Free elderly care expansion promises spark row over affordability

Plans to expand free home care for the elderly sparked furious exchanges at Prime Minister's questions yesterday as a new report said "radical changes" were needed to maintain the care system in the face of increasing demands.

The Care Quality Commission's (CQC) annual report on health and social care services in England said a predicted 1.7 million more adults will need care by 2030, putting pressure on already stretched public finances.

The Government's Personal Care at Home Bill, which would provide 400,000 vulnerable elderly people with free care in their homes, was criticised by council leaders earlier and Tory leader David Cameron accused Gordon Brown of using it to promote "cheap dividing lines" between the parties ahead of the general election.

Mr Cameron demanded to know where the funding was coming from and insisted the Prime Minister wanted the "benefits" of the policy before the election, leaving the costs to afterwards.

But as Speaker John Bercow struggled to keep the noise down, Mr Brown hit back, attacking the Opposition leader for breaking cross-party "consensus" on the policy.

Mr Cameron asked the Prime Minister if he could rule in or rule out a compulsory levy on the elderly to pay for care, but Mr Brown sidestepped the question and said developing a "full social care system" would take time and needed consensus.

The CQC report, which was published yesterday, said tailoring services to meet people's individual needs would help save money while allowing people to remain independent.

CQC chairwoman Dame Jo Williams said: "We all know that the context is changing. Trends such as increasing demand and rising expectations will be exacerbated by pressure on finances. That means we cannot go on as we are. To cope, we need some radical changes in the way that we organise and deliver services.

"This means shifting the culture away from a one-size-fits-all approach to care that puts the needs of individuals and carers at the centre of everything. A key part of this will involve helping people maintain their independence and health."

The Government has said around £2.7 billion could be saved every year by helping patients avoid making unnecessary hospital visits.

But the CQC said this would require "a fundamental cultural shift" allowing patients to control their own care.

Stephen Burke, chief executive of the charity Counsel And Care, said "an honest and serious" debate was needed about funding.

He said: "Politicians, nationally and locally, owe it to older people, their families and carers to prioritise care reform and funding. As the University of Birmingham has highlighted this week, there are massive economic and social benefits to be gained from a new, properly funded care system.

"Older people and their families want to know what care they will get and how much they will have to pay.

"One way to fund better care would be a care duty on estates but it must be done fairly through a percentage on all estates above a certain value. For example, 2.5% on estates above £25,000 would raise enough to meet the current shortfall in care funding. And it would help older people and their families who currently face losing their home to pay for care."

Director of the Patients Association Katherine Murphy said she welcomed the report's "clear direction" that the NHS and social care services had to start working more closely.

She said: "It is vital this approach becomes widespread if we are to make the most of increasingly restricted budgets and ensure users get a responsive service."

Simon Lawton-Smith, Head of Policy for the Mental Health Foundation, said: "There has been a lot of talk about person-centred services and joined-up health and social care over the last 20 years, so in a way it's disappointing that the CQC still has to make these arguments.

"The hope now is that the likely need to reduce funding might concentrate minds on reform. An often-overlooked benefit of treating people as individuals and focusing on maintaining their independence and health is that it has the potential to save money."

From:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/free-elderly-care-expansion-plans-spark-row

Labour's plans for elderly care put essential services at risk

Frontline services such as social work, meals on wheels and road maintenance may have to be cut to cover the cost of controversial plans for elderly care at home, local authority leaders have warned. 

The £670 million required to provide free care for those most in need in their own homes — a key government policy— will add pressure to councils already trying to find multi million Pound savings.

A rise in council tax of between 1 and 2 per cent will be needed to meet the cost, while cuts in adult and childrens’ social care services are an “unwanted but very real possibility”, council chiefs have told The Times.

The warning came as Andy Burnham, the Health Secretary, was forced to defend his Personal Care at Home Bill in a two hour appearance before the Commons Health Select Committee. He was questioned repeatedly about concerns surrounding the Bill reported by The Times, including its impact on care and clinical research budgets.

Critics believe that the costs calculated by the labour Government are a significant underestimate and care experts have attacked the policy for disrupting elderly care strategies and being little more than an attempt at eye catching electioneering.

The draft Bill, set out in the Queen’s Speech in November, was described by Labour peers as an “exocet” on social-care reform and “a demolition job” on budgets, while MPs and care providers have also criticised it for being ill-conceived and uncosted.

In the latest blow to Mr Burnham’s plans, council chiefs have told The Times that the extra costs will force tax rises and service cuts. 

Backroom staff, from lawyers and human resources workers to environmental planners, would also be at threat, as well as infrastructure programmes such as road maintenance. Plans to introduce or upgrade local amenities such as sports facilities, bus services and meals on wheels would have to be reassessed.

The annual cost of the Bill is put at £670 million, which ministers say will support 400,000 people with the highest needs to stay in their own homes. Of this total, £420 million is to come from existing Department of Health budgets. Local authorities have been told that they must provide the remaining £250 million from efficiency savings. The first year of the scheme, running from October to April 2011, would require £125 million of local authority efficiency savings.

Mr Burnham said that he “fundamentally rejected” the suggestion that the cost calculations were flawed. “The characterisation of an exocet is 100 per cent wrong,” he said.

Pressed on how £60 million of clinical research savings would be made to NHS budgets to help to fund the plans, and which areas would be affected, Mr Burnham said that it had yet to be finally decided, but would not involve frontline services.

Ken Thornber, head of Hampshire County Council and a member of the social care board of the Local Government Association (LGA), said that for councils already making multimillion-pound savings in backroom staff, this could be met only with an increase in council tax.

His council, one of the largest, was already trying to save £15 million a year and a further £15 million in 2011 to absorb inflationary pressures. “As things stand we would have to find between £5 million and £10 million over and above the £30 million which we are presently projected to need to find in 2011-12,” he said.

Mr Thornber added that it could mean up to £20 a year on council tax bills for the 550,000 households in Hampshire.

The funding from the Department of Health would not alleviate pressures on services, he said, because it was covering people who previously would have been cared for by the NHS or in care homes.

Jenny Owen, president of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (Adass) and director of adult social care for Essex County Council, said the council estimated that it would need to find £4 million of savings. “If you do not increase council tax by 1 or 2 per cent it will be a reduction in services.”

Andrew Lansley, the Conservative health spokesman, said that the plans were being rushed through for electoral gain. “While in an ideal world we want to give free care to as many elderly people as possible, it is simply not affordable, particularly since we are in the throes of a debt crisis. The reality is that Gordon Brown will only be able to pay for this through cuts to the NHS and higher council taxes.”

From:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6979815.ece

Reverse e-auctions an invitation to cut standards

One company boss who took part in the London Procurement Programme’s reverse e-auctions in May called them depressing.

The chief executive, who wished to remain anonymous, said he thought that the company had completed the procurement process after submitting a 206 point questionnaire, with 9 attachments, followed by a 122 question tendering document with 18 attachments in February.

“We heard nothing for a month, which was odd given the contracts were to start on April 1. Suddenly we were told, ‘Congratulations. You have been selected to take part in a reverse e-auction’.”

On May 19 the chief executive sat down with his finance director, logged into the LPP website and waited for the bidding to start.

The company had submitted tenders to provide palliative care and care for physical frailty and dementia. It had made bids of more than £1,000 a week for places in its homes. To take part in the e-auction it had to drop its price by at least £8 at a time. When bidding began the company was told its price was in the bottom five in the shortlist of 20.

“We wanted to test the system so we gingerly put in a bid of £10 below what we had tendered. Our position didn’t change,” he said.

“After a few more bids our position had not changed at all. By then we had reached the point where we could not cut the price further without undermining the quality of care so we stopped.”

In all, the company took part in three e-auctions. “In the end we really pushed it and cut our price by over £100 really just to see what would happen. I think we moved up a few places to 15th. It was a very depressing experience.

“You are filled with dread about what you are going to have to cut back on to get within the winning price. It is devoid of any human consideration. It’s fine if you are supplying stationery, but we are talking about human beings. This is an open invitation to companies to cut standards.”

From:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6401125.ece

Health Direct points out that reverse auctions are the result of the desire to get something for nothing.

They very rarely work as the winning company often has to come back for more money when they find they cannot provide the service to the standard required for the winning bid. It is a fallacy that it saves money!!

Elderly suffer after reverse e-auctions for home care

Labour NHS IT reverse auctions reduce dignity and care for elderly

Andrew Wilson, 78, was one of the elderly people who received poor treatment after a reverse e-auction. This was run by South Lanarkshire for the provision of home care.

Domiciliary Care, a big provider in Scotland, won the contract after companies had driven down their prices. It won with a bid to provide care for £9.95 an hour.

Mr Wilson is hard of hearing, blind in one eye and unable to walk more than a few steps. With no close family, he lives alone and depends on carers. He allowed Panorama to fit secret cameras in his home for 19 days.

The cameras showed Mr Wilson being given a bed bath while his carer was constantly on her mobile phone complaining to the office about her workload. The cameras also recorded that, of his four half-hour visits a day, those at lunch and teatime were often curtailed.

His care assessment makes clear that his lunchtime carer should prepare a meal. However, he was routinely fed sandwiches, crisps and toast.

One GP who specialises in old age care said she was shocked by what she saw. “He has been treated with a complete lack of dignity,” she said.

At the time Domiciliary Care denied that Mr Wilson was neglected. It said that carers were under no obligation to go shopping for Mr Wilson but often did so. However, Care Choices Group, which took over the company last September, admitted that an internal inquiry had found that a number of the allegations were correct, and apologised.

From:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6401122.ece

MPs criticise NHS in England for forcing patients to spend their last days in uncaring hospital surroundings

Elderly patients in the final stages of terminal illness are being denied the right to die at home due to inadequate NHS and social care, a critical parliamentary report warns.

Newly allocated funds aimed at improving end-of-life care are at risk of being spent on other medical priorities, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) suggests.

Half a million people die in England every year; almost two-thirds of them are over 75. The vast majority of deaths follow a period of chronic illness such as cancer or heart disease.

About 60% of those deaths occur in an acute hospital despite the fact that "there is no clinical need" for the person to be there, the study says.

"Most people express a preference to die at home [surrounded by friends and family]. People should have the right to die in the place of their choice.

"[Health authorities should increase] the availability of community services, such as 24-hour district nursing, and access to advice and medication out of hours to help reduce the number of unnecessary hospital admissions."

Those who die in hospital are often deprived of effective pain management and not accorded adequate "dignity and respect" in their last days and moments by NHS staff, the report states.

"Because someone is approaching the end of life it should not mean we abandon concern for their quality of life. End of life care should seek to sustain people's quality of life as a priority."

There should be more checks, the paper suggests, to ensure staff receive education and training in end of life care. Specialist palliative care teams should always be deployed to deliver pain relief.

Residential homes, especially those without qualified nursing staff, often feel ill equipped to care for people in the final stages of life and send them to hospital or refuse to take residents back after a hospital admission.

In one local study, the report shows, at least 40% of patients who died in a Sheffield hospital "did not have medical needs which required them to be admitted". Many had been occupying a bed for more a month – suggesting that resources could be freed up and redirected to home care.

The National Audit Office has estimated the cost of caring for cancer patients (who account for 27% of all deaths) in the 12 months before death was £1.8bn. Reducing emergency admissions by 10% and cutting the average length of stay to three days would release £104m for redistribution to other end of life care services.

The Department of Health has allocated £286m over the next two years to improving end-of-life care. But the PAC warns "there is a risk that the additional [sum] will not be used as intended. The department should require primary care trusts to account for how the additional funding is spent."

Co-ordination between health and social care services in this area is "generally poor", the report notes.

"That health and social care providers have traditionally given a low priority to end-of-life care is shown by the lack of training in basic end of life care among front-line staff," the chairman of the PAC, Edward Leigh, said.

The catalogue of problems discovered in hospitals include poor support for basic comfort; lack of privacy for the patient and their family; poor communication by staff; and staff recognising too late that somebody is about to die.

"It is appalling that people dying in hospital are not always being given the end of life care they deserve," Leigh said, "including effective pain management and being treated with dignity and respect."

From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/14/end-of-life-care-report-nhs

NHS is killing patients with learning disabilities, regulators find

The National Health Service is failing people with learning disabilities, according to a report published yesterday on the deaths of six disabled patients.

Regulators blame hospitals and local authorities for “significant and distressing failures” that led to the six patients receiving inadequate care because of their disabilities.

Ann Abraham, the Health Service Ombudsman for England, said the findings suggested that a wider pattern of poor care for people with learning disabilities which was “an indictment of our society”.

Mark Cannon, 30, died after being admitted to hospital with a broken leg. Staff failed to give him any pain relief or to administer the correct medication to control his epilepsy. Renal failure and a severe chest infection were diagnosed only after considerable delays.

Martin Ryan, 43, starved for 26 days following a stroke because a feeding tube was not fitted and he was left too weak to undergo surgery.

Four other cases, all of which ended in the death of the patient, followed a similar pattern, with nurses and doctors accused of complacency or discrimination.

Families of the six put pressure on nurses and doctors to administer proper treatment, but were ignored and dismissed.

When they pursued their complaints formally, they were dealt with inadequately, leaving them “drained and demoralised”, the report says.

The six cases are the subject of a rare joint review by the by the Health Service and Local Authority Ombudsmen entitled Six Lives, which was published yesterday.

It has ordered a total of £120,000 to be paid to compensate the families for the distress caused in the care of their relatives.

Ms Abraham said that serious mistakes were made and ordered the NHS to overhaul its procedures for treating people with learning disabilities.

From:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article5965336.ece

NHS patients mixed sex indignity continues on hospital wards

Men and women in hospital are still being treated on mixed-sex wards with little or no segregation, despite government promises to improve privacy for patients, the Conservative Party says.

In April ministers claimed that they were close to abolishing mixed-sex accommodation in the National Health Service. Figures obtained by the Conservatives suggest that 15 per cent of hospitals in England still use mixed, open-plan “Nightingale” wards, while a similar proportion (16 per cent) have wards where patients are segregated only by curtains. The party said that nearly a third of trusts did not have separate bathrooms for men and women.

There were 997 complaints about lack of privacy and dignity in hospital trusts and 135 complaints in mental health trusts in the past year, a poll of 132 acute trusts and 55 mental health trusts showed.

Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, accused the Government of breaking its promises on the issue. “Patients have enough to worry about when they go into hospital without having to suffer the indignity of being placed in accommodation that affords them too little privacy at such a sensitive time,” he said.

Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, told a nurses’ conference last year that there was a “bit of a political distinction” between the terms mixed-sex accommodation – where men and women are in separate rooms or bays and have their own bathrooms and lavatories – and the larger, mixed sex wards.

The Department of Health responded: “We are reducing mixed-sex accommodation to an absolute minimum and have made significant progress. Some hospitals and local NHS areas still have more to do and they are now required to publish and implement ambitious plans to improve.”

From:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5478334.ece

Phil Hope takes over social care brief at DH

Phil Hope has been appointed as a minister in the Department of Health, replacing Ivan Lewis.

Mr Hope takes over the social care portfolio. The department is in the middle of an emotive debate on the future shape of care and support, intended to precede a green paper on reform of social care funding.

The controversial debate has increased in profile as more people have become concerned over the anomalies in the present system and the growing number of older people.

Mr Hope has been given the brief as a minister, whereas Ivan Lewis was a junior minister in the department.

Mr Hope is expected to inherit most of Mr Lewis's previous ministerial responsibilities, including the third sector and social enterprise. Until the reshuffle this weekend, Mr Hope was minister for the third sector at the cabinet office.

Before that, he was a skills minister in the Department for Education and Skills and a parliamentary under-secretary of state in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, where he had responsibility for local government.

Mr Hope's other responsibilities at the Department of Health are likely to include:

* the DH's relationship with local government;
* mental health;
* dignity and respect;
* equality and human rights.

Mr Hope is also minister for the East Midlands.

His website lists tennis, juggling and computing among his hobbies.

Ivan Lewis, who until yesterday was the longest standing minister at the DH, has been moved to a junior ministerial post at the Department for International Development.

From:
http://www.hsj.co.uk/news/2008/10/phil_hope_takes_over_social_care_brief_at_dh.html

Michael Parkinson fights for dignity in care homes

Elderly people are being treated like inmates in prison by uncaring nurses, Sir Michael Parkinson has claimed, as he promotes a drive to ensure patients live with dignity and respect in hospitals and care homes.

The broadcaster said he had been forced to complain about the treatment his mother, Freda, received before she died last year aged 95.

But he also admitted fearing the repercussions for her once he made a complaint, saying that he did not want to leave her alone.

Sir Michael was named recently as the labour Government's new "dignity ambassador" with a mission to raise awareness of the importance of compassion in care services.

He said: "My mother had a wonderful life except for the last five years, and experienced a variety of care. I came across an extraordinary mixture of care – some nurses who were utterly dedicated and wonderful.

"But there were others who treated it as a job and a bit like they were a jailer, treated people in their care as inmates. There were distressing signs of elderly people being left weeping who were still there half an hour later, and that's obviously not right."

He said he had complained about his mother's care once or twice. "When I left the building I did wonder, 'Who will get the smack for this?' I used to worry about leaving her on her own."

Sir Michael, 73, whose chat show ended last year, also said nurses should be paid more. "We take it for granted they're going to work for less than most people and that's wrong," he said at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital in central London.

Over the next six months Ivan Lewis, the Care Services Minister, is to visit every area of England to encourage more people to become "dignity champions". More than 1,800 people have signed up to promote the respectful and compassionate treatment of elderly people in their areas, but the Government wants twice as many.

Mr Lewis also announced that "discussions" would be opened with councils to make sure that elderly couples were not split up when they need more care.

The Daily Telegraph reported that a married couple who have been together since the Second World War could be separated before their diamond wedding anniversary because their local council would not pay for both to move into a nursing home.

From:
Michael-Parkinson-fights-for-dignity-in-care-homes.html

On June 22, 2006 Health Direct posted: Minister wants Dignity debate for caring for the elderly

New care services minister Ivan Lewis has said he wants to make dignity of older people one of his top priorities. Speaking at a session on the out of hospitals white paper, he said: ‘I want to make dignity an important theme in my time as a minister. ‘This is not a gimmick; just another initiative. It should be at the heart of what we are doing.

Health Direct pointed out that this is a classic Labour tactic. Ivan Lewis’s caring, sharing labour government announces a laudable new spin policy for caring for the elderly and frail. Brilliant

He then lambasts everybody else for not delivering his policy- when it’s his own fault because the Labour govt has not put a single new penny of money into the pot to pay for the new initiative!

NHS patients face humiliating treatment- what happened to Dignity?

Hospitals are still failing to treat people with dignity and respect as complaints reveal patients left unwashed, in soiled bedding and in humiliating open-backed gowns, the Healthcare Commission has said.

A third of complaints about the NHS relate to dignity, respect and nutrition in hospitals, the commission's 2007 "state of healthcare" report found.

Mixed-sex wards are still a major problem, despite Labour's manifesto pledges in 1997 and 2001 to abolish them.

The report also said that one in five patients who wanted help with eating did not get it, and others complained that food or drink was placed out of reach.

Examples of complaints over dignity included a lack of regular baths or showers, gowns that failed to protect patients' modesty and curtains being opened while a patient is receiving intimate care.

The 136-page report also called for improvements in care for children, action on hospital superbugs, better service planning and promotion of patient safety.

The report said one in 10 hospitals in England did not meet standards on patient privacy and confidentiality.

Half of patients in mental health wards and almost three in five with learning disabilities were treated in mixed-sex accommodation.

A third of patients admitted to hospital as an emergency were sleeping in mixed-sex areas and 30 per cent of in-patients had to share bathroom or shower areas with the opposite sex.

Patients were also frustrated that staff often did not have access to their notes, meaning they had to describe their condition repeatedly to different doctors.

A fifth of patients had been assaulted on mental health wards. There was variation in treatment for cancer patients and hidden waiting times in areas that are not subject to targets, such as two-year waits for psychological therapies and hearing aids.

Opposition MPs said the report provided a "damning indictment" of the NHS after more than a decade of Labour government, which has seen huge increases in investment.

Funding has increased from £55 billion in 2002-3 to almost £90 billion in 2007-8, and the workforce has increased by 29 per cent.

The commission warned private hospitals failing on standards that they could be banned from providing care in the future.

Eleven NHS hospitals were named as performing badly in patient satisfaction surveys for the second year.

The report, presented to Parliament, made recommendations to improve waiting times in areas not covered by targets, promote a culture of safety, raise standards of care for children and inform patients better.

Sir Ian Kennedy, the chairman of the commission, said: "Let's be clear that health care has improved. But there is still some way to go before everyone gets world-class care.

"People are getting healthier, but there is serious disparity in both general health and in the care available to the haves and the have-nots."

The Liberal Democrat health spokesman Norman Lamb said: "As an NHS report card, the conclusion is could and must do a lot better. It is a damning indictment that 10 years into a Labour government, health inequalities are still shockingly wide."

From:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/05/nhs105.xml

Classic Labour tactic this. Ivan Lewis’s caring, sharing labour government announces a laudable new spin policy for caring for the elderly and frail. Brilliant

On June 22, 2006 Health Direct posted: Minister wants Dignity debate for caring for the elderly

New care services minister Ivan Lewis has said he wants to make dignity of older people one of his top priorities. Speaking at a session on the out of hospitals white paper, he said: ‘I want to make dignity an important theme in my time as a minister. ‘This is not a gimmick; just another initiative. It should be at the heart of what we are doing.

‘I want to stimulate a debate about dignity in older people and the disabled. It has to be integral to how we are seen to support people in the modern world.’

He called for more PCT funding on prevention - such as £25 on griprails in people’s homes which would help prevent falls.

He then lambasted everybody else for not delivering his policy- when it’s his own fault because the Labour govt has not put a single new penny of money into the pot to pay for the new Dignity initiative.

Where is the money to pay for the £25 griprails that you mention- let alone the extra nurses that you want to police your dignity policy, Mr Lewis?

NHS ignoring human rights of people with learning disabilities

The NHS is holding thousands of people with learning disabilities in bleak accommodation with scant regard to their human rights, inspectors warn today.

The Healthcare Commission said in its report that more than 4,000 adults with Down's syndrome and other disabling conditions are living in hospitals, treatment centres and secure facilities in England. It found inadequately trained staff failed to provide stimulation or the opportunity to make simple, everyday choices.

Adults in care that is provided or commissioned by the NHS had few opportunities for friendships. Many never got a visit from family. Some were not even allowed to make themselves a cup of tea.

The commission said: "Even in the best services, the safety and quality of care were not up to the standard expected of modern services." There were "significant institutional failings" that deprived people of human rights and dignity. Services operated "off the radar" of senior NHS managers, "with poor leadership, poor training and no framework to measure the performance of services".

The government responded last night with plans to strip the NHS of responsibility for the sector. Ivan Lewis, the care services minister, said he would publish proposals tomorrow to put local authorities in charge of commissioning services. He added: "It is totally unacceptable for anyone with a learning disability to be treated in a way that compromises their human rights."

The commission decided to undertake the first national audit of learning disability services after it discovered malpractice in Cornwall and Carshalton, south London, where residents were tied up for prolonged periods in a misguided attempt to stop them harming themselves.

Anna Walker, the commission's chief executive, said the national audit did not find such flagrant abuses at the 72 NHS trusts and 17 independent organisations visited by inspectors, after giving 24 hours notice of arrival.

But it identified "serious and unacceptable" lapses in the London borough of Bromley, where the primary care trust asked the inspectors for help in sorting out its facilities.

They found one house with gates on the bedroom doors and straps to restrain residents in chairs. Living standards were poor, with worn furnishings and toilet doors that would not close. Three crates of confidential information were left unsecured.

The commission also looked into complaints about NHS services in North Lincolnshire, Sandwell and Coventry, and an independent unit run by Care Principles Ltd in Stafford.

Walker said: "The report paints a bleak picture. Services for people with learning difficulties are not generally unsafe, but they are poor."

She called for a sustained effort to provide excellent care for this vulnerable group, giving them choices and independent advocates to speak up for their interests.

Jonathan Hurley, a man with Down's syndrome who took part in the inspections, said: "I have a full life. People in these homes don't. I have choice. They don't."

Dame Jo Williams, the chief executive of Mencap, the learning disability charity which exposed the Cornwall scandal, said: "Immediate action must be taken to make sure that poor care for people with a learning disability is stamped out."

The Department of Health merely said it was already committed to closing all "NHS campus" facilities for people with learning disabilities by 2010.

From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/dec/03/learningdisability.humanrights

Nurses dont report abuse of the elderly

More than half of nurses would not report the abuse of an elderly person in their care, according to a survey published today. The poll of NHS and private sector nurses, conducted for Help the Aged, found that a lack of training, heavy workloads and fear of confrontation or of upsetting the victim all prevent nurses taking action.

The findings come amid growing evidence that elder abuse is a widespread problem in families, care homes and hospitals. A study by the National Centre for Social Research and Kings College London suggested that 342,000 older people living in private households are subject to some form of mistreatment every year in the UK.

A report by the parliamentary joint committee on human rights this month highlighted significant levels of abuse and neglect suffered by older people in care homes and hospitals.

Its latest study, based on 848 responses from readers of Nursing Standard and Nursing Older people, found that 58% of nurses would not report abuse of an older person because they fear having got it wrong.

The poll revealed that 68% of nurses felt a lack of training in how to deal with elder abuse was a barrier to them providing decent care.

From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2157864,00.html

On June 22, 2006 Health Direct posted: Minister wants Dignity debate for caring for the elderly
when the new care services minister Ivan Lewis said that he wanted to make dignity of older people one of his top priorities.

Speaking at a session on the out of hospitals white paper, he said: ‘I want to make dignity an important theme in my time as a minister. ‘This is not a gimmick; just another initiative. It
should be at the heart of what we are doing.

As Health Direct also mused: Classic Labour tactic this. Ivan Lewis’s caring, sharing labour government announces a laudable new spin policy for caring for the elderly and frail. Brilliant

He then lambasts everybody else for not delivering his policy- when it’s his own fault because the Labour govt has not put a single new penny of money into the pot to pay for the new initiative.

Where is the money to pay for the extra nurses that you want to police your dignity policy, Mr Lewis?