Think of this: a plan to ‘warehouse’ disabled people.

[SerendipityJane]

maybe just send them to Rwanda ? Out of sight, out of mind etc ...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/25/warehouse-disabled-people-bristol-city-council

PS - having been to Rwanda, I might be willing to consider an offer. It's looking quite attractive compared to the UK, and at least I wouldn't need to worry about heating bills.

I'm sure this country will bring in assisted dying at some point then we'll be off down the route Canada is taking.

Go into a home or die. The choice is yours. At least you have a choice, people will say. Ffs

dont give them ideas!!

After all that money is mainly going into the pockets of private landlords, as opposed to big corporations. So thats got to change!

That is an unacceptable solution. I came across a lady in her 50's with CP in a nursing home when I was student. She had no life. She could really have achieved a lot living in the community.

Some great ideas coming out here<smiley face> !

Totally agree. It's going back to the old long stay institutions that we managed to get rid of.

Are you taking the piss or something?

I hope they were 😀

Have you had experience of care homes?

I've got MS. Hell would freeze over before I give up my house, beloved cats and independence to live in a care home!

People are posting answers to this as if people are going to be carted off in black mariahs.

What would happen (if such a plan went ahead) is that the care package wouldnt pay enough for the current interventions of things like a PA or going out etc

So a person might look to friends and family to provide that rather than live residentially.

That runs the risk for people who dont have such a network, but also possible exploitation.

In an ideal world, elderly people would be cared for in their home or their relative’s homes. Some people manage it. I know someone who kept her mother with dementia at home for many years. Not everyone has the capability to care for them or the right sort of property. People are working so aren’t around in the day. Also, as someone said, the average time spent in a care home is 2 years. I can’t imagine what spending your lifetime in an institution would be like. Awful, awful.

Well, so do DH and I but this conversation clearly is about those who can't live independently, not us. 20% of the UK population identifies as (I say that because the figure comes from a census not any official record) disabled, the term doesn't mean much these days.

A flat is still your own home. I don't understand why British people hate flats, you lot don't seem to accept you live on a tiny, densely populated island. That's why you're not going to solve this housing shortage with the 'everyone needs a house' mindset. In cities like Paris and densely populated island countries like Hong Kong and Singapore almost everyone lives in flats, yes even 'higher earners' and they're as spacious as houses. The only caveat is communal management.

@midgetastic Everyone deserves a secure space to live, and years ago it did happen. People got council houses whenever they wanted them. In 2023 housing is an issue not just for the disabled but across the board. Even with HB people can't afford private rents (and the amount available dropped as many LL's sold up). FT working adults can't afford to leave house shares, entire families are stuck in B&B's.

More housing needs to be built and more importantly OWNED and MANAGED by the government. Flats, not individual houses.

Just an aside although this discussion is related to care packages not the cost of housing

Oh we wouldn't force anyone ...we'd just make it impossible for them to do anything else

That's not better

Who do you mean by "you lot" @nachosandnachis ?

@nachosandnachis
but this conversation clearly is about those who can't live independently, not us. 20% of the UK population identifies as (I say that because the figure comes from a census not any official record) disabled, the term doesn't mean much these days.

It means a lot to people with disabilities. Perhaps your disability doesn't mean much but mine does.

But "....this conversation clearly is about those who can't live independently, not us...."
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Martin Niemöller

A conversation about taking away the liberty and human rights of anyone is a conversation about me.

Money is found for the things this Gov have deemed important (PPE, Rwanda, cutting business tax). A low tax state doesn’t work for anyone (including those waiting for cancer treatment). Plus anyone, or any member of their family, could become disabled at any time and require support. A decent society supports the most vulnerable and doesn’t moan about doing so.

British born and bred. Unlike me.
Where I'm from flats aren't just 'starter homes' unlike in the UK. As a result they're not all rabbit hutches. There are 2 beds, 4 beds, multi-storeys, multiple bathrooms ... every configuration you can think of. They're designed for family living, not as a stopgap until one can move on to a house. Oh, and also have all the required facilities nearby by law like a GP, schools, etc.
I get why people here don't want to live in them, it's a chicken and egg problem. People 'don't want them', so they're 'not built'. At the same time, it is because they're not well built that people don't want them.
But equally, people are always moaning at a lack of housing yet constantly trying to stop anything new being built. I get it if it's greenfield (that vs brownfield is a whole other conversation) but things like traffic, not wanting 'incomers'... seriously?

No idea where all these nice big 3 bed semis and a massive garden are going to be put with enough density to provide everyone with the housing they deserve.

Agree with what you say but we're not a low tax state

We are also not a society that generally keeps our sick, disabled and elderly with us in our own homes, so we want the state to manage this

I include myself in that too, I would not have the ability to provide direct care in that way unfortunately.

I don't think my point was quite clear actually. I wasn't against anybody's human rights. Just that 'the disabled' is such a big category these days tarring everyone with the same brush isn't useful.
Just like how the voices of those with more needs in, say the autism community is drowned out by the rest. If anybody else says 'autism is a superpower' I don't think I'll be able to avoid braining them with a shovel.

Anyway. Of course warehousing is unacceptable but the other funny thing is, care homes itself aren't even a magic solution. Many have closed down due to being underfunded. So how are they even going to do that?

It's all going to vary a lot regionally depending on what's available. People are just going to end up being shoved in where they can be which isn't great.

Own home care should always be the first choice. I really can’t see how much cheaper it would be in a care home over paying for 24/7 care. I know people who can’t even scratch their own nose don’t get 24h carers anymore. They fit a self turning mattress and say congrats your care plan is down to 12h a day.

At bare mim I want choose my own meals even if I can’t choose when the agency are available to warm them up for up. Even if they are unhealthy and junk food. I want some control over who comes into my own even if it’s asking for some carers not to come back. I went regular time using my care hours where I can go outside. Not based on if someone else needed an extra shower.

I want decide what washing powder I like my clothes to smell off. I want decide how much the heating is on or not. I want decide when and what visitors can come even if it’s not convenient for staff. I want any care time I have to be dedicated to me not rushing off to answer calls bells. All of which wouldn’t happen living in a residential home. It’s not asking much surely. You might save £100 a week on care and make most peoples lives feel worse off and remove them from their communities.

It's right that the state should manage care across the board. If it falls to individual families then only those lucky enough to have a supportive family with the means and resource would get cared for.
In many of the 'family care' countries all of that is done off the labour of women who get no thanks for it. Sadly care continues to be viewed primarily as women's work and so not important enough or deserving of decent pay.

We think its right that the state manage care, thats because thats what we're used to

We are a minority of countries in the world that has that philosophy.

I believe it too, but Im aware that its what Im used to and what I would rely on personally. It doesnt mean its the only way and there are lots of disadvantages to it

@BelindaOkra what happened to your son and the hospital admission as a response to distress behaviour is just what is going to be the "norm" again if this sort of shit goes through.

The ONLY way this could be viable (and not just melt down the NHS further with trying to deal with the fall out, hospital admissions, self-injury and absolute avalanche of referrals from placements unable or unwilling to cope) would be if the regulators were given some SERIOUS FUCKING BALLS and the standards for what we consider acceptable within the social care industry were completely ripped to shreds and rebuilt from the ground up. No more having someone come once a week to sing bloody Vera Lynn songs (and I do not for the fucking life of me know why residential settings for younger people are still stuck thinking they're catering for war-era adults - but they do) and calling it an "activity".... a ban on fucking bingo being the only other activity for the week as well. Decent staffing, actual proper interaction with residents - both during the downtime periods of the day and also during mealtimes - actually catering to people's different sensory and communication needs... and an end to these huge homes and a move toward smaller group homes.

People able to go out and engage in activities THEY want to do and not just shunted into an activity that they can get a few people in the minibus and do together whether the residents want to or not, or a "no you can't go to the shop today because you only have 1:1 staffing timetabled on a Tuesday afternoon".

When done well - it works - but it requires time, it requires staff who WANT to engage (and there are homes I know of where the culture is absolutely fucked), it requires staffing consistency and - to start off with, it requires a massive leap of faith to change how things are done and rethink what some of the residents are actually capable of doing if you set them up to succeed and not to fail.

I'd also like a fiver for every time I go in somewhere and get told "oh they understand everything we tell them they just don't want to do it sometimes" - and I do assessment and find out that their understanding of language is actually nowhere near that level! I would be bloody rich.

You think you're being sensible and community minded, you think what you've written is palatable and socially acceptable - but what your words tell me is that you have a streak of evil running through you that you're not even aware of.

This man has a career as a social worker, he also volunteers as a school governor, he has friends and a social life and you'd see him condemned to a home with pensioners where he'll be lucky if the staff get him up before 10am let alone dressed and out the door? You have no contact with either the disabled community or care homes do you? If you did you would understand that this is a wild suggestion.