“Phyllis Sim, 92, is blind in one eye, uses hearing aids and a Zimmer frame, leaving her virtually housebound. Yet more town hall cuts mean a vulnerable 92-year-old’s only link to the outside world will be a telephone…”It is just not right that we leave people like this, they are just saying the elderly should just sit somewhere quietly until they die,” Mrs Turner’s daughter said.” Newcastle City Council cuts spark concern for the elderly. Evening Chronicle (local newspaper).
There are always more than one side to a story, but whatever is happening in Newcastle, this looks like a public relations disaster for the telecare service.
Readers of Telecare Aware need to mobilise to save the NHS and the general independence and well-being of vulnerable people from the army of headline-chasing journalists and petty politicians who confuse care with support and wants with needs. They seem intent on preventing the closure of hospital wards that might enable many people to be treated more safely in their own homes; the same ones stop local authorities from closing old and ill-equipped care homes where people must give up independence and control in order to fall in with institutional requirements; and now they refuse to accept that sheltered housing schemes where tenants are often only in their 50s and in full-time employment don’t need, don’t want, and wont pay for a warden to check up on them 5 days a week.
This is the 21st Century and many of today’s Nonagenarians are quite well enough to look after themselves and enjoy life. Those who are assessed as needing care will receive it from professional carers who will help with specific domestic activities but then move on to other service users with high needs. Friends and family can provide the necessary social contact and quality time knowing that actual care needs are managed, and also that telecare is providing reassurance for everyone that help is close at hand in the event of an emergency.
[quote name=”Anon”]Readers of Telecare Aware need to mobilise to save the NHS and the general independence and well-being of vulnerable people from the army of headline-chasing journalists and petty politicians who confuse care with support and wants with needs. They seem intent on preventing the closure of hospital wards that might enable many people to be treated more safely in their own homes; the same ones stop local authorities from closing old and ill-equipped care homes where people must give up independence and control in order to fall in with institutional requirements; and now they refuse to accept that sheltered housing schemes where tenants are often only in their 50s and in full-time employment don’t need, don’t want, and wont pay for a warden to check up on them 5 days a week.
This is the 21st Century and many of today’s Nonagenarians are quite well enough to look after themselves and enjoy life. Those who are assessed as needing care will receive it from professional carers who will help with specific domestic activities but then move on to other service users with high needs. Friends and family can provide the necessary social contact and quality time knowing that actual care needs are managed, and also that telecare is providing reassurance for everyone that help is close at hand in the event of an emergency.[/quote]
I don’t think anyone is intent on standing in the way of progress. The press are clearly following a line of increasing concerns expressed by both patients and their families against a backdrop of reported data losses, inferior quality of service delivery and job cuts. I dont fully appreciate the extent of this individual case, however as a general comment I would caution that not all septo, octo or nonagenarians have the ability to draw upon support from family members even although those family members may live locally. Unfortunately, some family members may be unable to provide the support required due to their own financial/work and home commitments and this still leaves mum or dad with a hole in their support network. The reality is that these informal carers need confidence in the service ability to deliver care at home! Give them access to information which in turn builds confidence in the ability of the care provider to deliver quality services. It’s time for the industry to tighten standards, for stakeholders to pay a reasonable price for sub-contracted quality care and in return demand the right to audit through the proper adoption of technology solutions and sharing relevant information with all interested parties and without compromising on personal security matters.
If you actually read the story the clues are in the details.
Its a housing warden service. Not a care service. If care was delivered by the housing warden then this has been an optional extra as opposed to part of the job. This was shaped by funding.
Housing wardens aside from the paid reason they are there have been a fantastic crux for people to rely on but they are going. Those that stay are being pushed along the route/role of a caretaker/maintainer.
If a person is assessed as needing care they will be offered it. If they are independent enough they will not. If we are not careful we end up disabling people by providing care for them when they don’t need it as opposed to enabling people.
Housing wardens do not provide care. If they do then they do so at risk to themselves, the organisation they work for and the people they are ‘helping’. It really is as simple as that.
You can go on about all the other problems with the world but if the Evening Chronicle checked their facts it would realise this was a non-starter.