To be shocked that Derek Draper didn’t qualify for NHS Continuing Healthcare

[Mum1976Mum]

Just sat down to watch the latest Kate Garraway documentary. I am absolutely shocked that Derek didn’t qualify for NHS Continuing Healthcare funding as his needs weren’t deemed high enough. This funding isn’t means tested so how much money they have isn’t relevant.

I have some experience of this as we had to claim for my grandad about 8 years ago. He had sarcoma and had to have his leg amputated. He had a prosthesis fitted and was actually pretty active! He could do a lot of things for himself but struggled with self care (showering) and he qualified for the funding.

I honestly thought that, should the worst happen, and someone needed a substantial amount of care that they would qualify. Watching the documentary, Derek needed help with absolutely everything! How on earth did he not qualify?

Yep.

2010 austerity budget was the point that a hatchet was taken to social care.

Politicians know that it would take money to fix and we’re now going into recession.

..but we could still change this... why should a band 8 medic pay 40% on part of their salary but Sunak pay 22% on his?

Heaps of money in the UK, its just incredibly badly distributed.

I don’t think people realise how much social care costs. If it was no longer means tested, how would we fund education and health? I’m sure we could look at what taxes are paid and re prioritise but I think some elements of social care (and proper social care so not things like 2 hourly turning by 2 carers being deemed “social care” when it’s clearly health!) should be means tested.

I think the poster is talking about residential care, so the value of the house would be included in the assessment unless there was a reason not to. I think it was just worded badly, because the upper and lower thresholds of £23,250 and £14,250 apply to both residential and home care. It’s only the home the person is living in which is disregarded for home care - any second property would count as an asset and would be included in the assessment. It’s also important to note, that regardless of any savings, income is also taken into account - state pension and benefits such as pension credit and attendance allowance, all count towards the assessment for both home and residential care.

Social care would be more affordable if it wasn't done by the private sector who have to get a good return on their investment.

A thriving SC sector is essential if we are to have a functioning NHS (patient discharges into the community) plus good SC helps children's education too, a child carer is not going to do well in school if he/she has been up half the night.

Where I am we have brought a lot of social care ‘in house’ so people are employed by the LA and it’s run by the LA. It is not much cheaper, to be honest. There are many people out there living with complex needs. They deserve better. Personally, I think social care needs a huge injection of time and attention and money. It won’t happen, not with this government in power.

This is an important point. Social care on a ‘for profit’ basis = elderly and vulnerable people being fleeced for out of control fees.

No it means his care package is funded 100% by CHC. A lot of his peers have joint funding so social care pay some and CHC pay some. My son has had different care packages over the years. He had 28 hours of home care at one point and a credit card with £150 a week on it for activities, then he was at a residential college and now he lives in a residential placement. For him the main benefit is he doesn’t have to pay a contribution towards his care. If was social care funded or even joint funded he’d have to pay nearly all of his benefits towards his care package.

I'm so sorry for Kate's loss & her particular situation, but equally she has property worth millions & I feel should self fund. It's ridiculous to always expect the State to pick up the tab.

I agree it is expensive. My son’s care package is £6,800 per week. He has a lot of 2:1 support so when you break it down the bulk of the fee is staffing.

Not surprising at all. My dad is bedridden, doubly incontinent and unable to care for himself in any way. He failed to qualify because he can breathe unassisted and can hold a spoon to feed himself. I was told that he’d have to be on a ventilator and completely paralysed to qualify!

I have done CHC assessments, and I do reassessment. What some people don't realise (in wales) sometimes people are worse off having CHC funded care. I think we should do more shared care between the health board and social services to get much better packages of care for people.

Ask for a reassessment. Every CHC assessment I have ever done to date has been accepted, and not all were on ventilators or paralysed.

the main benefit to my son is that with 100% CHC funding he doesn’t have to contribute towards his care so keeps all of his UC and his PIP. If his care was joint funded or solely funded by social care he’d be left with around £30 per week. That wouldn’t even pay for his swimming let alone toiletries, clothes etc.

Scotland has free personal care

Are you in England? It's different in Wales, where I am. Patients don't get direct payments and lose other benefits from social services once CHC is agreed.

Just wondering about this. Before DM got CHC we had looked at residential care and there were homes willing to care for her, incredibly expensive obviously but they assured us they would be able to meet her needs, at that point she had a Parkinson’s dementia diagnosis.

She was then diagnosed with a terminal brain tumour and received fast track CHC. Symptoms remained the same but the homes who had previously said they could look after her said they couldn’t meet her needs, they weren’t prepared to discuss or assess, it was just a straight no. I did wonder whether the CHC funding made her less attractive (for want of a better word).

Meanwhile successive Conservative governments have been sitting on the Dilnot Report which was published in 2011. Its recommendations for reform of the social care system have been completely disregarded.
I know Andrew Dilnot feels very frustrated about it, not least since so much time and effort went into it.

Do I recall Johnson promising that he was going to sort out social care? Not that I believed that or any of his other fantasies.
It's just not a sexy, vote winning topic and, while we remain in thrall to the US model of taxation, nothing will change. Their services are certainly a reflection of low taxation and we* seem only too keen to follow.

*Not me!

@Alwaystired23 we get direct payments from CHC and social what was beneficial for us was how much per hour we received social only paid I think 15.00 an hour to myself which then I could pay minimum wage to hire someone.
but because our package was combined and CHC here is 21.00 an hour to myself so I can pay 18 an hour to a carer social had to meet the same hourly rate.

its just over 4 k a month we get in personal budget a month.

Yes England. People have to contribute towards their care package if they have any level of social care funding. So even if the funding is spilt 90% CHC 10% social care they have to contribute. Before we had CHC funding my son had to pay towards his respite care. Now he pays nothing. We are currently going through re assessment though so it can all change any time.

It is an iniquitous system. I got it for my late OH on appeal after he died, having been turned down twice.
The NHS cannot afford it so gets round it either by making sure people don't know it exists, or by making the rules so opaque and tortuous that people turn to lawyers for help ... and they are making loads of dosh put of it.
It's a mess ... and stressful at what is usually a distressing time.

Actually the whole point of continuing care is that it is not means tested. It is absolutely extremely difficult to get even for people severely handicapped , in pain because of Parkinson’s . So people are ill, need care because they have an illness but the nhs abandons them .

Totally agree .

I work in social care and have attended a lot of CHC assessments on behalf of my workplace. In a lot of cases you don't actually need a nurse to look after a sick patient. There are actually very few instances where only a qualified nurse will do. DD had the necessary equipment and a private carer (who came across brilliantly on the very moving programme). CHC is only awarded when a RGN needs to be involved in daily medical aid.