What is going on in this house?

"90 mins isn’t that far. Plenty of people commute that distance to work daily."

An hour and a half one way to do a lowly paid carer's job? I can't believe that unless the commute is also paid and part of working hours, which it would be if the staff are transferred from a different trust.

If the person is a criminal or potentially dangerous?
Facilities for homeless people also sometimes get that kind of bad press.

Why would the press be interested in one man moving into an adapted living facility with two carers. Unless he’s Elvis, it’s not remotely newsworthy.

Exactly . I don't have the right to ask

I would be curious too if it was near me.

You may be able to search planning permissions on your local council website. Very surprised that nothing has been in the local press as this sort of thing is loved by them to create drama locally. We have a few homes nearby that have been converted into children's homes and the press had a field day trying to stir up trouble.

Definitely not a relative.
The trust they come from would be about 90 mins drive away at best with no traffic so quite far

Wow 5 to 1 care? I didn't even know that existed really. This sounds almost exactly like the house I'm talking about, even the frosted window film and the darkened vehicle. Maybe this mystery is solved!

You put in the appropriate measures that those individuals need, according to their personal level of risk and their histories. You can use sections, and DoLS etc as appropriate. You certainly don't ignore when a person with a history of violence tells you that they have a detailed plan to throw someone off a building and then give them unsupervised leave, or any of the other failings listed in the two of those cases we know about.

Some people can't seem to see that these high profile cases reveal serious professional and system mistakes, rather than "all people with high needs mental disabilities are so potentially dangerous they need locking up preventatively". If that's the way we should be thinking, maybe we should just lock up all men to be honest.

You have not read any of the posters telling you how this care is likely funded or that these prison type facilities you advocate for don't exist in the UK. Do you propose the NHS/LA should start building/funding/staffing these as this would be millions spent, making care packages small in comparison.
It is clear from your posts you have never had relatives that have needed bespoke care how lucky for you!

Personally I now think you are on a wind up to rile other posters on this thread but if not, well shame on you

So what to do with people who won’t take their meds and stab 3 people going about their business or someone who throws a little boy on his hols over a balcony or someone who thinks chucking a toddler into a crocodile pit - surely we deserve as a society protecting not dodging bullets every day

You do realise the reason they have made the news is because it is so unusual? Many people need care because they are more of a risk to themselves than anyone else. Have you ever worked in this industry or had any family members needing 24hr support?

Yes, exactly that, but in some form of solitary confinement where he has access to carers but not actual physical access to other residents. Or very limited access to other residents in strictly controlled circumstances and small doses. So like when you see someone doing a prison visit via a protective screen, they could socialise to a degree, if capable or willing to do so, but not have the opportunity to physically attack other residents.

It's not very nice, I know, but it's just the most realistic and pragmatic option. People are saying 'where are these facilities? They don't exist.' Well neither do these very expensive, bespoke assisted living places until some committee decided to buy a house and convert it to one. These people are essentially being kept in solitary confinement (apart from access to their carers) anyway aren't they? That would appear to be the entire point of these houses, to accommodate certain very high needs, high risk individuals away from other residents in a shared facility. So we may as well drop the hand wringing and outrage at the idea of solitary confinement for unwell or mentally disabled people. Because that is basically what these outrageously expensive tailor-made solutions are designed to do.

This is why relatives can't be involved in these kinds of decisions. Of course we all want the best that's possibly available for our relatives, whether that's care or some ultra expensive drug or treatment.

But, "we" can't pay for it all, so difficult decisions have to be made. My neighbour went to the US, after being told her cancer was terminal, for treatment that wasn't available on the NHS. 20 years on she's just run a marathon. The NHS would have let her die because of cost, those kinds of decisions happen daily.

So what to do with people who won’t take their meds and stab 3 people going about their business or someone who throws a little boy on his hols over a balcony or someone who thinks chucking a toddler into a crocodile pit - surely we deserve as a society protecting not dodging bullets every day

I think sadly people look at those with severe learning disabilities (and the like) as if they're not real people. I think on some level they don't really believe it could happen to families like theirs.

They don't understand that the these people are our cherished children, who we held close as babies, and nursed through sickness, and got ready for school, and celebrated all their achievements (whatever they may be). They're real people, with souls and personalities and loved ones and human rights. They're not this homogenous, intrinsically dangerous, not-fully-human "other" kind of being.

It’s a half way house for ex offenders

sounds exactly like one on the street round the corner from where I used to live

The problem with the families who want their mentally unwell or mentally disabled relative to live the most free life they can, is that they don't want to be the ones caring for them 24/7 while they do it.

Because they already know how exhausting and demoralising and risky and dangerous and basically impossible it is to enable them to have that. But they want the rest of us to pay for round the clock care for other people to provide the care that they themselves don't want to do provide because it's too much like hard work and they are tired of being head butted or having their house smashed up daily.

So I'm sorry but unless you are prepared to do it yourself then you can't always demand and dictate the level of 'care' and 'freedom' and independence' or 'autonomy' or 'inclusion' or whatever you want to call it, that you'd like that relative to have.

Look at the situation recently of the little boy thrown into the crocodile enclosure. That mentally disabled man had two full time carers with him and this still happened. And we've been told that his limited capacity to understand what he did means he won't face any charges for it. His right to 'enjoyment' and 'inclusion' meant other people were put needlessly at risk and it almost cost that poor child his life.

Perhaps, after the inevitable enquiry about what went wrong (apart from the bleeding obvious) some genius will argue that 'lessons have been learnt' and from now on, the answer to this is that people like him should have six carers, not two, when they are taken out for the day among the general public. Any measures, at absolutely any cost, just so long as they aren't 'locked up in an institution like Victorian times'.

Yes agree with this. In my ICB which serves a huge area of probably 1 million plus. We have no more than 10 high cost cases and most of them are 3:1 max and thats only waking hours.

@ForeverNowWithin

So say a 15yr old fell off their bike. Wasn’t wearing their helmet. Got a brain injury. Parents tried to care for them for a few years but their other dc were at risk due to the change in them since their injury. Now requires 2:1 care, regularly inappropriate and difficult to look after. Prior to the accident was just a normal kid. If this was your child you honestly think they should just be locked up? You would be ok with that? Providers and carers work hard to ensure they still have a fulfilling life as much as possible but you would be ok with your child not getting that?

Fuck me, some of the responses on this thread are disgusting.

OP I don’t blame you for being curious, lots of us would be.