to think that Human Rights has a lot to answer for in this obesity related death.

[meyesmyeyes]

A lot people are saying, Well why were people getting him that food? Why weren't they saying No? and why weren't the 'Carers' refusing to give him his takeaways etc.... OK, he would have sworn at them, but he couldn't get out of bed, so wouldn't have been able to harm them for not getting him his junk food.

the human rights act allows him to do what he wants if carers do not comply they are in the wrong and are liable to lose their jobs psychiatrists have to prove they do not have the capacity -- very few people come under this sadly

So surely, this poor man was failed miserably by a system that was supposed to help him?

People should have been in a position where they were able to say 'no' to him. But because of a flawed human rights system, this man has lost his life.

If they weren't available in his house, I would bring some from my own home - I would use my own initiative.

But that's the way I am. I've never been the type of person to think ''well I'm not doing that! That's not in my job description.
I would have bent the rules - to help him.

Where would you get the low fat spray and vegetables from then?

That was in relation to the above question.

And you'd do that for every client? We can have up to nine per night. Many of those are fifteen minutes.

And help for a lot of people means a lot more than just being told to eat less, rebecca. Unlike fags or booze, you can't go cold turkey on food, which means a lot of work needs to be done to both deal with factors surrounding feelings of fullness and hunger as well as all the intertwined emotional issues.

And many fat people do eat vegetables.

ouryve,
Obviously he wouldn't like it to start with, but you can train your taste buds to get used to different flavours and textures in food.
He may have got to like the taste of his food being cooked in less butter, or possibly grilled instead.
But somebody had to be prepared to try and make small changes first.

Nobody did, obviously.

And you'd do that for every client? We can have up to nine per night. Many of those are fifteen minutes.

No, just the one who was in danger of dying because of his bad food choices.

We have an obese woman on my calls. It's half an hour in the morning and fifteen minutes at night. Believe me cooking using low fat spray would make no difference - her fridge is just filled with chocolate and juice and cream.

But in any case it would be so patronising to cook her something using low fat spray - and inappropriate.

Well said LH. (And CS Lewis).

The man might have drunk himself to death, drugged himself to death, worked himself to death or jumped off a bridge. It's sad he chose to use his life in this way, but he exercised his free will as was his right to do.

I am a Community Carer OP.

You are hugely overestimating the Carers power and, essentially, misunderstanding their role in the man's life.

Carers are not medically trained (above basic training). We do not (and can not) tell people what to eat, when to eat, what to drink, whether they should smoke or insist on people taking their medication. Of course, Carers will make appropriate suggestions to their clients regarding what might be healthy to have for tea or that a cup of tea would be a good idea rather than another can of lager for an alcoholic etc. etc. but, if the client says to you "no, I want bacon, egg & sausage all fried in butter" then that is exactly what we are obliged to prepare and serve.

Carers are there purely to help a person do the tasks they are no longer able to do for themselves. Any concerns about a persons lifestyle, health or wellbeing is reported back to SS, District Nurses, Dieticians, GPs, Consultants etc. etc. Carers have absolutely no power or right to refuse to serve a client the food they ask for providing it is fresh (i.e. not mouldy) & able to be prepared in the time allowed (30 mins usually).

To refuse such requests is actually classed as abuse of a vulnerable adult & would lead to the Carer being sacked & placed on the SOVA register - so unable to work in care again.

Do not assume this man's Carers didn't make appropriate suggestions to him, or try to encourage a healthier lifestyle. In fact, I would be amazed if they didn't. Ultimately, though, they had absolutely no power whatsoever to forcibly change his habits.

If that were my son and I wasn't around, I would want people to interfere and possibly be patronizing and controlling and override his choices and 'rights' for a while - in order for him to survive.

It is a tough one.

Thanks for coming forward and answering, Santa.

I realize that Carers have very little time in which to care for patients. It's higher up that needs sorting out.

It sounds like he ordered his own food anyway. The local Indian who delivered it said he was down to two takeaway orders a day.

Thanks for the biscuit Patapouf. I was hungry. Very mature

*If they weren't available in his house, I would bring some from my own home - I would use my own initiative.

But that's the way I am. I've never been the type of person to think ''well I'm not doing that! That's not in my job description.
I would have bent the rules - to help him.*

Unfortunately, to do so against the client's will would be considered abuse and would end the Carer's career. It is not about Carers not caring.

"If they weren't available in his house, I would bring some from my own home - I would use my own initiative."

Then you probably would have found yourself facing either disclipary procedures or the sack.

Frontline care staff do not have the right to impose their own values/standards of living on their clients. And neither should they. It's a gross misuse of power.

That's not to say I don't think he should have been sectioned or had a special diet written for him by qualified nutritionists, and put in place by his social worker/head I care team.

If the person in question is of a mental capacity to make their won decisions then it is noone else's right to take that away.
If the person wants to eat a ton of unhealthy food he should be allowed to make an informed choice.
You saying he shouldn't be allowed is wrong.

People do things everyday they know isn't good for them..smoking,drugs,junk food,alcohol,having too many babies. They are all within their right to do so.
YABVU.

Bollocks has it got anything to do with the human rights act and the fact that a young man has effectively eaten himself to death is sad but the law shouldn't be changed because of that. He was more than capable of orderi food for himself and if he had MH issues that was something that needed to be dealt with.

I've reported my last post, as I think it might have been in poor taste considering the subject matter but the sentiment stands OP. You can't erode people's rights over something like this. If he wasn't capable of deciding for himself there are legal measures that could have prevented him eating so much.

Thank you Santa

And I reported it before you acknowledged it OP. You are being ridiculous and Fuckitfay expressed what I meant far more eloquently than I did.

YABU and very confused - this story has nowt to do with 'human rights'

Carers have absolutely no power or right to refuse to serve a client the food they ask for providing it is fresh (i.e. not mouldy) & able to be prepared in the time allowed (30 mins usually)
Carers will make appropriate suggestions to their clients regarding what might be healthy to have for tea or that a cup of tea would be a good idea rather than another can of lager for an alcoholic etc. etc. but, if the client says to you "no, I want bacon, egg & sausage all fried in butter" then that is exactly what we are obliged to prepare and serve.

I never realized that Carers were bound by so many rules and regulations.
So even if the Carers wanted to do right - they can't because their hands are tied.

The whole situation is sad.

Probably no one is to blame. It's just one of those things.

I'm flabbergasted at some of the views on this thread.

I'm not a carer, I'm a support worker. Slightly different, mainly in that I spend every 12 hour shift with the same man.

But the rules are the same. We can make suggestions. That is it.

If the service user declines our suggestion or refuses to comply (with medication for example), well that's where it ends.

Some of the naivety on here is a joke.

You'd bring your own stuff in for him? To name just a few ways this is wrong:

1/. Against the service users wishes
2/. You could have tampered with it
3/. Deliberately deceiving your patient
4/. Misappropriation of funds.

And they all have one outcome: being fired and unable to work with vulnerable people in any capacity again.

This was no ones fault, but the gentleman in question.

If you don't think his Social worker, psychiatrist, behavioural psychologist, occupational therapist, Nurse (mental health and probably LD), carers, GPs and god knows what other agency, hadn't pushed and pushed for the man in question to accept the support they were offering, and tried in vain for years to get him to change then you're dillusional.

Also, to whoever said "he was bed bound" yes and? So he couldn't throw something at you? If you think him being bed bound gave the carers any sense of safety your misinformed.