Care Homes Necessary Or Evil?

gettingtheresometime

Mum has said she'd rather be shot than go into a nursing home...I have asked her to put that into writing.

Aunty is a nursing home and I'd rather be shot myself that go into a home like that.

Not a resident of Ambridge are you OP?

Pollycat

Rambosmum wrote: »

Necessary and evil.

And they won't be any different until we stop paying carers minimum wage and give them proper training, but to do that we'd have to value our elderly and disabled.

Not always.

The one my Dad was in was good - and it wasn't expensive. In fact it was one used by the Council for people who couldn't fund themselves (Dad was self-funding).

Firetastic

I would say Care Homes are necessary. My Gran is in a Care Home and although we've had problems recently the staff are second to none. It would be impossible for us to look after Gran .

The house isn't really suited to her needs and would require adaptions. She is rather stubborn and wouldn't do anything we told her eg walk with zimmer. She has a lot more company than she did when she was living with us. She also eats a lot more than she did when living with us.

However sometimes it's more no choice than through choice.

itsanne

bluelass wrote: »

Should old or disabled people go into care if they cant look after themselves? My answer is yes they should. If someone needs 24 hour assistance and they are very handicapped (need lifting, spoon fed and toileting etc). No one could do it single handed 24/7 what if they cant sleep because the person they look after is always trying to get out and wander off. And not everyone has the ability to be a unqualified nurse maid so I think it is justified.

Are you being pressed not to have someone go into a care home or trying to persuade someone their relative should go, bluelass? If anyone is pressuring you, if you think it's the right thing there's no need to feel guilty. No one else can walk in your shoes.

Bettie

I can't believe the difference in "Granny" since she went into a care home. She's bright, happy, her dementia seems to have been a misdiagnosis as there is now no sign of it, probably eating much better has helped plus she has loads of company and entertainment every day. She no longer has to worry about wetting the bed or getting her tablets right or answering a door to strangers. She was dreading going into a home but now wishes she had done it years ago.

pollypenny

My father went in a residential home after breaking his hip. It was council, but he was self-funding.

It was generally good, with three smaller lounges, so no barn-like feel, very good quality furniture and the staff were wonderful, good valleys people.

It's just the food that occasionally let it down.

Rambosmum

Gavin83 wrote: »

Out of curiousity did the people in the first category fund themselves and the people in the later category receive council funding?

I actually work in the local authority and support people who require LA funding for care and most homes are a mix of self funders and LA funding, care homes aren't allowed to discriminate.

Pollycat I also investigate safeguarding concerns in care homes, and yes, some are great. But I don't know a single care home in my LA which hasn't had a safeguarding in the last 12 months.

Gavin83

Rambosmum wrote: »

I actually work in the local authority and support people who require LA funding for care and most homes are a mix of self funders and LA funding, care homes aren't allowed to discriminate.

No they're not allow to discriminate but there will be a number of homes that simply won't accept the council rate so either people in there are self funding or are subject to a top up fee. Logic would dictate these homes would be the best as the extra income will allow more to be spent on the residents and the very fact they're able to charge more would suggest they're more desirable. The reality? Possibly different.

At the moment having your own money gives you more choice and this is the way it should be.

Rambosmum

Gavin83 wrote: »

No they're not allow to discriminate but there will be a number of homes that simply won't accept the council rate so either people in there are self funding or are subject to a top up fee. Logic would dictate these homes would be the best as the extra income will allow more to be spent on the residents and the very fact they're able to charge more would suggest they're more desirable. The reality? Possibly different.

At the moment having your own money gives you more choice and this is the way it should be.

The reality - very, very different in my experience.

Gavin83

Rambosmum wrote: »

The reality - very, very different in my experience.

Well there isn't really much to say to this as it's also very dependent on area. I do know that the home widely considered the 'best' in my area is one that doesn't accept the standard council rate.