Comments on: Caring Choices exposes raw emotions and an emerging consensus – what have we learnt and what next for the debate?

By: Alec, Riversway Nursing Home

Alec, Riversway Nursing Home — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:45:35 +0000

Thanks for sharing the original article and posting these comments. I am just entering this field and feel that the situation can be much improved upon. Reading the discussion here is really useful stuff for a novice like me.

Again, thanks.

Alec
Riversway Nursing Home, Bristol

By: Susie

Susie — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:08:05 +0000

Social care and Mental health carries an ongoing arguement, some may agree that care should be paid for whilst others may not. I feel that the provision of health care for sufferers or those in need should automatically be provided once needed, free of charge. Under the Natiuonal health service (NHS), the government makes it out as if all services are free; however I feel that, that is not the case. Through my experience in working within the care and mental health field, disempowerment is strongly portrayed; choices are not in option if the care providers agree that you are not in a state of mind to make your own decisions. Some services are too be paid for, although they may not completyley benefit the individual but it may add to their progess. Helping and giving back to our community and society is something I strongly believe, Gate ways were opened for us by certain individuals, some who are now old and are in need of care.

By: Debbie

Debbie — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:46:15 +0000

There isnt really an easy answer to this. Many older people that I have worked with as a Care Assistant will accept care within their own homes, as they do not wish to go into a care home. They enjoy the freedom and independance of being in their own home, and also enjoy building a relationship with the carers that visit them. However, I feel that costs and contributions are not thoroughly explained to the service users at assessment level. The huge amount of service users that have confirmed this whilst I have been working with them is vast. The majority of Service Users will keep accepting care for 13/14 weeks. Then, when the Social Worker reviews the care and the service user finds that the care is no longer free and they will be expected to contribute towards the costs, they cancel their care with immediate affect, jeapodising their health and wellbeing in order to save what little they have scraped togather over the years. I can fully understand this from my Service Users point of view. The majority of Service Users take the stance that they have paid their national insurance contributions and income tax over their working years, so the government should fund their care. The majority of Service Users also wish to be able to leave their savings to their family members upon their deaths, to give them a better life. I have met a lot of service users over the years, who feel crushed that they have to spend their savings and sell their homes to pay for their care. I can also see this from a government and a Social Workers view, having worked for Social Services myself. Social Workers come under more increased pressure every day, being put in an awkward position by the government, by having to act as financial advisors when detailing care to service users. They also have to be the bearer of bad news, when the budget is not large enough to fund a Service Users care package. There are views from all aspects, and there will never be an easy solution. Means testing is a good idea, but it does tend to be harsher on those that have saved and worked hard all of their lives. The majority of Service Users’ family members get very disillusioned by the fact that they are going out to work, and saving hard as the government advises people to do, and then they will not be able to financially support their own children in years to come as their savings will be funding their own care. There does seem to need to be a huge reform in means testing, so that it is fair on everybody. The current system does not seem to be fair, and seems discriminative in places. There are new regulatory bodies spring up all over the place to make sure that policies and procedures are adhered to. CSCI was invented a few years ago and this is enhancing the lives of many service users, by ensuring that they live by the minimum standards set out atleast. This not only applies to residential care, but also nursing care and domicillary care. This is good as it means no service user is receiving inadequate care and all service users are entitled to the same across the board, whethere they be in their own homes or within a nursing/resdiential home environment. This is a huge step forward, but the same needs to be done in the sense of the financial side of care.

By: Joan Smith

Joan Smith — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:35:06 +0000

Dementia is the same as any other Diseases, so why do people who have this disease have to pay for their care. The amount that they expect you to find is way out of most people’s capabilities. Younger people today earn much more then most of us older people have earned in a life time of work. It seems this government wants everyone to be on benefits, taking away our children’s inheritance to pay for care puts another generation on benefits. What people get for their money is unqualified staff,coming into our homes,and working in care homes, who can hardly speak a word of English. As we all know now, older people in these awful places do not have the same human rights as everyone else in this country. If you were in a hotel and paying a lot of money for the pleasure of staying there, you would expect comfort. Not so in care homes, forced to eat food you have never eaten before, if you have spirit, you will be given drugs to calm you down, no privacy, no freedom of choice and no proper care because the staff are unqualified and they become more important then the people who they are there to serve and who pay their wages because the home would be closed with out them. Would I send a member of my family into one of these institutions the answer is no!!! If I have said this before it is because nothing has changed and neither has thoughts, they will always remanin the same unitil something is done about it!!!!!

By: Margaret Birch

Margaret Birch — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:54:38 +0000

I hold the registered manager qualification ( as well as other relevent academic qualifications) and have experience in ‘very’ sheltered housing and also both local authority and private residential establishments.
In April this year my local authority revised its charges for community care. The published document detailed the ‘actual’ cost of services for home care to be: £10.86 to £16.91 per hour, resulting in a ’subsidised’ cost of £7.94 per hour.
If a residential home charges the local authority rate of approximately £390 per week (variable dependent on authority) this works out at £2.32 per hour.
Can anyone explain to me how this is supposed to work?
Home care provides personal and practical services only. Residential care has, by virtue of legislation, to provide holistic care which encompasses all areas of need.
As long as we have anomolies of this financial magnitude how on earth can we start to even discuss what future care services should look like and be funded ?
My experience tells me that a system of ‘very’ sheltered housing (villages?) allied to a ‘home for the elderly’ without the nursing or residential tag, but providing apprpopriate care when the time is right for the individual to move on to, is precisely what frail elderly people want and would be willing to pay for

By: Penny Bussey

Penny Bussey — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:13:19 +0000

The focus of all arguments seems to be concern over rising costs. The way in which care is provided at present, with massive regulation and vast tiers of management both within homes themselves and in the organisations responsible for them, distorts the picture of what care itself costs. For many years now cuts have been made at actual care level i.e. in care staff pay or numbers whilst increases in staff and pay happen at managerial level. Wwhat this has meant in Social services depts.is that the actual care is devolved to agencies . We need to strip the whole thing back to basics and reinvent it at local level, without constructing a care ‘edifice’ We `are after all talking about people who only want to be treated as individuals. I can remember a lady being forced into a care home because the local council could not provide a carer for 1/2 hour each day to help her to put her corset on. That kind of crazy economics impacts on everyone who has greater care needs and leadsto the impression of an unaffordable system.