This morning I visited a lady I know who is in nursing care to wish her a happy Christmas etc....

She had a series of mini strokes before a major stroke and has been in a nursing home for 2 years. The past year she has been completely bedbound, has lost her abilitiy to speak at all, is on a soft diet, doubly incontinent, has high blood pressure and (so I discovered from her notes this morning) a host of other medical things for which she had drugs. She requires turning every 4 hours, by 2 people using hoists.She has to have a pressure mattress that automatically inflates and deflates constantly to keep her from pressure sores. She cannot do ANYTHING AT ALL for herself other than breathe and blink and smile and try to speak.

(I only saw her notes as she had been given a 6 page letter from social services which she wanted me to read to her. The notes were not her medical records but the information in the letter was clearly obtained from them.)

She has never had any property or assets so fighting for NHS funded CHC has presumably never been something her family have had to do.

You would think given all her medical issues however, that the NHS would be funding her. Not so.

The letter she wanted to know about (which was laying on her bed) concerned the results of an annual review of her care by social services. They stated her needs had not changed much since last year etc... and then went on to say what those needs are. It finished by telling her how much her care was each week, minus the weekly nursing contribution of £108 and her personal allowance, meaning that her care is NOT being fully funded by the NHS.

Given that this lady is so clearly ill, WHY are social services funding her? Why are social services not kicking this case back to the NHS? Why are social services happy to fund people who are so obviously unwell and in need of health care?

We all know how social services are happy to pick up the ball and run with it from the NHS once someone has been cost-shunted to them - but when a person has NO assets to fund care with, why don't social services fight their own corner and pass these cases back to the NHS?

Only by doing so, can others who do have assets have a chance of gaining funded care.

In a perverse sort of way ~I can see why the NHS and social services collude when a person has assets - but I cannot for the life of me see why social services pay for the care of a sick person when that person has no assets.

SUCH an important question. If we could know the answer to this case, it would help us to gain the support of local Social Services Departments for 'self-funders'.

Looking forward to some other experience and guidance on this.

Of course, it could simply be that you know a lot more than this S S Department (that's Social Services, not the other S S)!

Thanks starlightblue.

Section 5 of the ADSS report 2007...says that soc workers MUST challenge the NHS decision not to fund if a person looks likely to be eligible. I have asked for an explanation as to why this was not done in a case we have just got funding for and I now ask it everytime...pointing out to the soc workers their obligation to do just that.
It comes as a surprise to them so they are obviously not being told and they don't seem to read their own director's reports!
keep pushing them to do their job properly!