Today's report into the care of the elderly should be a real wake up call. About half of those surveyed reported themselves happy with the care provided. But
"the inquiry also revealed many examples of older people’s human rights being breached, including physical or financial abuse, disregarding their privacy and dignity, failing to support them with eating or drinking, treating them as if they were invisible, and paying little attention to what they want. Some were surprised that they had any choice at all as they thought they had little say in how their care was arranged.
"For example, evidence given to the Commission included a woman being left stuck on the toilet in her bathroom, as the care worker said she was too busy completing the list of care tasks to help her; and people with dementia not being prompted to eat or their food ‘hidden’ in the fridge, so they go hungry; and a woman who asked for help with her washing up and to be assisted to walk out into her garden but was given help washing herself instead."
In the 1970s I worked for two very different local authority social service departments - East Sussex and Birmingham. I also served on the social services committee of Sandwell Borough Council. During that period I heard of several complaints about the care of children and young people and those with mental health problems but very few about the care of the elderly.
The mainstay of support in the community were home helps, meals on wheels, and district nurses. In the main these were directly provided by employees contracted to the local authority or the NHS. Sometimes meals on wheels were provided by voluntary organisations such as the WRVS. Residential care was provided through local authority homes with employees again directly contracted to the local authority.
Just occasionally there would be an accusation that an employee had stolen from a client. But with the notable exception of one home in Birmingham (co-incidentally in the former Primitive Methodist ministerial training college in Quinton) I never heard of any suggestion of physical or systemic abuse.
Basically the system in operation in the 1970s actually worked mainly because it was supervised by engaged and elected local councillors who carried out their own inspections and investigated any allegations.
The modern system of outsourcing, arms length bodies and distant local government "scrutiny committees" over various private contractors is a recipe for tick box care, poor management and low wages and demotivated carers. We need to learn the lessons of the past and ditch the idea that effective care must always be provided through the "free market".
"the inquiry also revealed many examples of older people’s human rights being breached, including physical or financial abuse, disregarding their privacy and dignity, failing to support them with eating or drinking, treating them as if they were invisible, and paying little attention to what they want. Some were surprised that they had any choice at all as they thought they had little say in how their care was arranged.
"For example, evidence given to the Commission included a woman being left stuck on the toilet in her bathroom, as the care worker said she was too busy completing the list of care tasks to help her; and people with dementia not being prompted to eat or their food ‘hidden’ in the fridge, so they go hungry; and a woman who asked for help with her washing up and to be assisted to walk out into her garden but was given help washing herself instead."
In the 1970s I worked for two very different local authority social service departments - East Sussex and Birmingham. I also served on the social services committee of Sandwell Borough Council. During that period I heard of several complaints about the care of children and young people and those with mental health problems but very few about the care of the elderly.
The mainstay of support in the community were home helps, meals on wheels, and district nurses. In the main these were directly provided by employees contracted to the local authority or the NHS. Sometimes meals on wheels were provided by voluntary organisations such as the WRVS. Residential care was provided through local authority homes with employees again directly contracted to the local authority.
Just occasionally there would be an accusation that an employee had stolen from a client. But with the notable exception of one home in Birmingham (co-incidentally in the former Primitive Methodist ministerial training college in Quinton) I never heard of any suggestion of physical or systemic abuse.
Basically the system in operation in the 1970s actually worked mainly because it was supervised by engaged and elected local councillors who carried out their own inspections and investigated any allegations.
The modern system of outsourcing, arms length bodies and distant local government "scrutiny committees" over various private contractors is a recipe for tick box care, poor management and low wages and demotivated carers. We need to learn the lessons of the past and ditch the idea that effective care must always be provided through the "free market".
