To have concerns about men working with non verbal female patients in care homes ? ( Content warning, sexual abuse).

[strawberrymilkshake123]

My mum recently sent me a link to a horrific story about a male care worker who has been jailed for raping a 99 year old dementia patient in the care home he worked at, ( my mum is hyper alert/ worried about any chances of abuse in care homes atm as my Grandma has recently been moved into one).
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-60299916

However, googling has shown this isn't a one off.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-51550011

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-58188294

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/care-home-worker-who-sexually-23290876

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-57771411

AIBU to say that whilst 99% of men working in care would not behave like this, to protect the dignity and safeguarding of vulnerable/ non-verbal residents, there should be same sex care provided for vulnerable residents ?

@butnobodytoldme

CCTV is mandatory in all English slaughterhouses. Vets, of course are always on the premises but they cannot be everywhere at once. It was clear to animal rights activists that ill-treatment was inevitably widespread.

CCTV is not mandatory in English hospitals, care homes or anywhere else, except for police stations.

It produced a rapid drop in the number of people who "fell down the steps on the way to the cell". But it proved useful to police officers, too, because it showed them innocent of many false accusations. It also provided evidence for any later legal procedures.

Police were hostile at first, but quickly became enthusiasts, and also adopted shoulder-worn cameras for their own protection.

Use independently monitored, (randomly requested) footage of CCTV (from overt plus from randomly moved hidden cameras) and body-cams in all settings where abuse is possible.

The supposed 'protection of privacy' arises from a false notion that what is on CCTV is somehow available for national television. It is not. The CCTV from slaughter houses is not. Nor is police cell or shoulder-camera footage.

Vulnerable people need protection from abuse, by staff or by their peers. CCTV footage, available only to authorised monitors, but possibly sometimes including a glimpse of them receiving personal care, is not a threat to them. Lack of CCTV is.

Under British Law someone can only be constantly monitored under a court order - either criminal in Police/prisons or court of protection in care homes.

For that they have to be proven to lack capacity to consent and for it to be in their best interests.

How would a care home sort the people out who need this protection and who don't?

And people in care homes do still have sex lives and people with dementia often like to masturbate - do you really suggest monitoring this? The risks of a different type of abuse could be massive.

Vulnerable people have Human Rights and that includes the right to privacy - and privacy from the people that care for you is included in that not just sharing things in public.

There's also the matter of privacy and dignity. You may not mind intimate care being done by an opposite sex person, but many women do, and there is no reason to assume that the most vulnerable, who cannot stand up for themselves, would want or deserve any less.

Am I assuming they dont? Did I say that? Seems like a leap to reach the conclusion that I dont think vulnerable dont want same sex care.

What I AM saying, is that poor care is endemic in our 'care' system. I take your point about statistically women being more at risk though, thats very true. The entire care system is shit. I suspect cases like this are the tip of a very big iceberg of neglect and abuse.

So, nobody but me thinks it odd CCTV is needed to protect animals or criminals, but unthinkable for anyone else (despite seeing the links)?

@butnobodytoldme

So, nobody but me thinks it odd CCTV is needed to protect animals or criminals, but unthinkable for anyone else (despite seeing the links)?

I would not want to be in a care home or hospital and be monitored in my room!

Ahem, cough, DBS checks, ahem, cough

DBS checks are only helpful in denying employment to offenders who have previously been convicted. If these predators actively seek positions where their client group cannot verbalise or otherwise advocate for themselves then they are only likely to be caught if they are actually witnessed committing a crime.

@PinkSparklyPussyCat Of course, the person you are today can only imagine being fully able to defend yourself.

But would you truly prefer no protection at all against the abuse described, if you were non-verbal, possibly unable to move?

If, for just two seconds, you regained power enough to tick box a) or box b), which would you honestly select?
The form would read
"Given the straight choice of only two options, which do you prefer:

a) being likely to get raped, beaten, abused in all ways while entirely helpless, and by people who are safe from ever being detected?

or b) being protected in the same way Parliament has made necessary for both slaughterhouse animals, and the prisoners in police stations, by using CCTV recordings monitored independently to detect and prevent abuse?"

Pairing care workers up doesn't help, and it isn't just a case of 'stop men providing care alone' because women have been found to be physically, verbally and sexually assaulting residents too.

Stronger checks, more CCTV, higher rate of pay to get people who actively WANT to do the job and are skilled, rather than people who have no desire to do the job but are forced to do it.

CCTV in rooms is a big deal, but how else do you do it - you can't have areas where there's no CCTV.. as those will be the areas abuse will take place, bedrooms and bathrooms.

I don't think (assuming proper control over who checks that CCTV and where it's stored of course) that that is a huge invasion of privacy for someone who cannot communicate and cannot choose who provides their intimate care.

Speaking as someone who does require intimate care (fortunately at this point, from someone I know and trust, and I have the ability to choose) - I couldn't give a crap who sees my genitals if it means the chances of me being abused are reduced!

@FOJN

Ahem, cough, DBS checks, ahem, cough

DBS checks are only helpful in denying employment to offenders who have previously been convicted. If these predators actively seek positions where their client group cannot verbalise or otherwise advocate for themselves then they are only likely to be caught if they are actually witnessed committing a crime.

This the same modus as paedophiles. Certain kinds of people choose jobs with power and where it makes it very difficult for them to be challenged.

Jimmy Savile liked hospitals too. This is not a coincidence, since he knew there there were lots of vulnerable people in there who could not get away.

I haven’t read the full thread but I think it’s far from that simple. It’s a large, not well paid, and growing care sector. Banning men from it would probably not lift overall quality, I think like many things men would think it not their problem so much and forget about it in legislation and business decisions to improve care. It’s also not non physical just because it’s caring. My dh worked as someone’s carer in a home while he was at uni, the staff were very glad to have a fit strong 20ish young man around.

@Ponoka7

"If I can't, I'm just assumed to consent to men washing/ dressing/ toileting me, one-on-one, in private. Despite the fact this puts me at risk of abuse."

You won't get a concenus that women are at risk from men. Even on here posters tie themselves up in knots giving scenarios that show they fear nothing about men.

If they can’t consent then the family have to put in the care plan what staff they are comfortable with. My Nan and mum have at least 1 female for care needs, both need 2 staff members.

@HoodieHoodie

YANBU Iirc there was a high profile case of a woman in a vegetative state who was repeatedly raped and ended up having a baby.

The depravity and entitlement to sex of some men is horrendous, and all women should by default be cared for by women unless they are able to consent otherwise.

I completely agree with this!

[quote sadpapercourtesan]@Ponoka7 in which countries is rape legal?

If you're talking about countries in which rape is tolerated, a blind eye turned and convictions vanishingly rare...you're in one.[/quote]
Yes, that's what I thought too!
UK is hardly a ''Safe'' place, where rape is taken seriously.

YANBU.
I quite like the idea of personality testing for these roles but they are hard to fill as it is.
Care home residents (and/or their advocates) can specify same-sex carers only but when a home is short-staffed and/or can only be staffed by agency carers (and only men are available), it can be very hard to meet this preference.