Closing a care home
At the moment I am in the midst of writing part of a unit for the new course ‘Adult Health, Social Care and Wellbeing’ (K217) on ethical dilemmas , and have been struck by the reporting of a battle over the closure of a care home in Wolverhampton. On the one hand, it is being argued by the relatives of the residents, there is a risk to the health and wellbeing of residents if they are moved, or split from other residents with whom they have forged close relationships. On the other hand, the local council insist that the home does not meet modern standards for care provision.
So which argument will win? If the care home is difficult to navigate and cannot be fitted with modern equipment, then is it not in the best interests of the residents to move them into a more appropriate and modern care environment? But what happens if in moving the residents to newer facilities, there is a risk of harm?
This situation demonstrates some of the ethical issues in providing care in the twenty first century, in the context of resourcing and planning for an ageing population, meeting care standards, and the ever shifting sands of local and central government policy. I for one will be watching with interest to see what the outcome from the Court of Appeal is in this case; I wonder if it will instigate similar types of battles elsewhere?
September 29th, 2009 at 8:46 am
It is as you say a fascinating reflection of how we conceptualise ‘care’ in the twenty first century. Its not my area of expertise at all, but I’m assuming just a few generations back the debate would have been very different. ‘Modern care standards’ would barely have come into it. There would have been the expectation that the elderly would be cared for by remaining family if they were available and could afford it. If not, then off to the workhouse.
So on the one hand we have quite a rose-tinted view of how previous generations cared for their elderly, linking it to strong family ties and responsibility. And we lament the passing of such an idyllic society and criticise those who send their aging relatives off to residential homes.
Yet on the other hand, it was also a time when luxuries such as maintaining particular ‘care standards’ was pretty much out of the question. And we prefer to forget the many thousands of old people who lived out their final days in workhouses up and down the country because they were simply too expensive to care for in any other way.
I’m wandering off the point maybe – but it does beg the question of whose interests are being served in this situation. Are the council genuinely concerned about the failing standards for the sake of the residents, or for the sake of covering their backs and ticking the right boxes? Is it modern standards of care they hope to maintain or modern standards of bereaucracy?
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:00 am
Interesting – potential harm if you do, potential harm if you don’t and all taking place in a profoundly risk aversive society.
October 9th, 2009 at 8:35 am
Update – the Watt’s family lost their case, so the home will be closed after all.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/8294930.stm