppose the talks might succeed this time is that both sides have broadly agreed to park the more sensitive issues. Agriculture, traditionally one of the big sticking points, will essentially be ignored, and the two have agreed to learn to live with each other’s regulatory regimes, so that they become interchangeable. The benefits from such a limited degree of trade liberalisation are probably pretty marginal in the short term, but if the two jurisdictions can find ways of harmonising future business regulation, which is the intention, then in the long run there is plainly a bigger prize to be had.
In any case, a free-trade pact with the US seems at last to be within Europe’s reach, and two cheers for that. This in turn raises some interesting questions about the European Union. If it is possible to have free trade with the US without the paraphernalia of common government, or even completely harmonised rules and regulations, why do we need all this guff in order to have a functioning internal market in Europe? Or is it the case that without the clout that Europe gains from negotiating collectively on behalf of its 27 member states, it wouldn’t be possible to reach a mutually beneficial agreement with the US? You can read it either way.
Whatever the answers, this seems to be a case of putting the cart before the horse, for the EU is still struggling to achieve a functioning single market across key service and utility sectors – energy, finance and so on – even within its borders, let alone with the US. Part of the problem Britain has with Europe is that the rules seem to conspire to exploit UK weaknesses in traded goods, where the internal market reigns supreme, while denying it the opportunity to play to its strengths in services, where the single market still doesn’t really exist.
By far the largest part of Britain’s seemingly permanent current account deficit is with Europe. In fact, we enjoy a very substantial current account surplus with the US, so on the face of it, it would suit Britain better to cosy up to the US than to Europe, despite the latter’s proximity.
The more you look at what Britain actually gets out of Europe, the harder it is to justify continued participation. It’s more fear of European retribution that keeps us from pulling out than any measurable economic dividend.
Mr Cameron will have to make substantial progress over the next couple of years in genuinely opening up Europe to British business if he is to convince us of the merits of staying in. None the less, it would be the ultimate irony if, through Europe, we achieved trade liberalisation with America only to go sailing off in the other direction as far as the EU is concerned.
Free trade is an end in itself, and a highly desirable one that mutually benefits everyone who honestly engages in it. It’s only a shame that Europe seems determined to make it into so much more.