While I so agree that Learning Disability training should be mandatory for all nurses, why just restrict to nurses as both Learning Disability and also autism training should be mandatory training for all staff within Health and Social Care. When I say all staff within Health and Social Care I mean all staff starting with the Chief Executives and all Board directors down to every level within all of these organisations.
Also it mentions co-production and co-design, but it should mean real co-production and co-design, 2 different but similar concepts and in many organisations co-production is simply just consultation and no way meets the standards of co-design, let alone the standards of co -production and in many instances it is just a ‘tickbox’ exercise and therefore there is no real intention to comply.
It does not state it, but in true co-production and work and especially outcomes are the property of the co-production team and not anyone of the individual partners in the co-production, so it will not be the property of the NHS, Social Care, etc, so any instances to change or amend should be a reforming of the original Co-production members.
Attitudes have always been changing, and will always do so.
For in the 18th century persons with learning disabilities (LD) or now known as intellectual disabilities, but with different labelling, were more inclined to be looked after by their families and were a part of the community.
But on approaching the 19th century this form of accepting changed and persons with LD were more than likely to be placed in institutions where they were out of sight of Society and, of course, their families.
But in the mid-Twentieth century there institutions were, quite rightly, starting to be closed and persons with LD were again within the community and to a large extent their families under the heading of Community Care. But there was one major drawback, as Community Care was never, anywhere near sufficiently funded by Governments, which is still the case for Social Care today.
In 1948 the NHS was created and welfare benefits from 1906 -1914. However, the current and last few Conservative Governments have eroded some of the financial state of these benefits with a view to enhance employment.
But these Governments failed to see, either by design or ignorance that not all on benefits can gain employment and for some of those that do, their financial gain in doing so was minimal, as they were on the statutory minimum wage which in many instances was just above subsistence level and this is the case, even today.
For many employment opportunities on a salary above subsistence to be replaced by opportunities on only the minimum wage. this is in no way inclusion and this is for the general workforce.
But within this there are many persons with disabilities, who need, due to their disabilities more income to cover the additional costs relating to their disabilities.
Yes.as said before, there are welfare benefits, but these are again insufficient and Tory governments have put in place barriers which make it much more difficult to obtain these benefits.
This coupled with the state of Social Care in the twenty-first century are making lives even more difficult for persons with disabilities.
Much needs to be done by this Government to engage change, but have they the will to do this? I fear not.
Children’s TV presenters are often at the forefront of social change. Perhaps this is because – as one of the people interviewed in Silenced: The Hidden Story of Disabled Britain (BBC Two) remarked – “children are much better at inclusion” than their angry-letter-writing, Ofcom-complaint-making parents.
Ben Cajee, of the current CBeebies cohort, won praise for his age-appropriate discussion of racism in October, but in 2009 it was his predecessor Cerrie Burnell who inadvertently became an activist. Burnell was born with a right arm that ends just below the elbow. She hadn’t set out to champion the rights of disabled people – all she wanted was to introduce another episode of Balamory – but when parents complained that her appearance was “scaring children”, she did just that.
Where do such prejudices against disabled people come from? This documentary saw Burnell explore that question, finding the beginnings of an answer in…
Social Care is just as important as Health Care, but does not receive the support is should do.
With this in mind please could I mention that the forthcoming Budget is an important opportunity to address the crucial issue of funding for Social Care, but will it.
Boris has promised, but will he keep his promise and even if money is made available will it be sufficient.
Boris has now mentioned it will take 5 years to get the funding, Social Care can not wait that long.
Boris needs to be told this is not good enough, so it is essential we keep the pressure on Boris and my petition ‘Solve the crisis in Social Care could be the means.
Please see below
We now have the New Year 2020.
However, if the ‘Crisis in Social Care’ is not Solved soon there will not be many more New Years for the care, required for persons in need of care, to be provided by Local Authorities due to their lack of funding. This will then have a much greater impact on health care provision, which is itself in crisis.
I have therefore created my latest petition, please follow the link
While I agree that Learning Disability and Autism training should be mandatory, so should Training on Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (Dols) and the forthcoming change of Dols to LPS (Liberty Protection Safeguards) effective from October 2020.
However, in this instance, while Learning Disability and Autism was relevant, surely the adherence to the policy on allergies is also relevant as this should be an underling principle for any organisation, especiallywithin health.
Co-production is a set of core values, principles and approaches that can be used to transform the way social care and mental health support are designed and delivered. This can happen on both individual and collective levels.
On the individual level, co-production can be described as a collaborative relationship between the people who use services and the practitioner (be it a social worker, personal assistant, teacher or housing officer). By emphasising the importance of communication and negotiation between frontline staff and the people who use services, it offers an alternative to the gatekeeping and ‘gift’ models of care based on resource eligibility, or care and support delivery based on tasks. The emphasis is on power sharing, relationships and mutual respect for knowledge and expertise.
Assessment and support planning provide a primary opportunity for practitioners, services users and potentially family, friends and other supporters to work together co-productively to define goals and outcomes and to design the support needed to achieve these. This can happen in any social care or mental health context, be it self-directed support planning for personal budget or direct payment use in the community, or in the context of residential care (Sanderson and Lewis, 2011). To be co-productive, the practice should be informed by Edgar Cahn’s (2004) core values of having an asset perspective, nurturing reciprocity and building social capital. Person-centred, strengths-based and recovery approaches in mental health all have the potential to reflect these core values in assessment and support planning. For example, in mental health:
In our times of austerity with LA budgets so tight there isn’t support for adult family carers, beds or equipment; benefits slashed to £62.50 per week for 24/7 care, and DLA reduced to £103.
Our government is providing 136 million to transfer 3000 LD/autistic from NHS hospitals to private increasingly venture capital monopoly corporation ‘ community living’ care with no public only private hospital admissions of the autistic/LD and/or behaviour challenged
So this 136 million goes straight into USA Universal Health Services/Acadia and three monopoly community living providers and LA administration. .
Such siphoning off of NHS/LA money to private profit has been planned for years, Laing and Bouisson, specialist consultants in care development produced this report in 2011.
Commissioned by the Director of Learning Disabilities NHS under the ‘Valuing People now’ initiative.
At the start of this co-production Rachael enquired through Sheffield Mencap & Gateway for carers of persons with Learning Disabilities to work with her on her PHd project.
During the last 18 months we have had regular meetings at the University of Sheffield on how we would proceed with this project and what our initial outcomes would be. Initially through general discussions, which Rachael was recording, it became clear that the recurring situations was around carers communications with the range of Service Providers. Within the context of Service Providers it included Sheffield Adult Social Care
Long-awaited green paper will be published by next summer, but will focus just on care for older people
At last we have some details of the government’s long-awaited consultation on reform of long-term care. But let’s be clear: this will not be a social care green paper.
Plans for the consultation were announced on Thursday in a written statement to parliament by Damian Green, the first secretary of state. He did call it a green paper – something that had been in doubt – and said it would be published “by summer recess 2018”. Recess is likely to be late July.
It looks like its appearance will be more than a year, then, after the general election in June at which the Conservatives’ ideas for care funding reform were so disastrously mishandled, almost certainly contributing to the loss of their majority, and the subsequent Queen’s speech, which promised that the new government “will work to improve social care and will bring forward proposals for consultation”.
But this is a different prospectus than that implied by that pledge. In one sense, as Green said, it is broader than social care services and broader than funding alone: it will “incorporate the wider networks of support and services which help older people to live independently, including the crucial role of housing and the interaction with other public services”.
In another sense, however, it is far narrower. Care for younger adults, which accounts for almost half of all council spending on adult social care and includes the fastest growing element, learning disability, is to be excluded from the green paper. Instead, it will be reviewed by “a parallel programme of work” led jointly by the departments of health and communities and local government.
Given this, many sector bodies that had been stressing the central importance of having a green paper considering social care as a whole have been notably muted in their response. Even the usually vocal Voluntary Organisations Disability Group, representing not-for-profit providers of services for disabled people, has welcomed the announcement as “a step forward”, while cautioning that disability provision must not be sidelined.
Reaction on social media has been more robust. Calls for an all-age approach were supported even by some of those named as advisers on the green paper, while Victor Adebowale, the crossbench peer and chief executive of care provider Turning Point, simply tweeted #notgoodenough.
Other critics have pointed out that there is no care users’ or workers’ representation among the 12 experts, who will “provide advice and support engagement in advance of the green paper”. Trade union Unison branded this “a huge mistake”.
Carers’ groups were meanwhile left wondering what had happened to the carers’ strategy promised by the government in March 2016. It had been thought it might be rolled into the green paper, but Green’s statement made no mention of carers.
The accepting response of the sector establishment to the proposals is, no doubt, a reflection of relief that there is to be any kind of green paper at all. The focus on older people may finally point to a way forward on the vexed issue of care funding that has been becalmed in the muddy waters of politics since the Dilnot commission reported in 2011.
The 12 experts, ranging from statistician Sir Andrew Dilnot himself to Caroline Abrahams, charity director of Age UK, and Martha Lane Fox, the crossbench peer and dotcom businesswoman who seems to pop up on most government reviews, may also prove able to shape the consultation purposefully before it goes live next summer.
However, anyone with an interest in social care for younger adults will be left trusting that the “parallel programme of work” proves meaningful and that the sector stays in one piece. The spectre of the division of the former cradle-to-grave social services function into adult and children’s services in 2004 hangs heavy in the air.