AFTER reading the letter in regard to having Royal Preston Hospital set up as a major trauma centre, I am confused at the contradiction of the writer.

They state that they are a Chorley resident, like myself, and that if one of their relatives or friends had a serious accident and was 'on the brink of death' they would rather have them sent 10 miles for assistance, rather than receive almost immediate aid in Chorley?

This I find very confusing. If I was in that position, then I would prefer to have them sent straight to Chorley because, even on clear roads, it would still take 10 minutes to reach Preston, which in fact may be the difference between life and death.

The writer states the importance of medical attention to the trauma patient, yet would risk allowing the patient to 'wait' for emergency intervention?

As for the choice of 'dilution of all equipment and medical staff' with two sites or a 'concentration of equipment and specialist doctors' for RPH, it sounds more like the trust is trying to save funds rather than increase facilities for the benefit of the patients they treat.

At the end of the day, it is the patient concerned that should benefit and not the management! Personally, I would prefer to have my life secured before going for a 'short drive'.

Ms A King, Via email.