"Inconsistent clinical opinion"

Having been admitted for a swelling behind my eye, I was first seen by Opthalmology who wanted me to be assessed by the medical team. The medical team ran a number of tests and decided that there was a problem but had agreed I was able to fly on my very expensive family holiday but will need to be seen by Neurology as soon as I return. Opthalmology disagreed and said I need to see Neurology urgently and should cancel my holiday. I chose to go with the Medical teams advice - thankfully - as the appointment has been set for late October which doesn't seem very urgent.

Upon phoning the hospital, I was told I was routine and this decision was based solely on the Medical Team's referral which, if correct, taking into account the opthalmology opinion then is fine but, according to the secretary of the Neurologist, this is only based on the medical team's opinion.

2 point question - why/how can 2 clinical opinions be so different and how can an appointment be made based on only half the information? When I asked the secretary this question, she said the Neurologist hadn't read my medical notes, only the referral. Is this standard practice?

Now that I have complained about the incosistent approach by the Dr's, and explained I would be taking this further, suddenly I'm offered an appointment within a week.

So now I have asked to meet with Head of Communication, Director of Medical Services, The Chief Executive and at least 1 of the consultants. Do we think NDDH will say yes?

Why should the PALS office take calls from me? Maybe the Board should hear it direct and I would gladly meet with the Chief Executive and the board so they can hear first hand about patient dissatisfaction.