The clock is ticking - Guardian

[rosemary]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/ ... socialcare

[gordie07487]

That is a very good link Rosemary, urge all to read it. My only comment would be, why,why do people assume if you have an illness which requires a carer you are old every thing I have read so far uses the words Old, elderly, older,it is extremely insulting, it is not being pc to use these words, it is patronising to the extreme.
Sorry I forgot Good Morning all.

[g.herschel]

Guilty as charged

I always say elderly/ disabled as thats from my view point but if i remember i try to mention young carers and elderly carers of pensionable age looking after younger family members with out the carers allowance .

but as you can see from recent government statements the main problem is in fact elderly disabled and they are also aware that many carers are in their mid to late 50`s and in just a few years we carers will in fact become the next elderly group needing help and as government ministers have said carers are the least able to care for themselves when they are in retirement

GEORGE

[chmaja]

[quote] My only comment would be, why,why do people assume if you have an illness which requires a carer you are old ]

Well said!! oh I wish more would say it! There is a huge huge focus on here for this...why should we all need to be old to be ill?

Having just returned from a pre admission clinic for surgery where yes I am not old and yes I have chronic progressive conditions which have no cure and little treatment I was surrounded by YOUNG people who are also very ill and need care............but who cares?

Through my blog I am meeting younger very sick people.They are strong and determined people who like me need help and support and care but we are not old....oh gosh no we are the ones nobody cares about........the younger gang who need care and nobody remembers we exist because we live postive lives and don't moan!

Chris
www.mypeggypeg.blogspot.com

[Guest]

It will need a complete change in attitude if this is to become a reality, I knew my rights and responsibilities, I knew what was available and that we met the eligibility criteria, even though I'd been an advocate myself and had dealt with both health and social care professionals on behalf of other people I had to get myself an advocate yet despite all this we ended up with no assistance whatsoever, a disabled woman, ironically registered disabled by the same LA and area team, looking after a frail elderly husband. I've met and spoken to other people with similar experiences across the country.

Knowing your way round the system isn't always guarantee of services, in fact I would suggest that it can put you at a disadvantage if the attitude of the professionals you're dealing with is one of mistrust and they arrive having already decided that you're not entitled to services. If there's an ethos of gate-keeping access to services, as one social worker described it: making sure that only the right people get them and making sure that the "wrong" people don't, rather than of facilitating and enabling individuals to lead something vaguely pertaining to a normal life nothing will change. The attitude of mistrust of users and their carers having and controlling their own budgets is epitomised by the ADSS (Association of Directors of Social Services) demanding that if individuals are to be given their own funding to purchase their own services, social workers should be given powers to enter the homes of service users to ensure that they aren't being abused.

This all sounds wonderful on paper but without the willingness of social workers to trust the people they deal with and fully implement it, it will remain that, a wonderful idea on paper.

[Matt Hill]

It's a valid point about the focus on older people, but I think the thing with that article is that it's written by Stephen Burke who is chief executive of Counsel and Care and they are exclusively an older person's charity so naturally that will be his focus.

matt

[gordie07487]

It's a valid point about the focus on older people, but I think the thing with that article is that it's written by Stephen Burke who is chief executive of Counsel and Care and they are exclusively an older person's charity so naturally that will be his focus.

matt

Fair comment Matt

[gordie07487]

Guilty as charged

I always say elderly/ disabled as thats from my view point but if i remember i try to mention young carers and elderly carers of pensionable age looking after younger family members with out the carers allowance .

but as you can see from recent government statements the main problem is in fact elderly disabled and they are also aware that many carers are in their mid to late 50`s and in just a few years we carers will in fact become the next elderly group needing help and as government ministers have said carers are the least able to care for themselves when they are in retirement

GEORGE

No guilt need be xpressed george, I have one or two things that bug me that is one of them, I will be the first to admit Alice and I will not see 45 ish again Alice does draw her state pension not by choice, its the assumption I have the problem with

[charles47]

Of course, the only mention of disabled people of working age is that they should be helped into work.

So they don't need a carer, then, obviously!

Perhaps CUK could help to point out that this is not an option for everyone - because the government doesn't seem to have twigged yet!

[Guest]

Perhaps CUK could also mention that carers, working-age and older, can also be sick or disabled themselves both prior to taking on the carer role or as a direct consequence of caring, yet not only are they frequently expected to care alone with no consideration of the limitations on their capacity to care their illness or disability causes but they're also caught by the overlapping benefit rule .