-
- Member
Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:44 am
Under 18s need some experience of life before they become carers, imo.
New rules allow 16 to 18-year-olds to become carers
Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
-
- Member
Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:29 am
with both this change to ages, and now the changes to benefit which will force people to work, is the motive perhaps purely cost related???most care jobs round here are at/near minimum wage....which is lower of course for 16-18 yr olds. how much would these private care companies specifically save a year???or am i just cynical?
Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:46 am
I am waiting for a response from cuk regarding the protection for our young carers under 18 (as they are still officially classed as children) who will be expected to provide intimate personal care?
Also, will cultural differences apply to some and not others re this issue?
Also, will cultural differences apply to some and not others re this issue?
-
- Member
Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:06 am
Mairie, I know that Matt and Gavin have been working at the conferences recently, so I don't think they've been anywhere near the website over the last few days to be able to give any answers.
As I understand it, you're asking CUK to campaign against this policy about allowing 16-18 year olds to become carers? This is the problem with the news media and just about everyone else talking about carers but meaning care workers - paid staff. This polict is about allowing 16-18 year olds to obtain paid work as care staff, and while CUK and individuals working for CUK may have opinions about it, they do not work for those individuals. The only campaign they could follow in those circumstances is to ensure that carers and the cared for have a choice in terms of the staff that enter their homes. Having said that, I know of some very mature youngsters who really give a darn that would work out better than some older care workers. Again, that's really down to individual choice - and I do take your point about the potential for abuse. That is about training and support for staff and certainly doesn't come under CUK's remit other than in terms of the quality of services.
Young carers often provide care for their parents and in some cases have had to provide very intimate personal care: CUK has been campaigning against this for some time. It now appears that the government has finally listened, and the new national strategy (for all its other faults) does address this by saying that no young carer (that is, under 18) will be expected to provide "inappropriate" care. Of course, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating as always and no doubt there will be arguments about what is and is not "appropriate." But it is a start.
As I understand it, you're asking CUK to campaign against this policy about allowing 16-18 year olds to become carers? This is the problem with the news media and just about everyone else talking about carers but meaning care workers - paid staff. This polict is about allowing 16-18 year olds to obtain paid work as care staff, and while CUK and individuals working for CUK may have opinions about it, they do not work for those individuals. The only campaign they could follow in those circumstances is to ensure that carers and the cared for have a choice in terms of the staff that enter their homes. Having said that, I know of some very mature youngsters who really give a darn that would work out better than some older care workers. Again, that's really down to individual choice - and I do take your point about the potential for abuse. That is about training and support for staff and certainly doesn't come under CUK's remit other than in terms of the quality of services.
Young carers often provide care for their parents and in some cases have had to provide very intimate personal care: CUK has been campaigning against this for some time. It now appears that the government has finally listened, and the new national strategy (for all its other faults) does address this by saying that no young carer (that is, under 18) will be expected to provide "inappropriate" care. Of course, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating as always and no doubt there will be arguments about what is and is not "appropriate." But it is a start.
-
- Member
Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:07 am
You are right it is about money all it will mean is that some will employ a lot of 16-18 year olds with one older person to supposedly supervise. It will also mean more profit for the company or care home as the price will not changeThis is not about easy options so much as the recruitment problems in the care "industry".
And of course the much lower minimum wage for under 21s, and especially those under 18. Which is what this is REALLY about.
My youngest daughter started work in a care home just before her 17th birthday by the time she was 19 she was been left to run the place and in charge of the other staff over twice her age. She is now at university studying mental health and when qualified is thinking of working overseas USA or Canada
Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:42 am
Charles, thank you for your reply.
-
- Member
Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:00 am
I was married at 18 in 1965! (and we're still here after 43 years 
). I don't like the idea that I was a child. I was a rock'n roll chick with the world at my feet! My first child was born 11 months later
We're doing our young people a dis-service by extending their childhood. In fact some of them are out there dying in Afghanistan; they aren't children when we want them to put their lives on the line.
How can you educate someone for the awful view of an elderly, wrinkled body? Not a pleasant sight and enough to turn the stomach of any eighteen year old!! Should we give them a full day of training by forcing them to gaze upon one naked pensioner after another? Who will volunteer to be the bodies gazed upon?
Nurses have always wiped bottoms. Parents have always wiped bottoms. It's a fact that we all have bottoms that need to be wiped. As a young child I wiped the bottoms of my younger siblings.
What we need to ensure is that those who take on the role of Carer are equipped and mature enough to do it, and that they do it out of choice.
). I don't like the idea that I was a child. I was a rock'n roll chick with the world at my feet! My first child was born 11 months later We're doing our young people a dis-service by extending their childhood. In fact some of them are out there dying in Afghanistan; they aren't children when we want them to put their lives on the line.
How can you educate someone for the awful view of an elderly, wrinkled body? Not a pleasant sight and enough to turn the stomach of any eighteen year old!!
Should we give them a full day of training by forcing them to gaze upon one naked pensioner after another? Who will volunteer to be the bodies gazed upon?Nurses have always wiped bottoms. Parents have always wiped bottoms. It's a fact that we all have bottoms that need to be wiped. As a young child I wiped the bottoms of my younger siblings.
What we need to ensure is that those who take on the role of Carer are equipped and mature enough to do it, and that they do it out of choice.
-
- Member
Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:35 am
I had my three daughters by the time I was 26. We adopted our DS son when I was 35.
Nowadays many parents are putting off having children until they are well into their 40s even early 50s in some cases. I feel for the children who might end up caring for aged parents at a relatively young age.
Nowadays many parents are putting off having children until they are well into their 40s even early 50s in some cases. I feel for the children who might end up caring for aged parents at a relatively young age.
Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:20 am
I apologise for offending anyone with my last posting. I certainly did not wish to upset or offend anyone.
I have edited out my post and I hope nobody else was offended. I will not post again on this subject.
Best wishes.
I have edited out my post and I hope nobody else was offended. I will not post again on this subject.
Best wishes.