Older people dying from lack of social care

Thanks mamagran I thought my mum was an isolated case but sadly it seems not to be so.

@trisher I hear what you say. 100% agree. I'm sending you good thoughts.

My mother was probably part of this she died in hospital waiting for a care package. She was in hospital for over 3 months after a fall when she broke her pelvis. She suffered a number of health complications in hospital and steadily deteriorated. She became largely immobile. When she was deemed fit for discharge she needed nursing and social care. I did a tour of the local care homes that could provide the nursing care but didn't think she would like any of them. We were waiting for a care package to enable her to return to her own flat when she died of pneumonia. She had signed a DNR. I still wonder if she could have been discharged asap to her own flat if she would have lived longer, but she was 93. The care she received in hospital was amazing and the team who were working towards her discharge did everything they could. But I don't want to spend my last days in a bed on a hospital ward.

Private carers would be my choice too.

I agree to many of the points raised above. I've had to deal with social carers myself, for my parents who require quite a lot of care. The system is under pressure tremendously. Private carers have worked the best for us. Also, residential care was another option, but we soon established that that option was out of the question. We found our lovely carer Karolina with a care agency and she has been looking after our parents for 1 year. Whenever she needs to take a break, the agency sends someone else to cover for her.
In my opinion, this is the best course of action if you are looking for any particular type of care. Here is some advice if anybody is interested. I myself found it very helpful.
www.thecareworkerscharity.org.uk/homecare
www.guardiancarers.co.uk/care-information/pay-for-homecare

GracesGran, the proposed 'not selling our homes' is a devious plan. Currently, if you receive care at home, it's not included in your assets - but it will be.

The 'not selling' is only until you die, when the debt, plus interest, is payable.

Some lovely government working party has realised that care homes are closing, demand will increase significantly - oh, so how can they avoid any responsibility for paying?

I don't see how Generation X (61 - 81) will be able to look after their children as they will still be working ... won't they?

Add to that that they may be looking after us. Sad to say but caring for the elderly or very elderly can destroy your help as you are often doing it alone with no support. So how can they?

You're right Hetty. It does need a whole new system. So far though all we have been offered is tweaks and not selling our homes.

GracesGran, I really don't know as a whole new system is needed, maybe something like Germany or France have. We need to campaign for change.

rosenoir, as we're all living longer, many of us are in our sixties or seventies when our poor parents need help. It's tough enough working until 65 for some of us. My back problems are just due to 'wear and tear' but I couldn't cope physically with hoisting/transferring/supporting anyone.

Things are at crisis point now but I consider myself robust, optimistic and long suffering. What I'm really worried about is how my children and grandchildren will manage when they're old and frail.

Many grandparents are now looking after grandchildren whilst the parents work, I wonder if those families will look after the grandparents when needed.

I know. I've met so many good Social Workers who were quite beaten down by seeing so much need yet being unable to do what needed to be done.

Oh, Hetty. What can we do to change all this? Looking after mum I have learned the system but the very good people in it are battling against the cuts to councils, etc., just as much as we are.

My friend, having received treatment (and terminally ill) was sent home, with twice daily carer visits arranged. She expected her mother to be there, but no, she was in hospital, having rapidly gone downhill.

My friend had always lived at home, never on her own. Even the family dog wasn't there. I'd taken him in after neighbours had fed and walked him for a few weeks and he'd become depressed. I couldn't return him - because the carers wouldn't allow a dog in the house.

My dear (late) friend was a carer for her very frail and confused mother. When my friend suddenly became ill, (with brain tumours) she was whisked off to hospital and her mother was just left alone.

Neighbours broke in through the back door (the mum would never answer it) only because we visited my friend and she was worried sick. There was her mum, just sitting in a chair, waiting for her daughter to come home. It's dreadful to think what might have happened.

Remember, it's a Johnson Care Crisis. If he is back it will only continue.

Jane10, your stories are among many others that demonstrate there is no natural division between social and medical care.

The term 'care package' is good. However the several caring agencies should be orchestrated by one adequately capable person. In one of my experiences as a paid carer this 'orchestration' such as it was was initiated by a good neighbour, the old lady herself having no living kin.
I rang her GP to alert him about her specifically medical needs which were not being met by anyone. It should not happen that even the GP is unaware of the needs of a vulnerable person who is on his books until the GP is alerted by someone who is not employed for that responsibility ,such as a 'carer' or a good neighbour. There should be a designated fully capable individual who actively visits the vulnerable person and has the responsibility to institute whatever care the vulnerable person needs.

I should say the good neighbour in question was indeed very good and maintained her interest in the old lady , but the old lady's total care should never have devolved upon the random chance of there being a good neighbour.

There isn’t any EV. The National Debt has increased year on year since they have been in power. I think it’s now at its highest level EVER.

Because as sure as Hell they haven't been spending it in the areas where it's needed.

Where is all this money that the Conservatives have squirrelled away these past years, under the cloak of austerity ??

Yehbutnobut thank you so much for putting the link on.

So many things lost "all for the want of a horse-shoe nail" and it will cost so much to put them back together again. I find myself closing down when I read the stories; I cannot go back go that place. My mother has been in a lovely home for just over a year now, celebrating he 99th birthday last week.

Just one incident. We waited six weeks for the "emergency care" after one stay in hospital because of yet another fall. Yes, I covered with my doctor telling me my own conditions were deteriorating and I shouldn't continue, and yes, my daughter, like so many, help support us both while trying to do a job that has a great deal of travel and a family to care for. In the end mum had to fall and break her ankle, be move from hospital to hospital, temporary care home to the one she is in all while suffering - and she was suffering with huge anxiety - with dementia. And all the time you are asking, what if there was no "us"? What happens to the people on their own?

I can't thank the carers enough but the running down of the system over the last 10 years by the Conservatives, privatising under the guise of a pseudo need for austerity is wicked. There is no other word for it.

The standard definition is

‘Social care is a term that generally describes all forms of personal care and other practical assistance for children, young people and adults who need extra support.’

I think everyone can agree it’s inadequate and especially when people are paying for this.

Baggs a lot depends on how 'social care' is defined. My MiL was offered 'social care' which amounted to three hours at a care centre with sandwich lunch provided. To take up this offer she'd have needed someone to go in and get her up dressed breakfasted etc then waited with her till transport arrived or taken her there then either collected from the centre and taken home or someone waiting at home to receive her and get her organised for the rest of the day etc etc. Its the lack of thinking about all thats involved thats such a problem
My neighbour is in and out of hospital all the time despite his wife paying for 2 staff three times a day to get him in and out of bed etc. She's in her 80s. Recently he was discharged home at 2 in the morning due to ambulance availability but she had to refuse as she can't get him in and out of bed and see to his catheter etc as she's a wee thing herself. She worries when he slips down the bed and chokes and she cant pull him up. I've said to call me without hesitation but they are very proud and don't want to bother neighbours. Its all just a boorach!

Delays in replying to calls for help is something to target. A target which, I think, should not be beyond the wit of whoever oversees these things to improve on. I would say that is the crux of the article.

Of course an estimate can be wrong both ways. There may be many more than the estimate.

In fact we know that an accurate picture would be almost impossible

I work for a Scottish charity that provides day care for elderly people. One of the charity's establishments has closed recently because in the area it served there was more social care available than was needed in that area.

Whilst I agree that social care for elderly people is often inadequate, I think it's worth pointing out two things from that article. I quote:

"Age UK estimates" [my underlining]

"No one knows how many of these older people, if any, might have lived longer had they received care in time"

Estimates need more description, more specifics about how the estimate was made.

"No one knows" seems to contradict the claim made in the titles of both the thread and the article.