Social Workers are still up to their old tricks.

Oh good, a non-contentious thread.

I just think it wrong that Social Workers are telling people to sell houses when they are not legally obliged to.

Frank

Well I don't know Gracesmum the ex-social workers on the forum might quite justifiably take exception to the prejudicial tone of the thread title

On the other hand jane the practising and ex social workers might just think it's not even worthy of a response. A bit like when every client you visit tells you 'I don't like social workers'. After the first hundred or so you just think 'and ???'

Hi janeainsworth

If Social Workers / Councils are not trying it on to save money are you saying I am the only person who knows of 5 cases where the son / daughter has been an owner occupier with a parent they have been told that the house would have to be sold when it is clear the council can not take any of the house value to fund the care.
In 4 of the cases the parent got full NHS funding when they kicked up a fuss and in the other case the parent passed away while the meeting was happening so the matter was not taken any further.
I do know of another case where a son owned half of the house but did not occupy it.
The house was a 2 up and 2 down and the mother lived in it.
The Social Worker did say if the funds ran out from her half share of the sale proceeds from the property he would have to use his share of the proceeds of the house as his half of the house had been inherited from his father who passed away a year before.
This was clearly incorrect but again the mother passed away a week after she got to the care home.

Frank

I am an ex-social worker.

All I can say is that government policies of underfunding to the care system have forced local authorities to penny pinch and SWs are being put in a hopeless situation. Their desire to organise good care for their clients is compromised all long the line. Line managers are chosen for their budget-driven mindset and not for their humanity or professionalism. It is a truly sad situation - particularly for those of us who fought to the end and gave our all trying to keep standards up.

It is clearly a problem for SWs on the ground who do assessments knowing that the needs cannot be properly met.

However, whilst I sympathise with the plight of the SWs and the pressures they are under, it is wholly unacceptable for misinformation to be given.

Just to add - it is always very hard when a whole profession is regarded in such a negative light; and the title of this post is unfortunate. This does not excuse the examples of bad practice that Frank is quoting.

SWs are picking up the messes that our society creates - neglected children, drug addicts, abandoned elderly. They are doing this under enormous financial constraints and under huge pressure.

There are some rotten apples - I have met them. Indeed I have tried to fail them on their training courses when I was a SW practice teacher, but been over-ruled on the grounds that my standards were "too high."

But most SWs do care and try their best to do a good job under difficult circumstances. So we need to give them a bit of a break sometimes.

We used to say that we were damned whatever we did and had to grit our teeth and continue anyway.

What an amazing number of people confide in you with details of their financial affairs HUNTERF. I can't imagine discussing this sort of thing with anyone but close family and professional advisors (accountant and solicitor).

Not as bad idea though, to warn people not to take a social worker's word for it on financing care of elderly parents. Wasn't there a thread a little while back in the same vein?

I agree with everything Mishap says, and would add that social workers have a strong sense of fairness and justice - it's inherent in them and their chosen vocation. You can imagine how frustrating it must be for them to see needy people having to take a back seat for resources when there just isn't enough money in the budget and they are having to re-prioritise daily, even hourly. If I saw the possibility of a family being able to pay for some of their care so that another needy person could be accommodated, too, I would really struggle to deny that other person their care. The ethics of treating each family fairly are a minefield, and trying to avoid making judgements about what they can realistically afford should not influence the social worker in an ideal world.

I would like to see these critics of social workers spend a day in their shoes! They would go home and cry!

Whats that about heresay not being admissable? If dear ole Hunterf does one more 'Someone said to me that someone told them such and such I shall scream!

Well said Hilda

It's probably not worth saying but in stressful situations, we find it hard to remember what has been said. Or even in non-stressful situations. That's why you get so many bloody stupid annoying headlines on the lines of 'Fred defies doctors!' Because Fred is not dead and he and his loved ones think what the doctor said was, 'You'll be dead inside two weeks' when what doctor said was 'The prognosis isn't good'. Women have said to me over childbirth, 'No-one tells you that it's painful'. Yes, right.

Hi Mishap

I do know misinformation is given as I have sat in on 2 meetings with Social Workers.
Fortunately my father never went in to care but at the time he passed away he had very little money and only his half share in the house.
I admit I sold my house and joined him in his house when my wife and mother passed away and the 5 situations I have mentioned have been similar.
I am sure I would have been given the same wrong information if he had gone onto care but the council would have not got away with it.
At the end of the day however the law is the law and for care purposes only the wealth of the patient can be taken in to account and not the wealth of the families.
If a person qualifies for NHS funding of care he should get it even if he has a billion £'s which the children will inherit.

Frank

I would also add that it is highly likely that the 'social workers' who are giving this advice are not in fact qualified social workers. In most local authorities there has been a huge increase in the number of unqualified support staff and a corresponding reduction in the number of qualified staff. This is yet another cost cutting measure. The qualified staff are usually wholly occupied in carrying out investigations of adult abuse, leaving the unqualified staff to pick up everything else. What is even more shocking is that it is not unusual for the managers to have no social work background or qualification. It doesn't take much imagination to work out why incorrect information is often given.

Sadly you are right nightowl - at about the time I jumped ship there were increasing numbers of unqualified staff being empoloyed because they are so much cheaper. An experienced SW with a track record of professionalism is an expensive (and it would seem expendable) commodity.

Frank- I do not doubt that misinformation is given sometimes and we all regret that. I do not condone this in any way - it is quite simply wrong. But teh idea that SWs are "up to their old tricks" implies a general lack of caring and honesty which I do not think exists.

My Dad has received some very poor care in the last few weeks, but I am careful not to imply that all the carers/nurses are poor because I do not think that is the case. There are some rotten apples, and faulty systems of support and accountability fail to root them out or to help them to improve.

I think it is only getting worse Mishap. I no longer work in adult services but the stories I hear from colleagues make my hair stand on end.

Frank - you must encourage anyone who has this experience to make a formal complaint, contact their local councillor, do whatever they feel they must to bring this to light.

There; I said I wouldn't respond but can't keep quiet, as usual

H nightowl

One of my friends did make a formal complaint and only got a response that the matter had been investigated.
One of my friends got the same bad advice a few months later from the same person.
That person did not know I was involved in both cases.
I will advise my friend to take this up with their councillor but I do not know if it will do any good.

Frank

Have ever thought of starting a 'VictimsRus'' group Frank?

Orca

I am now retired so I do not want to start any group.
What I am finding annoying is how many people are selling houses etc when they are not obliged to do so.
I know there are stacks of cases where people are claiming compensation for payments they have wrongly made.
The problem is even if they get compensation they are unlikely to get the house back which they have sold for example to fund the care as somebody else is likely to occupy it.

Frank

Frank - there are lots of places that people can go to get free help and advice re these isues - CABs, Age Concern etc. What seems to have been a particular issue has been the mis-classification of nursing care as social care, and that clearly is wrong. But equally, there are many cases of deliberate deprivation of capital that occur. The proposals that have just come out re funding of long term care still leave the whole savings/house issues as they are - which is in a mess!!

Hi Bluebell

It is difficult to draw the line on where deliberate deprivation of assetts has happened.
In one of the cases I has mentioned the daughter had joined the mother in her house about 18 months before the mother went in to care after being widowed to care for her mother.
The mother was disabled but at the time she joined her there was no sign of dementia.
The social worker did try to say the daughter should have seen care was on the cards at that point but the daughter did not agree. As it happened the mother got NHS funding and the daughter inherited the house.
Also a situation which could happen is a son / daughter could join a parent in a house as a half owner occupier to care for the parent not realising the parent would need care in the near future.
Somebody I knew had a water infection in the June and appeared to recover.
They were in care the February after and it turned out to be dementia.

It would not surprise me if at some point in the future if the offspring has been left half a house by one parent and the other parent has to go in to care a law may be passed saying the offspring may have to use some of his house sale money to pay for the parent's care.
This could be difficult however if the parent / offspring has been living together for say 20 years.

Another thing which could happen is there may be a law passed saying none of the parents house can pass to the children before both parents have passed away but this could cause problems.

Frank

If there is someone living in the house over the age of 60 the house is disregarded for funding.

Hi ninathenana

You are right.
In the cases I have described they had all been offspring in their 50's and one parent has passed away and left their half of the house to their son / daughter.

The son / daughter have lived in or around London in all cases and have got early retirement and they decided to sell their London houses.

As they have been widowed they moved back in to their childhood homes with their parents as half owners and as a consequence aquired the right to remain in these houses.

The parents have then had to go into care but the offspring has just enforced their right to stay in the house and would not let any sale happen.
As the house can not be sold with vacent posession this has made the parents half worthless as nobody will buy half a house with somebody in it.

Age Concern Factsheet 38 clarifies this.

Frank