Do people want to be ‘vulnerable’?

It sounds as though Wales has the same system. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.

I received a phone from my LA in Scotland, to ask if I wanted a free food box, because I hadn't asked for one. I declined as I have family and friends who are helping with shopping.

I'm unsure about Wales, but Scottish and English Authorities seem to be operating differently.
People in Scotland received their letters two weeks after the English ones were sent.

I have also received a second updated sheilding letter, reinforcing the advice in the first one I received.
Then I got a follow up phone call from the practice nurse, checking that I had received my letter and that I knew what to do if I became ill.

I am being well supported, apart from getting online deliveries.

No, I'm not thinking of different categories. Local authorities have been warned that there is likely to be a need and they need to prepare themselves for it.

As far as informing local authorities about medical needs … what's supposed to happen is that GPs are sending texts or letters to all those at high risk (ie Group 1 and Group 2). The Group 1 people are sent a food box automatically, unless they opt out. Group 2 people are told to contact their local authority if they need help (or will potentially need help), which can't be provided by friends, family and local community groups. The local authority has a statutory duty to provide it. There's no breach of privacy because the "at risk" people themselves are asking for the help and allowing their names to be put on a list.

PS. It's already an issue which isn't being addressed, but the current situation is exacerbating it.

I think informing the LAs about your medical details would be a breach of privacy and I do not thinj this is happening here.

We are given contact numbers if we wish to avail ourselves of the food box but the LA does not need to know medical details.

I think you must be thinking of a different category of patients, growstuff, ie those being discharged from hospital for whatever reason and needing care at home.

Callistemon No, I don't think it's different in England, but I know a couple of local councillors and they've been told that they have to upgrade their social care because there will be people ready for discharge from hospital with no home support. Hospitals aren't supposed to discharge people, unless they know there is support. There is also an issue with people actually getting home, which is why the NHS has asked for volunteer drivers. I don't think that's been made public, although it's been written about in social care journals. As far as I can tell, there are all sorts of issues with organisation and, crucially, funding.

It must be different in England.

There are specific categories in Wales and it says nothing whatsoever about people who may be 'bed blocking'.
They may be bed blocking for reasons which are not on the list.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Why would anyone want to be in the shielding group?
I definitely didn't, but I am. I thought I might be sent the letter but I hoped I was wrong. One or two other people I know received one and a couple of days went by and I hadn't received one. I felt relieved and positive, then 2 days later there it was amongst my post. It upset me and if I'm honest it still does. It is one thing being classes as vulnerable, that in itself is surely a concern for every single person who is and especially for their loved ones but it's quite another being classes as in a group most likely to succumb (die) if you contracted the virus. Does anybody who has received the letter have a death wish? I don't think so, so why anyone would wantto be shielded is beyond my comprehension.
growstuff, I don't mean to be funny but the 1.5 million people figure is the one for England only.

In theory, local authorities are supposed to know about those in both the highest risk groups and to contact people about help they might need, should they be hospitalised and need help with transport and care at home after discharge. The NHS has a list of volunteers who have put themselves forward to help those people, partly so that they don't stay in hospital unnecessarily and "bed block". Well, that's the theory, but it appears to be somewhat shambolic.

BTW Every single one of us has codes next to our name on the NHS database, indicating whether we are smokers, diabetic, carers, obese, have a heart condition, asthmatic, etc etc. It's how you're sent invitations for bowel cancer screening, diabetic eye tests, breast cancer tests, etc. Whether your code is accurate depends on the efficiency of your GP practice.

I have “the letter”, I have RA and inject immunosuppressants twice weekly, I am shielding for 12 weeks, weather great so in garden daily and plenty to do, weekly food delivery free of charge from the Scottish government, downside for me is I can’t do my 3 times weekly swimming and it’s definitely affecting my joints in a bad way.

Gee thanks Marydoll x

Callistemon and others … it doesn't help that the NHS, the government and other sites all seem to use the terminology "vulnerable", "highly vulnerable" and "at (high) risk" differently. People have many misunderstandings and even those who should know better are giving out the wrong information. They really do need to get their act together.

There are approximately 1.5 million people in the highest risk group. It does not depend on age, but on medical conditions, which are on the NHS website.

Another much larger group of people are advised that they are "at risk", including those over 70 and with certain existing conditions. Generally they are people who are eligible for free NHS flu jabs. Originally, they were advised to be especially careful, to social distance, not go out unless necessary, etc. This hasn't changed, but the general population has now been given the same advice. There is now no difference between this "at risk" group and everybody else.

According to the government, the 1.5 million in the most vulnerable/high risk group are supposed to be receiving extra assistance in the form of food boxes and the local authorities are supposed to be aware of their potential vulnerability. Supermarkets were supposed to be informed, so that these people have priority when making online orders. The theory is that they are protected, so that they don't need to leave home, but it's obvious that in practice this isn't happening consistently. The bad news is that this group is likely to be "shielded" for some time yet and all the authorities involved need to start co-ordinating properly.

I am vulnerable and I shop for a friend who is shielded and therefore cannot leave her house and garden.

EllanVannin I have always thought you were much younger!

Years ago, when I had a hospital appointment, the staff couldn't access any records other than the relevant one. I would spend half my appointment updating the doctor on other clinics.

I attend a number of hospitals and now all hospital records are linked and immediately accessible. It makes life so much easier and treatment more efficient. My GP can view updates, without waiting weeks for hospital letters and consultants can liaise.
I have no problem with my records being stored in a safe environment.

I'm officially 'vulnerable'. I've been scored by my specialist as scoring 2 on the official system. The advice is to ensure distance and shop weekly, at the specific time for those of us in the vulnerable category. I have RA and until a year ago, took two immuno suppressants to modify the disease. I now only take one, I dropped the second med because of side effects. If I was still taking two, I'd score three and move into the shielding category.
I'm relieved both to be only 'vulnerable' but also, because shielding means staying in your home for 12weeks. I can take my daily walk, which I value. I did a quick supermarket raid during the 'vulnerable' time, awful so my husband will go in future.
I hope to avoid this virus - I'm not at all convinced Id survive it

Well done, EllanVannin and long may it continue.

I find shopping online more stressful than a pleasant wander around with a trolley.

Oh dear, Big Brother is watching me.

I wouldn't say I was vulnerable either although I'm 80 in a few months. I'd feel insulted. I'm as strong as an ox with what I've overcome. Let it continue.

I'm quite sure my medical records are available anyway to the CMO of Wales, Doodledog and will not be divulged to a third party.

I remember getting a letter a few years ago saying that unless I opted out, my records would be put on a central computer so that any authorised person in the NHS could access them if necessary. This seemed sensible, so I didn't opt out.

That is different, I feel, from there being coded categories of people based on their likelihood of needing expensive medical treatment as we enter what is potentially a lengthy period of living with a virus that will cost the country a fortune.

I am quite possibly over-reacting, but in the current climate, I am not at all comfortable about that.

Nobody in their right mind, Marydoll - perhaps she isn't atm?

I should add that I’ve always been overweight and DH never has - but I’ve been healthy and he never has....

There is a very BIG difference between vulnerable and sheilded, Callistemon.

Many posters think they are one and the same thing. It's almost like a badge of honour to some. Well they can have my badge anytime.

I should have said shielded not vulnerable