Uncaring officials

Published: 17 June, 2010

• JENNYFER Spencer’s voice was not heard at her inquest. 

But, thanks to the New Journal, her letter highlighted the discrimination she suffered: “I wish that no human/animal should ever go through life as I did.” 

Disabled, older and other vulnerable people are suffering from decades of care charges, privatisation and rationing implemented by uncaring officials.

Though councils say provision is increasing, as people live longer, fewer than ever get help, as we are deterred by charges, or turned down. 

Shopping, cooking and cleaning are not provided unless we are allocated hands-on care, yet they are often what we need most.

Private agency carers rush round more intent on getting their timesheets signed than with people’s welfare.

Absurd policies are cited to refuse simple tasks which may require getting up on a chair or step-ladder.  

The latest policy – “personalisation” – makes older and disabled people responsible for managing our own services, with little or no support.

Already, some users on direct payments who can choose their own carers, struggle with paperwork and employer’s responsibilities.

In an inaccessible world all people with disabilities work hard just to survive.

Women are often looking after other people while coping with our own disability. But our workload is scarcely acknowledged let alone reduced.

Single Mothers’ Self-Defence works with us to defend mothers who request council support for their children and are threatened with foster care.

Those of us who are people of colour, immigrant or asylum seekers are judged to deserve even less.

Older women, the majority of those getting homecare, are treated as a burden: surely after a lifetime of waged and unwaged caring work we’re entitled!

The lack of accessible housing is dire.

Many people are struggling indoors and unable to go out.

At the inquest a housing allocations manager described that a flat large enough for a live-in carer comes up perhaps twice a year. 

Asked why no offers were made to Ms Spencer in the past three years, the officer said probably others took priority, namely “bed-blockers”.

This is what hospital managers call patients they want to get rid of, to achieve “through-put” targets.  

In her inaccessible flat Ms Spencer placed furniture close together so she could hold onto it to move around.

This was deemed as “clutter”. In seven years the council didn’t ramp her front step.

Some years ago we helped a woman aged 90 get a grab-rail; she had waited five months just for an occupational therapist’s assessment. Without back-up, many die before equipment arrives.

Social services used to be free, like the NHS.

In 1983 a law gave councils the discretionary power to charge for services.

Charging spread, pushing some people below Income Support level.

We pressed for partners’ earnings to be exempted so disabled women would not suffer increased domestic abuse. But the 2002 “Fairer Charging” policy brought degrading means-testing and higher charges. And these were the boom years!

Last year a couple in their 90s rang Camden after getting a huge unexpected bill.

They were told they must undergo means-testing or pay £13 an hour.

They withdrew.

We protested and their service was reinstated free. But how many go without and die prematurely as a result?  
We who rely on services are determined to reverse these policies – our survival depends on it.

WinVisible and the Campaign Against Care Charges (Camden), are in a network of service users campaigning against charging and care cuts. Defend your entitlements! See our self-help leaflet at: www.allwomencount.net
CLAIRE GLASSMAN
WinVisible, NW5