In the wake of the white paper on social care and in light of recent revelations of abuse such as Winterbourne View, Worcestershire County Council is set to turn back the clock by a generation, with proposals that could force disabled people into residential care. Our new report, ‘Past Caring’, analyses the council’s proposals for a ‘maximum expenditure policy’, which would impose a cap on the value of social care packages, meaning that anyone needing significant amounts of support may have to go into residential care.
As well as criticising the council’s current consultation exercise, the report shows the proposed policy:
- Will mean disabled people get less support
- Will mean a deterioration in care standards and quality of life
- Could lead to disabled people forced into residential care, even if they don’t want to
- Could force disabled people to rely on charity for the help and support they need
- Goes against the recommendations of the Government’s flagship white paper on social care reform
- Could be open to a legal challenge
Whilst it is acknowledged that Worcestershire and other councils across the country are being hit by cuts in funding, the county council’s approach is flawed and wrong. Flawed, because any ‘maximum expenditure policy’ will have a series of knock-on effects for health and social care providers, which may end up costing even more; and wrong, because disabled people should be encouraged and supported to live independently. Institutionalising disabled people is not the answer to the social care crisis, in Worcestershire or anywhere else.
The report acknowledges the challenges facing local authorities across the country, but also highlights the principles of independence for disabled people, including a right to choose where and how they live, to be part of their communities and have control over their day to day lives.
Jim D Smith, Secretary of Worcestershire Coalition for Independent Living, points out:
“In a week when the Queen visits the County to open a new £60 million library it’s sad to reflect that the lives of some individuals in the County are threatened by such negative proposals. These proposals, if implemented, will undermine a generation of progress towards independent living and cause real mental anguish for individuals and families.”
It’s really important for local disabled people, their friends and families to speak up. The consultation finishes this month (July), and it’s crucial their voices are heard. It’s also vital they contact their local councillors and MPs to express their views before the final decision is made at the end of September.
For a template letter and contact details for Worcestershire councillors, go to our Letters & Briefings page.
Pingback: We are Spartacus Release the Past Caring Report « Ramblings of a Fibro Fogged Mind
Are these proposals far from the workhouse solutions of the 19th century?
Are these proposals far removed from the workhouse culture of the 19th century?
We recently had the pleasure of meeting the Shadow Health Minister, Andy Burnham MP when he visited our constituency Wythenshawe & Sale East, and locally we have formed a group to monitor and collate the adverse effects and changes in Health & Social Care, to forward to him, so that such things can be raised and challenged where necessary on the floor of the House of Commons. I personally was very impressed by his commitment to hold the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, to account for his reforms. It might be a good idea to arrange to forward a copy of your report ‘Past caring’ for Andy’s attention, assuming you haven’t already done so?? Kind Regards, Steve.
Pingback: Disabled people have a right to live independently, Worcester council | Sue Marsh | Disability Caring
Pingback: Daily round up of legal news July 13, 2012 - Rated Legal Professionals | Rated Legal Professionals
Time for ALL these charities, disability organisations, groups and others to come together as one and speak with one voice. Once this happens you can then petition as one and raise money through donations and fund raising events to finance good legal advise to look into all the legalities of what has happened to the sick and disabled with the view to challenging this Government in a court of law because what they have done to the most vulnerable in society is clearly outright wrong and draconian. This is the only effective way to go forward by coming together to become strong so that the message gets out and this Government will no longer be able to just arrogantly cover their ears.
Unite and fight as one, together we are strong.
Everyone e-mail this website and others to get them to come together as one and now. Don’t waste anymore time. Just remember if all these charities, disability organisations and others come together : Together We Will Be Strong and they will not be able to ignore what they are inflicting. So people start e-mailing this site to get them to take up this idea and now.
Your ideas are excellent. Actually, you’ll be pleased to know that we do have good solidarity, getting better as time goes on. As a national movement, WeareSpartacus was delighted to help the disabled people of Worcestershire with this particular issue. We also have some friends in high places, and an offer of possible legal help has come from the organisation Liberty, which can be taken up by Worcestershire residents if this proposals is adopted and they are disadvantaged by it. Liberty is not certain the proposal is illegal but is willing to look into it if the worst happens…
Greate pieces. Keep writing such kind of info on your page.
Im really impressed by your site.
Hello there, You have done a great job. I’ll definitely digg it and in my opinion suggest to my friends. I’m sure they will be benefited from this web site.
How does the new proposal of putting those who are long term chronically
ill in homes “saves” money? Contractors will benefit. This will lead to loss
of jobs for social workers etc.. Chronically ill will suffer abuse at the hands
of untrained cheap staff….Its about commodifying those who are vulnerable,
nothing to do with saving money.
The proposals are not illegal, and there will be no legal challenge, IMHO.
There should be mass protests by those who are healthy, those who are chronically ill are unable to put a fight.
1. This type of proposal has been met before and investigated by the local government ombudsman.
Liverpool City Council operated a financial ceilign of £110 pw on the level of care at home. This reflected the average cost of providing care to an older person in a care home. This policy was apparently rigidly applied and, on investigation, the ombudsman found the council had fettered its discretion in determining the care package to be provided. It was unfair and discriminatory against older people. Some £10,000 compensation was recommended. The report is complaint 96/C/4315, 20 August 1998.
Comments on a council choosing the cheapest option to meet assessed eligible needs can be found in the second and subsequent editions of Luke Clements and Puuline Thompson’s book, “Community Care and the Law.”
2. It is also arguable the policy flies straight in the face of the much vaunted “personalisation” policy. The individual can have choice, independence and control provided they do so in a care home. Perhaps Worcester had anticipated the new initiative launched by the Department of Health of permitting direct payments to be used to pay for residential care.
I believe they are courting absolute disaster.
Steve Brett
I am physically disabled, and lived in residential care for some time. I hated it, and wished I Was dead. I now have my own flat, and have full time support at home. I will fight to keep my independance and fight the government to keep my home….
Pingback: What’s the difference between 1930s Germany and modern-day Britain? | A Latent Existence
Pingback: 100 Britain is losing its sense of decency when it comes to the disabled | That Reblogging Thing
It was pasted on thursday 8th november 2012.
https://public.worcestershire.gov.uk/web/home/DS/Documents/Appendix/Cabinet/Agendas%20and%20Reports%202012/Thursday%2C%208%20November%202012/Agenda%2C%208%20November%202012%20item%205.pdf
Proposed Changes as a
result of Consultation
34. As a result of the consultation the revised policy now
includes:https://www.facebook.com/groups/wcc.cap.socialcare/
(a) The consideration of specialist opinion by the Appeals Panel;
(b) Clarity on the term ‘exceptional circumstances’;
(c) Clarity on the term ‘significant change in need’;
(d) Clarity that only County Council funding will be considered under the policy.
35. Whilst it is recognised, however, that the policy raises complex issues, no information was received during the robust consultation process that would lead to a recommendation to abandon the policy. The recommendation is therefore to introduce the policy,
amended as above.
So Worcester appear set on introducing a ceiling on the cost of care packages for care at home. I am sure the lawyers will be watching this “policy” very closely and it may well be it will be tested in the Courts. That apart there must be concern why it departs from the following advice.
1. The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services published a document, Common Resource Allocation Framework, in October 2009. It states on page 17, Policy issue 4 – People with high support needs:
…Other councils have set a “cost ceiling” or maximum figure. These approaches are not recommended and may well be open to legal challenge…
It accordingly advises:
Councils should avoid applying a “cost ceiling.”
2. I found another document on the Department of Health website entitled “Use of Resources in Adult Social Care, Putting People first, Transforming Adult Social Care, A guide for local authorities. Once you have located the document simply put “residental care” into the search box and then read the results that come up. It seems clear to me that the thrust is away from residential care not toward it.
Clearly Worcester have difficult financial decisions to make but their policy appears contrary to that of the Assocation of Directors of Adult Social Services and the Department of Health. They may well be sewing the wind.
The solution? To misquote from a leading case:
Parliament declared the ends (choice freedom and control in transforming social care) it is for Parliament to find the means.
Thanks Steve – you won’t be surprised to know that we have barristers on the case at the moment…
I’m assuming you’re something of an expert in social care policy?
Jane
Jane,
The local government lawyer website shows that an application for judicial revue has been made against Worcester CC.
Steve
isnt it about time this country got its priorities right if you want to save money make all immigrants wait 2 yrs before being able to claim benefits not attack disabled or terminally ill people. seems to me its an open purse thats causing all the problems anyway if i wanted to emigrate to australia i would have to prove that i could sustain myself so why not england and this should include our nhs healthcare im disgusted
how about all disabled and terminally ill flooding in to local dwp offices and having sit ins as protests