http://www.camdennewjournal.com/letters/2010/jun/uncaring-officials

Uncaring officials

Published: 17 June, 2010

 

JENNYFER Spencer’s voice was not heard at her inquest. 

 

But, thanks to the New Journal, her letter highlighted the discrimination she suffered: “I wish that no human/animal should ever go through life as I did.” 

Disabled, older and other vulnerable people are suffering from decades of care charges, privatisation and rationing implemented by uncaring officials.

 

Though councils say provision is increasing, as people live longer, fewer than ever get help, as we are deterred by charges, or turned down. 

 

Shopping, cooking and cleaning are not provided unless we are allocated hands-on care, yet they are often what we need most.

 

Private agency carers rush round more intent on getting their timesheets signed than with people’s welfare.

 

Absurd policies are cited to refuse simple tasks which may require getting up on a chair or step-ladder.  

 

The latest policy – “personalisation” – makes older and disabled people responsible for managing our own services, with little or no support.

Already, some users on direct payments who can choose their own carers, struggle with paperwork and employer’s responsibilities.

 

In an inaccessible world all people with disabilities work hard just to survive.

Women are often looking after other people while coping with our own disability. But our workload is scarcely acknowledged let alone reduced.

 

Single Mothers’ Self-Defence works with us to defend mothers who request council support for their children and are threatened with foster care.

Those of us who are people of colour, immigrant or asylum seekers are judged to deserve even less.

 

Older women, the majority of those getting homecare, are treated as a burden: surely after a lifetime of waged and unwaged caring work we’re entitled!

The lack of accessible housing is dire.

 

Many people are struggling indoors and unable to go out.

 

At the inquest a housing allocations manager described that a flat large enough for a live-in carer comes up perhaps twice a year. 

 

Asked why no offers were made to Ms Spencer in the past three years, the officer said probably others took priority, namely “bed-blockers”.

 

This is what hospital managers call patients they want to get rid of, to achieve “through-put” targets.  

 

In her inaccessible flat Ms Spencer placed furniture close together so she could hold onto it to move around.

 

This was deemed as “clutter”. In seven years the council didn’t ramp her front step.

 

Some years ago we helped a woman aged 90 get a grab-rail; she had waited five months just for an occupational therapist’s assessment. Without back-up, many die before equipment arrives.

 

Social services used to be free, like the NHS.

 

In 1983 a law gave councils the discretionary power to charge for services.

Charging spread, pushing some people below Income Support level.

 

We pressed for partners’ earnings to be exempted so disabled women would not suffer increased domestic abuse. But the 2002 “Fairer Charging” policy brought degrading means-testing and higher charges. And these were the boom years!

 

Last year a couple in their 90s rang Camden after getting a huge unexpected bill.

 

They were told they must undergo means-testing or pay £13 an hour.

They withdrew.

 

We protested and their service was reinstated free. But how many go without and die prematurely as a result?  


We who rely on services are determined to reverse these policies – our survival depends on it.

 

WinVisible and the Campaign Against Care Charges (Camden), are in a network of service users campaigning against charging and care cuts. Defend your entitlements! See our self-help leaflet:


CLAIRE GLASMAN


WinVisible, NW5

 

 

 

Camden New Journal - by CHARLOTTE CHAMBERS
Published: 06 November 2008
 

Diana Francis
‘Crippling’ bill for pensioner’s baths

Campaigners fight charges faced by elderly and disabled as woman is charged £500 for care

A PENSIONER just two months away from her 90th birthday was sent a bill of around £500 for a weekly bath, under new council homecare charges dubbed the “cripple tax” by campaigners.

The woman, who is unable to bathe herself, had two baths a week until she was hit by the unexpected fees in September. She was shocked to discover she had been charged £26.70 for each two-hour care session.

The woman, who is blind and has difficulty walking, has subsequently cancelled the second wash and is now given a bath just once a week. The charges were introduced in Camden in October last year.

She moved into sheltered accommodation after her husband died two years ago. She revealed her plight during a meeting organised by the pressure group Campaign Against Care Charges (CACC) that is fighting the means testing of care charges for pensioners and the disabled.

Diana Francis, who suffers from the muscle disease fibromyalgia, was also at the meeting in Kentish Town on Friday. She won her own fight against the charges when the council backed down over a £250 fee.

“On several occasions I got so frustrated my pain level shot up so high,” said Ms Francis. “If I wasn’t a very strong-willed person I probably wouldn’t be here talking to you.”

Eileen Mewes, 83, from Belsize Park, warned that the constant changing of carers – the result of a move towards agency staff – left many confused and could even be dangerous. She said: “Carers who know you know if something is wrong and they ring alarm bells for you.”

Campaigners have described the women as victims of the new charging system which has forced disabled and elderly people to pay for help with basic human functions.

CACC are calling on those who have already had their needs and finances assessed to appeal and are urging people to boycott the payments altogether.

CACC member Joy Palmer said: “Why should there be a ‘cripple tax’? I think it’s appalling that an 89-year-old woman is charged for having a bath.”

Conservative social services chief councillor Martin Davies said yesterday (Wednesday): “We are in line with government guidelines.

“Although not all councils charge, our charges are in line or below the average. I think if people have the means to pay then it’s better that they do. I’m not sure the UK can afford social care to be free.”