[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Hypothetically, - Carers UK Forum


Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
If i should return to work full time because of financial issues, and my caree refuses any intervention by s.s. direct payments ,etc as is her right of choice as she is highly intelligent , and I continue caring after work for the min 35 hours (ie, during the night).
Who would be legally responsible if anything happened to her while I wasnt there?
as I wouldnt be allowed to claim ca and therefore wouldnt be legally recognised as her 'working' carer.
Is there any provision for this issue in talks with cuk and various people who think they know all about what our individual circumstances are?
And why, if we still would provide the required 35 hours of care weekly would we be exempt from ca entitlement?
Please cuk will you explain the legal situation on here for anyone else in the same circumstances as me.
Hi Tinker,

We will have to stop meeting like this Image .

I have no idea of any legal implications in a scenario like this but for me the main thing is that your daughter at all times has the right to make her own choices for whatever reasons they would be.
We have to weigh the pro's and con's as a family and then make the best decision we can with the information to hand.

Others will be able to advise you further about Social services role in something like this but my understanding is that if a caree has the mental capacity to decide for themselves,their decision has to be respected and adhered to.

Can your daughter cope by herself at all Tinker?
Is returning to work part time or full time something you can consider just now or are you looking further ahead?

Hope you are well
x x

Phew, Tinker, you do ask some interesting questions...

Firstly the CA bit - it's the easiest to answer. The rules for CA are that you only qualify if you meet all of the necessary conditions - one of them being that (if in work at all) you must be earning less than £95 a week, and working for 16 hours or less a week. £95 equates to 16 hours at the minimum wage.

On the other point, as Rosemary says, if the person being cared for has the mental capacity to make such a decision, it's their responsibility. That's the easy bit.

However, if they make themselves vulnerable because of their illness/disability, and something does go seriously wrong, there will be a lot of questions for the carer to answer. I'm not sure of any possible repercussions because I don't know of any situations where this has come up. But I would have thought that something in writing from the caree, witnessed by at least two people (not the carer or direct relatives, ideally), stating that they refuse all care from anyone but the carer, and they are happy for the carer to go to work during whatever hours, might help to avert any difficulties. Hopefully someone with more knowledge of the law in this area can help, but that's what I'd be looking at for starters.
Hi Tinker,

I would have thought it depends on age of your daughter. If she is over 18 I would have thought you dont have a responsibility to provide care. The question of responsibility for her care/safeguarding her welfare may be in the hands of the local authority if her needs have been brought to their attention. One for legal advice/advocacy looking at particular circumstances and beyond my knowledge!!
The local authority is legally responsible by statute for the welfare of all adults with a disability or mental health problem - any carer can withdraw at any time (preferably not by just vanishing on holiday to the canaries with your milkman without telling anyone, as this might be in breach of your common law "duty of care" - which is something we all owe to each other!)
It makes sense and is perfectly in order to notify your local authority social services in writing, giving as much notice as practicable.
However, whilst they do have the over-riding duty of care, it might take place in some other location than your own home such as a local day centre or day hospital, that depends on all kinds of factors that will only come out in an assessment.
Excalibur - could you expand please on the "Common Law Duty of Care"?
Thank you for your replies.
I can only presume then that if we dont care than our carees will be forced by the state to have s.s assesments etc, therefore loosing their right of choice.
Isnt this in itself a good enough reason for 24/7 carers to be paid at least the min wage?
Excalibur - could you expand please on the "Common Law Duty of Care"?
In tort law, a duty of care is a legal obligation imposed on an individual requiring that they adhere to a reasonable standard of care while performing any acts that could foreseeably harm others. In order to proceed with an action in negligence, the plaintiff must be able to articulate a duty of care imposed by law which the defendant has breached. In turn, breaching a duty may subject an individual to liability in tort.

Duty of care may be considered a formalization of the implicit responsibilities held by an individual towards another individual within society. It is not a requirement that a duty of care be defined by law, though it will often develop through the jurisprudence of common law. For example, doctors will be held to reasonable standards for members of their profession, rather than those of the general public in cases related to their fields.

Duty of care is evident between drivers of automobiles on the road. Each individual driver owes a duty of care to each of the other surrounding people - motorists, cyclists and pedestrians - to prevent accidents and drive in a reasonable manner. In the case of an automobile accident, drivers not paying attention or driving irresponsibly will have breached that duty of care.
I can only presume then that if we dont care than our carees will be forced by the state to have s.s assesments etc, therefore loosing their right of choice.
Establishing the persons wishes is a fundamental part of social work and medical assessments. But nobody has the right to demand care from a person who is unwilling to give it - that would turn carers into slaves. And whilst social services will do their best, they cannot meet unreasonable demands - for example to receive personal care on board a luxury liner cruising the world would be regarded as "trying it on a bit"..
Iam no expert but i would think that if your caree needs help and care and you left your caree alone knowing that harm may come to your caree when you were absent without seeking some kind of other care back up i wouild say you could be held liable.

Excalibur - could you expand please on the "Common Law Duty of Care"?
He sounds like Social Services! Only Joking! Image Image Image