Blair is asked to support elderly (From This Is Cheshire)

Steve Paget MBE, Cornwall says...
6:36pm Fri 2 Mar 07

Free NHS care is the right of every British citizen resident in the UK and to refuse free care the NHS must produce evidence, which would satisify a court of law, that a 'health need' does NOT exist.

The situation that exists is blatantly targeted at, and discriminates against those members of our society who are least able to represent themselves.

This needs to be discussed at a National level and, dare I suggest, an enquiry launched into why so many people are being denied access to this service.

Report this post »

Steve Paget MBE, Cornwall says...
6:36pm Fri 2 Mar 07

Free NHS care is the right of every British citizen resident in the UK and to refuse free care the NHS must produce evidence, which would satisify a court of law, that a 'health need' does NOT exist.

The situation that exists is blatantly targeted at, and discriminates against those members of our society who are least able to represent themselves.

This needs to be discussed at a National level and, dare I suggest, an enquiry launched into why so many people are being denied access to this service.

Report this post »

STEPHEN JOHNSON OF CONTINUINGCARECAMPAIGN.INFO, Acton Bridge, Cheshire. says...
7:02pm Fri 2 Mar 07

I have been fighting Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust for the right under the Law of the Land for the funding of Rod's care.

The following is from the summary of the Law Society�s evidence to the House of Commons Health Committee Enquiry into NHS Continuing Care in 2004 - �The judgement in 'Coughlan' clearly establishes that where a person�s primary need is for health care, and that is why they are placed in nursing home accommodation, the NHS is responsible for the full cost of the package.� No residential home would take my brother because of his nursing needs.

The PCT ignore the law and do as they please. Recently they received a report from Rod's Pain Specialist telling them that Rod's 'HEALTH NEEDS WERE INDEED INTENSE AND COMPLEX'. The PCT wrote back to the specialist to get him to change his mind. He did not. A true clinician. Next up, the PCT launch an attack on me under the Protection of Vulnerable Adults Scheme. Two Social Workers turned up at the Nursing Home and asked my brother the following questions:

Question 1. Where do you live?

Question 2. Who owns the house?

Question 3. Who would own the house if your mother died?

Question 3. Are you happy with your brother being your attorney?

As Rod is self funding this has nothing to do with Social Services.

After the visit from Social Services a secret meeting was held without my knowledge. I then learned that I was totally exonerated.

The Primary Care Trust is trying to smear my name because they know I am in the right. How can these underhand tactics be allowed to happen? These are public servants who don't serve the public. I am the only one who stands in their way of taking complete control over my brother. I will not let this happen and will continue to act on Rod's behalf to get justice from these disgraceful people who work for Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Carte Trust. I think the meaning of Primary Care Trust is as follows:

Primary - The primary objective is not to have to pay.

Care - They don't care.

Trust - There is none.

Take my word for it, the PCT and Social Services are not to be trusted and if you find yourself in a situation with either of them, don't believe a word they say. Question every descision they make, as it could probably be unlawful.

Kind Regards,

Stephen Johnson.

I have been fighting Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust for the right under the Law of the Land for the funding of Rod's care. The following is from the summary of the Law Society�s evidence to the House of Commons Health Committee Enquiry into NHS Continuing Care in 2004 - �The judgement in 'Coughlan' clearly establishes that where a person�s primary need is for health care, and that is why they are placed in nursing home accommodation, the NHS is responsible for the full cost of the package.� No residential home would take my brother because of his nursing needs. The PCT ignore the law and do as they please. Recently they received a report from Rod's Pain Specialist telling them that Rod's 'HEALTH NEEDS WERE INDEED INTENSE AND COMPLEX'. The PCT wrote back to the specialist to get him to change his mind. He did not. A true clinician. Next up, the PCT launch an attack on me under the Protection of Vulnerable Adults Scheme. Two Social Workers turned up at the Nursing Home and asked my brother the following questions: Question 1. Where do you live? Question 2. Who owns the house? Question 3. Who would own the house if your mother died? Question 3. Are you happy with your brother being your attorney? As Rod is self funding this has nothing to do with Social Services. After the visit from Social Services a secret meeting was held without my knowledge. I then learned that I was totally exonerated. The Primary Care Trust is trying to smear my name because they know I am in the right. How can these underhand tactics be allowed to happen? These are public servants who don't serve the public. I am the only one who stands in their way of taking complete control over my brother. I will not let this happen and will continue to act on Rod's behalf to get justice from these disgraceful people who work for Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Carte Trust. I think the meaning of Primary Care Trust is as follows: Primary - The primary objective is not to have to pay. Care - They don't care. Trust - There is none. Take my word for it, the PCT and Social Services are not to be trusted and if you find yourself in a situation with either of them, don't believe a word they say. Question every descision they make, as it could probably be unlawful. Kind Regards, Stephen Johnson.

Report this post »

STEPHEN JOHNSON OF CONTINUINGCARECAMPAIGN.INFO, Acton Bridge, Cheshire. says...
7:02pm Fri 2 Mar 07

I have been fighting Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust for the right under the Law of the Land for the funding of Rod's care.

The following is from the summary of the Law Societys evidence to the House of Commons Health Committee Enquiry into NHS Continuing Care in 2004 - The judgement in 'Coughlan' clearly establishes that where a persons primary need is for health care, and that is why they are placed in nursing home accommodation, the NHS is responsible for the full cost of the package. No residential home would take my brother because of his nursing needs.

The PCT ignore the law and do as they please. Recently they received a report from Rod's Pain Specialist telling them that Rod's 'HEALTH NEEDS WERE INDEED INTENSE AND COMPLEX'. The PCT wrote back to the specialist to get him to change his mind. He did not. A true clinician. Next up, the PCT launch an attack on me under the Protection of Vulnerable Adults Scheme. Two Social Workers turned up at the Nursing Home and asked my brother the following questions:

Question 1. Where do you live?

Question 2. Who owns the house?

Question 3. Who would own the house if your mother died?

Question 3. Are you happy with your brother being your attorney?

As Rod is self funding this has nothing to do with Social Services.

After the visit from Social Services a secret meeting was held without my knowledge. I then learned that I was totally exonerated.

The Primary Care Trust is trying to smear my name because they know I am in the right. How can these underhand tactics be allowed to happen? These are public servants who don't serve the public. I am the only one who stands in their way of taking complete control over my brother. I will not let this happen and will continue to act on Rod's behalf to get justice from these disgraceful people who work for Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Carte Trust. I think the meaning of Primary Care Trust is as follows:

Primary - The primary objective is not to have to pay.

Care - They don't care.

Trust - There is none.

Take my word for it, the PCT and Social Services are not to be trusted and if you find yourself in a situation with either of them, don't believe a word they say. Question every descision they make, as it could probably be unlawful.

Kind Regards,

Stephen Johnson.

I have been fighting Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust for the right under the Law of the Land for the funding of Rod's care. The following is from the summary of the Law Societys evidence to the House of Commons Health Committee Enquiry into NHS Continuing Care in 2004 - The judgement in 'Coughlan' clearly establishes that where a persons primary need is for health care, and that is why they are placed in nursing home accommodation, the NHS is responsible for the full cost of the package. No residential home would take my brother because of his nursing needs. The PCT ignore the law and do as they please. Recently they received a report from Rod's Pain Specialist telling them that Rod's 'HEALTH NEEDS WERE INDEED INTENSE AND COMPLEX'. The PCT wrote back to the specialist to get him to change his mind. He did not. A true clinician. Next up, the PCT launch an attack on me under the Protection of Vulnerable Adults Scheme. Two Social Workers turned up at the Nursing Home and asked my brother the following questions: Question 1. Where do you live? Question 2. Who owns the house? Question 3. Who would own the house if your mother died? Question 3. Are you happy with your brother being your attorney? As Rod is self funding this has nothing to do with Social Services. After the visit from Social Services a secret meeting was held without my knowledge. I then learned that I was totally exonerated. The Primary Care Trust is trying to smear my name because they know I am in the right. How can these underhand tactics be allowed to happen? These are public servants who don't serve the public. I am the only one who stands in their way of taking complete control over my brother. I will not let this happen and will continue to act on Rod's behalf to get justice from these disgraceful people who work for Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Carte Trust. I think the meaning of Primary Care Trust is as follows: Primary - The primary objective is not to have to pay. Care - They don't care. Trust - There is none. Take my word for it, the PCT and Social Services are not to be trusted and if you find yourself in a situation with either of them, don't believe a word they say. Question every descision they make, as it could probably be unlawful. Kind Regards, Stephen Johnson.

Report this post »

Pam Coughlan (Court of Appeal Winner 1999)., Exeter. says...
4:52pm Sat 3 Mar 07

Dear Stephen,

Please expose the unforgivable treatment of the sick, whom the state seems to consider no longer sick if their condition is to be long-term!! This is UNREASONABLE, IMMORAL and DISCRIMINATORY! As is the outrageous complaints procedure. As no one so ill or frail can carry it out. We all thought we were paying for a National Health Service! The law says if a person's need for care is primarily a health need then who performs that care whether it be a registered nurse or an auxiliary nurse or a care worker is irrelevant.

The debacle looks set to continue, as the new consultation document offers no new criteria (according to the RCN response). Customers service unit at Her Majesty�s Court Service says that the judicial process is the only way individuals can challenge decisions. (I had asked if there was provision in law for advocacy for those unable to represent their case) he said it is one of the means by which irregularities and the possible need for change be brought to the attention Of Those Responsible For policy.

Recently two women have rung asking for phone numbers of solicitors.
It is excellent news that you have a number of law firms on board. If their numbers could be available and circulated many more could be helped.

Everyone I talk to says it makes them feel ashamed of our country. Asking people to pay for their care and expect them to sell their house! To me it is outrageous not to fund a person who clearly needs care! These people are going to be robbed and treated with contempt. People who should be cared for and cherished are being treated as if they don�t matter and probably they would rather be dead than treated like that. There must be some reason that Government, or Government Departments, are immune to the law. That is the only thing I can think as the Court of Appeal�s judgement laid down the law clearly enough. I think this is the biggest scandal in the whole history of the Welfare State. What we have here is a group of people who 20 years ago would have been cared for in a hospital environment and there would have been absolutely no dispute that their care needs were the financial responsibility of the NHS.

The Prime Minister constantly evokes values, fairness and justice as reasons for taking action abroad. He should take action at home on community care funding - Exactly!! Values, fairness, justice!

Frustratingly the NHS is oblivious to the rule of law, so it means, as you perceive, tenacity and a determination that failure to attain one's due under the law is not an option.

If there is anything more I can do, please let me know.

I wish you well in your venture.

Pam.

Dear Stephen, Please expose the unforgivable treatment of the sick, whom the state seems to consider no longer sick if their condition is to be long-term!! This is UNREASONABLE, IMMORAL and DISCRIMINATORY! As is the outrageous complaints procedure. As no one so ill or frail can carry it out. We all thought we were paying for a National Health Service! The law says if a person's need for care is primarily a health need then who performs that care whether it be a registered nurse or an auxiliary nurse or a care worker is irrelevant. The debacle looks set to continue, as the new consultation document offers no new criteria (according to the RCN response). Customers service unit at Her Majesty�s Court Service says that the judicial process is the only way individuals can challenge decisions. (I had asked if there was provision in law for advocacy for those unable to represent their case) he said it is one of the means by which irregularities and the possible need for change be brought to the attention Of Those Responsible For policy. Recently two women have rung asking for phone numbers of solicitors. It is excellent news that you have a number of law firms on board. If their numbers could be available and circulated many more could be helped. Everyone I talk to says it makes them feel ashamed of our country. Asking people to pay for their care and expect them to sell their house! To me it is outrageous not to fund a person who clearly needs care! These people are going to be robbed and treated with contempt. People who should be cared for and cherished are being treated as if they don�t matter and probably they would rather be dead than treated like that. There must be some reason that Government, or Government Departments, are immune to the law. That is the only thing I can think as the Court of Appeal�s judgement laid down the law clearly enough. I think this is the biggest scandal in the whole history of the Welfare State. What we have here is a group of people who 20 years ago would have been cared for in a hospital environment and there would have been absolutely no dispute that their care needs were the financial responsibility of the NHS. The Prime Minister constantly evokes values, fairness and justice as reasons for taking action abroad. He should take action at home on community care funding - Exactly!! Values, fairness, justice! Frustratingly the NHS is oblivious to the rule of law, so it means, as you perceive, tenacity and a determination that failure to attain one's due under the law is not an option. If there is anything more I can do, please let me know. I wish you well in your venture. Pam.

Report this post »

Pam Coughlan (Court of Appeal Winner 1999)., Exeter. says...
4:52pm Sat 3 Mar 07

Dear Stephen,

Please expose the unforgivable treatment of the sick, whom the state seems to consider no longer sick if their condition is to be long-term!! This is UNREASONABLE, IMMORAL and DISCRIMINATORY! As is the outrageous complaints procedure. As no one so ill or frail can carry it out. We all thought we were paying for a National Health Service! The law says if a person's need for care is primarily a health need then who performs that care whether it be a registered nurse or an auxiliary nurse or a care worker is irrelevant.

The debacle looks set to continue, as the new consultation document offers no new criteria (according to the RCN response). Customers service unit at Her Majestys Court Service says that the judicial process is the only way individuals can challenge decisions. (I had asked if there was provision in law for advocacy for those unable to represent their case) he said it is one of the means by which irregularities and the possible need for change be brought to the attention Of Those Responsible For policy.

Recently two women have rung asking for phone numbers of solicitors.
It is excellent news that you have a number of law firms on board. If their numbers could be available and circulated many more could be helped.

Everyone I talk to says it makes them feel ashamed of our country. Asking people to pay for their care and expect them to sell their house! To me it is outrageous not to fund a person who clearly needs care! These people are going to be robbed and treated with contempt. People who should be cared for and cherished are being treated as if they dont matter and probably they would rather be dead than treated like that. There must be some reason that Government, or Government Departments, are immune to the law. That is the only thing I can think as the Court of Appeals judgement laid down the law clearly enough. I think this is the biggest scandal in the whole history of the Welfare State. What we have here is a group of people who 20 years ago would have been cared for in a hospital environment and there would have been absolutely no dispute that their care needs were the financial responsibility of the NHS.

The Prime Minister constantly evokes values, fairness and justice as reasons for taking action abroad. He should take action at home on community care funding - Exactly!! Values, fairness, justice!

Frustratingly the NHS is oblivious to the rule of law, so it means, as you perceive, tenacity and a determination that failure to attain one's due under the law is not an option.

If there is anything more I can do, please let me know.

I wish you well in your venture.

Pam.

Dear Stephen, Please expose the unforgivable treatment of the sick, whom the state seems to consider no longer sick if their condition is to be long-term!! This is UNREASONABLE, IMMORAL and DISCRIMINATORY! As is the outrageous complaints procedure. As no one so ill or frail can carry it out. We all thought we were paying for a National Health Service! The law says if a person's need for care is primarily a health need then who performs that care whether it be a registered nurse or an auxiliary nurse or a care worker is irrelevant. The debacle looks set to continue, as the new consultation document offers no new criteria (according to the RCN response). Customers service unit at Her Majestys Court Service says that the judicial process is the only way individuals can challenge decisions. (I had asked if there was provision in law for advocacy for those unable to represent their case) he said it is one of the means by which irregularities and the possible need for change be brought to the attention Of Those Responsible For policy. Recently two women have rung asking for phone numbers of solicitors. It is excellent news that you have a number of law firms on board. If their numbers could be available and circulated many more could be helped. Everyone I talk to says it makes them feel ashamed of our country. Asking people to pay for their care and expect them to sell their house! To me it is outrageous not to fund a person who clearly needs care! These people are going to be robbed and treated with contempt. People who should be cared for and cherished are being treated as if they dont matter and probably they would rather be dead than treated like that. There must be some reason that Government, or Government Departments, are immune to the law. That is the only thing I can think as the Court of Appeals judgement laid down the law clearly enough. I think this is the biggest scandal in the whole history of the Welfare State. What we have here is a group of people who 20 years ago would have been cared for in a hospital environment and there would have been absolutely no dispute that their care needs were the financial responsibility of the NHS. The Prime Minister constantly evokes values, fairness and justice as reasons for taking action abroad. He should take action at home on community care funding - Exactly!! Values, fairness, justice! Frustratingly the NHS is oblivious to the rule of law, so it means, as you perceive, tenacity and a determination that failure to attain one's due under the law is not an option. If there is anything more I can do, please let me know. I wish you well in your venture. Pam.

Report this post »

Linda Everett, Southampton says...
7:07pm Sat 3 Mar 07

Current criteria for Continuing Care would not qualify Pam Coughlan for continuing care. However, she gets this due to her Supreme Court of Appeal Victory in 1999. The Law Society pointed this out to the Government. Anyone with health needs exceeding or equivalent qualify for, but may not get, Continuing Care.
We await news of updates to the Government National Framework of 2006 for their criteria in line with the Coughlan Supreme Court judgement of 1999!

Report this post »

Linda Everett, Southampton says...
7:07pm Sat 3 Mar 07

Current criteria for Continuing Care would not qualify Pam Coughlan for continuing care. However, she gets this due to her Supreme Court of Appeal Victory in 1999. The Law Society pointed this out to the Government. Anyone with health needs exceeding or equivalent qualify for, but may not get, Continuing Care.
We await news of updates to the Government National Framework of 2006 for their criteria in line with the Coughlan Supreme Court judgement of 1999!

Report this post »

Margaret O'Brien, Southampton says...
11:52am Sun 4 Mar 07

I reiterate all the comments previously posted. My own experience of this situation is that my mother has been refused NHS funded continuing care although she is immobile, doubly incontinent, has no speech, understanding or communication and has had 14 mini-strokes and counting. She has been refused this care for the unlawful reason that she is "stable and predictable" which is the excuse routinely trotted out by most PCT's, partly through ignorance of the law, but mostly through an entrenched mentality within the NHS of non-eligibility for continuing care in order to save funds. It makes you wonder, not only about a government which doesn't care, but about our justice system which is little help to the thousands of people in this position who are denied their rights under the Health Acts.

Report this post »

Margaret O'Brien, Southampton says...
11:52am Sun 4 Mar 07

I reiterate all the comments previously posted. My own experience of this situation is that my mother has been refused NHS funded continuing care although she is immobile, doubly incontinent, has no speech, understanding or communication and has had 14 mini-strokes and counting. She has been refused this care for the unlawful reason that she is "stable and predictable" which is the excuse routinely trotted out by most PCT's, partly through ignorance of the law, but mostly through an entrenched mentality within the NHS of non-eligibility for continuing care in order to save funds. It makes you wonder, not only about a government which doesn't care, but about our justice system which is little help to the thousands of people in this position who are denied their rights under the Health Acts.

Report this post »

Robin Lovelock, Sunninghill says...
7:26pm Sun 4 Mar 07

People such as Stephen Johnson and Pam Coughlan above contribute to a web site that provides simple but detailed advice on claiming your right to 100% NHS funded long term care. You will find it on google by entering coughlan or directed if you know the URL. I'll post the URL seperately in case it is automaticall removed. It is nhscare dot info.

Report this post »

Robin Lovelock, Sunninghill says...
7:26pm Sun 4 Mar 07

People such as Stephen Johnson and Pam Coughlan above contribute to a web site that provides simple but detailed advice on claiming your right to 100% NHS funded long term care. You will find it on google by entering coughlan or directed if you know the URL. I'll post the URL seperately in case it is automaticall removed. It is nhscare dot info.

Report this post »

Robin Lovelock, Sunninghill says...
7:27pm Sun 4 Mar 07

The web site that provides simple but detailed advice on claiming your right to 100% NHS funded long term care is www.nhscare.info

Report this post »

Robin Lovelock, Sunninghill says...
7:27pm Sun 4 Mar 07

The web site that provides simple but detailed advice on claiming your right to 100% NHS funded long term care is www.nhscare.info

Report this post »

Aneurin Bevan, Tredegar says...
6:13pm Mon 5 Mar 07

Abuse occurs where

an attempt is made

to marry the

incompatible

principles of private

acquisitiveness with

a public service.

Report this post »

Aneurin Bevan, Tredegar says...
6:13pm Mon 5 Mar 07

Abuse occurs where

an attempt is made

to marry the

incompatible

principles of private

acquisitiveness with

a public service.

Report this post »

S. FOX., Cheshire says...
6:52am Tue 6 Mar 07

I think it is disgraceful how the NHS treat our elderly and infirm. These are some of the most vulnerable in society and subsequently, they easily cast aside. The NHS should get their act together and stop the cheating and lying which enables them to meet financial targets. Is this country a democracy, or are we now a dictatorship? The law is being broken at every turn by the corner stone of the Labour Party, the NHS. These unlawful activities must be stopped and those responsible brought to book.

Report this post »

S. FOX., Cheshire says...
6:52am Tue 6 Mar 07

I think it is disgraceful how the NHS treat our elderly and infirm. These are some of the most vulnerable in society and subsequently, they easily cast aside. The NHS should get their act together and stop the cheating and lying which enables them to meet financial targets. Is this country a democracy, or are we now a dictatorship? The law is being broken at every turn by the corner stone of the Labour Party, the NHS. These unlawful activities must be stopped and those responsible brought to book.

Report this post »

Steve Paget MBE, stevepaget@hotmail.com says...
8:19am Tue 6 Mar 07

Whilst this story is highlighting a important issue affecting older people, I must emphasise that many much younger people, some with very complex health care needs, are also in the same predicament.

The Government must urgently take on board and act on this issue.

Report this post »

Steve Paget MBE, stevepaget@hotmail.com says...
8:19am Tue 6 Mar 07

Whilst this story is highlighting a important issue affecting older people, I must emphasise that many much younger people, some with very complex health care needs, are also in the same predicament.

The Government must urgently take on board and act on this issue.

Report this post »

Stephen Johnson of www.continuingcarecampaign.info., Acton Bridge, Cheshire. says...
9:54am Tue 6 Mar 07

Quite right Steve. This is not just about the elderly, it affects people of all ages and is a scandalous situation that needs to be addressed immediately. It is traumatic enough having a relative in such bad health without the added frustrations of fighting a corrupt system. This could happen to any one of us at any time so be prepared, because if you are not, then the NHS will destroy your family without blinking an eye.

Report this post »

Stephen Johnson of www.continuingcarecampaign.info., Acton Bridge, Cheshire. says...
9:54am Tue 6 Mar 07

Quite right Steve. This is not just about the elderly, it affects people of all ages and is a scandalous situation that needs to be addressed immediately. It is traumatic enough having a relative in such bad health without the added frustrations of fighting a corrupt system. This could happen to any one of us at any time so be prepared, because if you are not, then the NHS will destroy your family without blinking an eye.

Report this post »

Barbara Law, Cheshire says...
12:26am Wed 7 Mar 07

Stephen,

I have been following your story for some time, both in the news and on the message boards. I would like to help. I am amazed at the tactics that are being used against you and your brother. I have left messages for you on the message boards and would like to help. I have a lot of experience in these matters. Please contact me ASAP.

Report this post »

Barbara Law, Cheshire says...
12:26am Wed 7 Mar 07

Stephen,

I have been following your story for some time, both in the news and on the message boards. I would like to help. I am amazed at the tactics that are being used against you and your brother. I have left messages for you on the message boards and would like to help. I have a lot of experience in these matters. Please contact me ASAP.

Report this post »

Bill Watt, West Yorkshire says...
12:45pm Mon 9 Apr 07

Pensioners who have worked all their working lifes are entitled to Free medical. I have spoken to our own local M.P regarding the same subject but was fobbed off with a rather ignorant and stupid comment

Report this post »

Bill Watt, West Yorkshire says...
12:45pm Mon 9 Apr 07

Pensioners who have worked all their working lifes are entitled to Free medical. I have spoken to our own local M.P regarding the same subject but was fobbed off with a rather ignorant and stupid comment

Report this post »

Mr John Robertson Lee, Pembrokeshire says...
5:46pm Thu 29 Nov 07

I am on my 3rd appeal against the LHB stopping cotinuing health care for my wife, who has been receiving it for the last four years. She has severe dimentia, doubly incontinent, cannot communicate, cannot walk, cannot feed or wash herself, she cannot do anything for herself, even has to be turned at night to prevent bed sores. She is 82years old, how can she have become better all of a sudden? I think it is a cost cutting exercise on a frail and very ill lady...... absolutely disgraceful

Report this post »

Mr John Robertson Lee, Pembrokeshire says...
5:46pm Thu 29 Nov 07

I am on my 3rd appeal against the LHB stopping cotinuing health care for my wife, who has been receiving it for the last four years. She has severe dimentia, doubly incontinent, cannot communicate, cannot walk, cannot feed or wash herself, she cannot do anything for herself, even has to be turned at night to prevent bed sores. She is 82years old, how can she have become better all of a sudden? I think it is a cost cutting exercise on a frail and very ill lady...... absolutely disgraceful

Report this post »

Linda Clancy, cheshire says...
9:54pm Sat 23 Feb 08

We have just started the process for long term care in the home for my mother who has parkinsons.
after reading all your reports it looks like we are in for a lengthy fight.

Report this post »

Linda Clancy, cheshire says...
9:54pm Sat 23 Feb 08

We have just started the process for long term care in the home for my mother who has parkinsons.
after reading all your reports it looks like we are in for a lengthy fight.

Report this post »

Steve Hickin, Reading Berkshire says...
2:27am Wed 23 Apr 08

My Mother had a stroke at the end of January this year at the age of 69 and it has left her severly paralysed on her L/H side,unable to support herself thus completely immobile and requiring a hoist,doubly incontinent,impared vision,impared speech and diabetic requiring a soft food diet. We have been told that she needs 24 Hour nursing care but will need to be a self funder because of her small terraced property that she has lived in all her life was inherited by her from her parents. A home that she had always intended to pass on to her family. It is bad enough her trying to come to terms with her disability and reality of spending the rest of her days in a nursing home without me having to tell her she needs to lose all she ever had to fund it! This can't be right! Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Report this post »

Goal Alerts

News RSS Feed

Blair is asked to support elderly

Your Say YourThis Is Cheshire

In this section

Sponsored Links

Local Information

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars

Goal Alerts

News RSS Feed

Blair is asked to support elderly

Share this article

Related links

Your Say YourThis Is Cheshire

In this section

Sponsored Links

Local Information

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars