Fundamental reset for social care?

How do we feed into this consultation I wonder? Can't find anything online.

There’s a fundamental unfairness about the present system for sure. Wealthy property owners are given free end of life care in nursing homes which goes on for years and not months. Others are inaccurately assessed and it takes forever for social services to correct their figures.

Then there’s the problem of who should monitor for mini strokes, kidney infections and the rest if an elderly person is at home. Care at home is time limited to washing, using the commode/changing pads, dressing, feeding, administering medications. Not enough time to ensure physical mobility and mental stimulation so not ideal.

ronib

There’s a fundamental unfairness about the present system for sure. Wealthy property owners are given free end of life care in nursing homes which goes on for years and not months. Others are inaccurately assessed and it takes forever for social services to correct their figures.

Then there’s the problem of who should monitor for mini strokes, kidney infections and the rest if an elderly person is at home. Care at home is time limited to washing, using the commode/changing pads, dressing, feeding, administering medications. Not enough time to ensure physical mobility and mental stimulation so not ideal.

How do wealthy property owners get free end of life care, I have never heard of this?

The basic issue that needs sorting is the divide between health and social services, both in terms of finance and provision. Until a government grasps the nettle on this there will be bed blocking and unfairness.

Care in the home needs a total reassessment of how things have changed since many homes once run by local authorities have moved into private hands. Since everything is now profit driven, there is barely enough time allocated for carers to give anything more than the most perfunctory attention to their patients. Those who have been thus employed over a number of years feel this keenly as they have seen priorities change from being able to do small extra things to make the patient feel comfortable and valued, to rushing from one to another with no time to spare. The fact that many of them don’t get paid for their travelling time between calls is a complete disgrace.

How do wealthy property owners get free end of life care, I have never heard of this?

It may be because they have medical needs, or that they pay the fees from income, not sale of property.
I know a carer who visits twice a day and is sent out to walk the dog, with her phone switched off.

eazybee

^How do wealthy property owners get free end of life care, I have never heard of this?^

It may be because they have medical needs, or that they pay the fees from income, not sale of property.
I know a carer who visits twice a day and is sent out to walk the dog, with her phone switched off.

But if they personally pay for it, through any means, then it's not free?

ronib

There’s a fundamental unfairness about the present system for sure. Wealthy property owners are given free end of life care in nursing homes which goes on for years and not months. Others are inaccurately assessed and it takes forever for social services to correct their figures.

Then there’s the problem of who should monitor for mini strokes, kidney infections and the rest if an elderly person is at home. Care at home is time limited to washing, using the commode/changing pads, dressing, feeding, administering medications. Not enough time to ensure physical mobility and mental stimulation so not ideal.

Please explain how 'wealthy property owners' get free end of life care?

I’ve never heard of wealthy property owners getting free residential care for months. My understanding is the nhs funds nursing care if life expectancy is three months or less.

Luckygirl3

The basic issue that needs sorting is the divide between health and social services, both in terms of finance and provision. Until a government grasps the nettle on this there will be bed blocking and unfairness.

I quite agree. A care worker's job is to provide physical care, not medical or other care.

No scheme for anything can be without flaws and never misused, although to can be kept to a mimimum.

Healthcare is free to all, regardless of income and assets under the NHS, If someone has ongoing nursing needs this will therefore be paid for by the NHS. This is why some people, who would pay for their own care, have their care in a nursing home paid for by the NHS

I'm just so glad this is being looked at properly at last. and really, entirely necessary, not nibbling away at bits and pieces.

I had to have a carer a couple of years ago for a time, it was paid by me, so had continuity and so on and she was very good.

But what Greyduster said enraged me too. This was a lady with nearly 20 years experience yet she got about £15 an hour, and I was appalled she didn't get paid for travel time, and for that short period I was paying £34 an hour. And the newer carers got minimum wage.

She loved her job, or wouldn't have done it, but so, so wrong. No wonder it's hard to get carers who really are committed - and experienced.

No wonder some feel it's OK to take phone calls and so on or who are basically learning on the job and not up to it.

My DGD2 is very, very disabled, and in school holidays goes to a special centre now and then to give family a break, and needs 2 carers with her. The family do get DLA of course but the cost is greater than the allowance.

There are carers who work for the agency I briefly used that have to deal with a range of special needs- carers don't just cover physical health - poor Mental Health and borderline dementia don't necessarily involve physical caring.

This is where the feedback opportunity is: caseycommission.co.uk/contact/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
But .... "This page will remain open until the end of June 2026. After it closes, there will still be further opportunities to share your feedback with the Commission. Updates on how you can engage with the Commission’s work will be shared on this page, and you can also sign up for email alerts to stay up-to-date on our work here."

The eagle-eyed amongst you will have spotted that the consultation is now closed - so why the availability of sharing views has suddenly appeared ion the news I do not know! I will continue to look into this and let you know.

Iam64 .... "My understanding is the nhs funds nursing care if life expectancy is three months or less." This is a common fallacy and results in thousands of people not getting the care funding they are entitled to. NHS care funding can continue for years and is not contingent on a terminal diagnosis. It is based solely on medical/nursing needs criteria. My OH's care was paid for by the NHS for 9 months because he fulfilled the criteria and qualifying younger people get it for years. beaconchc.co.uk/ - they can advise.

It is basically part of the original NHS act which says that if someone has nursing and medical needs they are entitled to care from cradle to grave.

This is where one of the central unfairnesses of the current system lies because people are given misinformation about their entitlement and wrong judgements are made by people who are trained in other disciplines and are making a guess about it!- my OH was refused twice but because I had worked in the field I was certain they were wrong and he got it on appeal.

However the basic truth is that if everyone who was entitled received this the NHS would go bankrupt overnight! This is why there needs to be a fundamental review of the whole issue of funding care so that it is fair.

Long overdue but many 'projects' have been tried. The problem of course is defining what is a health care need and what is a social care one. Perhaps remove the barrier and have a sliding scale instead. social care and health care staff have very different policies and procedures, training and ethical basis. I suspect there is no one answer.