Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[Doon frae Troon]

After watching QT last night it seems like the Government is persuing the same line with test numbers and not being honest with the figures.

I wonder if they follow the same process with the bowel cancer poo test...…..send out 500,000 get back 300,000 but say that 500,000 have been tested.

 

[rudebhoy]

A big issue a hell of a lot of care homes need to address during and after his period is to start acting ultimately as care homes and not businesses.

I'm not for one second defending the government here as there is clearly a lot of areas they need to improve and be more transparent on with what's happening within the care homes but there is a huge portion of care homes that simply don't provide anywhere near enough actual care or provision of equipment to staff and residents alike because ultimately they're a profit making business. Obviously this is a generalisation as there will be some fantastic ones out there, but my own experiences of them is not a good one.

I'd personally like to see a full review of care homes, how they're run and what should be expected as care standards for residents, staff and more accountability for anyone not meeting those standards. Including better education & qualifications for the staff. As part of that review I'd like to see better government infrastructure & input into these areas with more transparency, future planning and guidance to help care homes.

there are some good care homes, but there are also some terrible ones out there. I went round quite a few trying to find somewhere suitable for my dad. At least two of them, the smell of urine hit you as soon as you walked in. The staff were disinterested, you tell that for some of them, it was the only job they could get, it was minimum wage, and they hated it. But the care home was still charging £650 a week (this was 7 years ago).

fortunately we did find a really good one, but the standard does vary dramatically.

 

[Wolf]

there are some good care homes, but there are also some terrible ones out there. I went round quite a few trying to find somewhere suitable for my dad. At least two of them, the smell of urine hit you as soon as you walked in. The staff were disinterested, you tell that for some of them, it was the only job they could get, it was minimum wage, and they hated it. But the care home was still charging £650 a week (this was 7 years ago).

fortunately we did find a really good one, but the standard does vary dramatically.

There in lies my problem with care homes. As I said my post was a generalisation and I'm sure there are many good ones but my experience of them is it seems far more are bad ones and more about money than care.

My nan (mums side) was in 3 different care homes it was only the 3rd that was any good, despite the previous 2 having been visited and seemingly good, the actual care and provision after they'd been moved there was awful. We learned from that with Dad's mum, but again so many bad ones visited before finding a good one. Only then to find that one ended up being closed because they had been investigated for malpractices and treatment of residents & was ultimately closed down due to deaths by neglect..

The other issue like you say in staff, I know so many people from school that work in care homes because they didn't get decent grades and couldn't get any other jobs so fall into doing it because they can't get anything else. Even my MiL is considering going to do it for a couple of years as she sees it as an easy way to get a job, yet has no interest in caring, that's not a good thing imo.

I'd like to see proper qualifications & pay for them as hopefully that would be partially a step to improvement of care quality and understanding. That's why I like to see the government totally revamp this area including their own remit and give all of the countries people in care better.

 

[funkycoldmedina]

There in lies my problem with care homes. As I said my post was a generalisation and I'm sure there are many good ones but my experience of them is it seems far more are bad ones and more about money than care.

My nan (mums side) was in 3 different care homes it was only the 3rd that was any good, despite the previous 2 having been visited and seemingly good, the actual care and provision after they'd been moved there was awful. We learned from that with Dad's mum, but again so many bad ones visited before finding a good one. Only then to find that one ended up being closed because they had been investigated for malpractices and treatment of residents & was ultimately closed down due to deaths by neglect..

The other issue like you say in staff, I know so many people from school that work in care homes because they didn't get decent grades and couldn't get any other jobs so fall into doing it because they can't get anything else. Even my MiL is considering going to do it for a couple of years as she sees it as an easy way to get a job, yet has no interest in caring, that's not a good thing imo.

I'd like to see proper qualifications & pay for them as hopefully that would be partially a step to improvement of care quality and understanding. That's why I like to see the government totally revamp this area including their own remit and give all of the countries people in care better.

My dad is in one at the moment and I can only echo everyone else's experience.
It does bring the question up of whether they or any form of care/health provision should be for profit.

 

[funkycoldmedina]

From what I understand of the coronavirus issue in care homes was that at any one time there are a lot of patients in the NHS who are waiting on care places. These people were moved quickly out of hospitals in care homes fur their own safety but it seems many of them either has Covid-19 or it was brought in during transit which led to the super charging of the issue in care homes. It's very sad but maybe this is one area where hindsight is a great tool. I'm sure they won't make that mistake again.

 

[drdel]

We need to be honest. The care home business in the UK has been pretty dire for a long time before Covid. Staff are usually low paid and their buildings are commonly old large houses ill equipped for medical purposes. Generally They have been run at minimum cost by private companies and LAs: holding any inventory was not a priority.

The virus has exposed the failings, its a failings in society and Governments of all colours

At least they are recieving PPE and support for free but you cannot change the infastucture quickly.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

there are some good care homes, but there are also some terrible ones out there. I went round quite a few trying to find somewhere suitable for my dad. At least two of them, the smell of urine hit you as soon as you walked in. The staff were disinterested, you tell that for some of them, it was the only job they could get, it was minimum wage, and they hated it. But the care home was still charging £650 a week (this was 7 years ago).

fortunately we did find a really good one, but the standard does vary dramatically.

One of our staff is a former care home worker. When we started looking for my MiL, planning ahead as we are close to needing one but not quite there yet, she said if you walk through the door and smell urine then turn back around and don't bother looking any further. The only time it is excusable is when the trolley is going past with the sheets in. If you catch them at sheet changing time then it is inevitable.

Drdel makes a great point, too many are old houses that are not really designed for purpose. There is a recently built, designed for dementia patient home near to me that is different class. Lots of light, wide corridors, windows to open and let air in, multiple lounges so all are not crammed in one place, and many other excellent features. So much better than the other homes we saw that are converted, 100yr old houses.

Surely the issue with care homes is that you have staff, suppliers and in the early stages visitors, going in an out. The residents are in the most vulnerable group. As soon as it gets in it will spread and have a huge impact whereas a similar university halls for example may get it and the students may barely notice. Care homes in future may have to go to a severe level of lockdown at the first sign of a virus, people including family who get aggressive about restrictions put in place will have to accept this.

 

[Mudball]

A story from another island nation. You can claim that they have more sheep than people, but equally it is not led by a Donkey.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1260568774329225217

 

[Hobbit]

A story from another island nation. You can claim that they have more sheep than people, but equally it is not led by a Donkey.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1260568774329225217

*YAWN*

See post 1802 and the subsequent discussion...

 

[Mudball]

*YAWN*

See post 1802 and the subsequent discussion...

had not realised this was a repost.. apologies. So what was the final verdict. NZers are better behaved than Brits. Or that NZ has a smaller population than UK and hence the rules dont apply

 

[Wolf]

had not realised this was a repost.. apologies. So what was the final verdict. NZers are better behaved than Brits. Or that NZ has a smaller population than UK and hence the rules dont apply

Why not read back over what's already written rather than dragging it up again

 

[Doon frae Troon]

One of our staff is a former care home worker. When we started looking for my MiL, planning ahead as we are close to needing one but not quite there yet, she said if you walk through the door and smell urine then turn back around and don't bother looking any further. The only time it is excusable is when the trolley is going past with the sheets in. If you catch them at sheet changing time then it is inevitable.

Drdel makes a great point, too many are old houses that are not really designed for purpose. There is a recently built, designed for dementia patient home near to me that is different class. Lots of light, wide corridors, windows to open and let air in, multiple lounges so all are not crammed in one place, and many other excellent features. So much better than the other homes we saw that are converted, 100yr old houses.

Surely the issue with care homes is that you have staff, suppliers and in the early stages visitors, going in an out. The residents are in the most vulnerable group. As soon as it gets in it will spread and have a huge impact whereas a similar university halls for example may get it and the students may barely notice. Care homes in future may have to go to a severe level of lockdown at the first sign of a virus, people including family who get aggressive about restrictions put in place will have to accept this.

When I was checking out my Mum's care home we had a few strong endorsements from friends who have/had their parent in there.
The manager showed us around without too much BS but he suddenly just left us to attend to a dementia resident who was starting to get distressed. Came back 5 minutes later without an apology. That sealed it for me.
Beginning to look like the Skye home has opened a can of worms. Massive company 200+ homes in the UK with big dividend payments to investors.

 

[drdel]

Charities are starting to operate like businesses, but, at the end of the day, it's not a good idea to expect businesses (care homes) to be like charities.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

A big issue a hell of a lot of care homes need to address during and after his period is to start acting ultimately as care homes and not businesses.

I'm not for one second defending the government here as there is clearly a lot of areas they need to improve and be more transparent on with what's happening within the care homes but there is a huge portion of care homes that simply don't provide anywhere near enough actual care or provision of equipment to staff and residents alike because ultimately they're a profit making business. Obviously this is a generalisation as there will be some fantastic ones out there, but my own experiences of them is not a good one.

I'd personally like to see a full review of care homes, how they're run and what should be expected as care standards for residents, staff and more accountability for anyone not meeting those standards. Including better education & qualifications for the staff. As part of that review I'd like to see better government infrastructure & input into these areas with more transparency, future planning and guidance to help care homes.

Yes - a full review required - that can come later. What surely has to happen now is that the government sets out new mandatory requirements for all care homes in the context of protecting their residents in the event of a second 'spike' in infections in the community.

The government should also make clear what it did wrong - or that it could have done better if they can't face telling us the did anything wrong.

When something goes wrong in my work I can only have confidence that the problem has been addressed and unlikely to be repeated, when I hear those responsible for the problem admitting their errors, mistakes or incorrect assumptions made - and what they'll do differently next time. I would have zero confidence if all I heard were denials or an insistence that all was done correctly and to the best of their understanding. I need to hear what has to be changed - what will be done differently. I heard none of that from Brandon Lewis this morning. He simply seemed hell-bent on not admitting that the government made any mistakes or made any incorrect assumptions; or drew the wrong conclusion or chose the wrong approach from the guidance offered.

Something has gone badly wrong. So what is it? And how is the government going to ensure that it doesn't happen again as a result of a second 'spike'.

 

[funkycoldmedina]

Charities are starting to operate like businesses, but, at the end of the day, it's not a good idea to expect businesses (care homes) to be like charities.

I know this will be against most people on heres belief but I would have it under some form of state control.

 

[IanM]

The will be lots of "could have done betters" - it's called hindsight. What do you expect? But as you say, demonstrate the learning please HM Government.

Meanwhile the Welsh First Minister is publishing his exit strategy. I guess he will when Sturgeon tells him what to say and he finds his crayons! I was going to type his name and I honestly can't remember it.

His strategy will be - demand more cash from Westminster, waste it and then blame London for not giving him enough.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

My dad is in one at the moment and I can only echo everyone else's experience.
It does bring the question up of whether they or any form of care/health provision should be for profit.

It shouldn't be , period. Care homes should be an "arm " of the NHS.
I don't mean the NHS should just take it on as part of their costs and that it is as free as the existing parts of the NHS. No, it needs a funding structure worked out, but the running of care homes in terms of standards, quality of staff etc should be under the NHS.
The businesses have made enough out of old people's problems and their health should not be a source of profit for any in a caring society.
So, in effect, nationalise them - and before anyone starts telling me how nationalised bodies are not run efficiently , then please define efficiently.
Do you mean making a profit, before ensuring proper standards?
Or suddenly closing when the profits dry up and the "business " decides to go into administration? ( too bad for the old folk, can't help what might happen to them)
There are many on here blaming the government for the. Covid- in -care homes -problem, but who may baulk at the word nationalisation , but if covid has proved anything, it is that some institutions of a civilised country should be owned , controlled and run by the Country, for the Country.

 

[Hobbit]

Yes - a full review required - that can come later. What surely has to happen now is that the government sets out new mandatory requirements for all care homes in the context of protecting their residents in the event of a second 'spike' in infections in the community.

The government should also make clear what it did wrong - or that it could have done better if they can't face telling us the did anything wrong.

When something goes wrong in my work I can only have confidence that the problem has been addressed and unlikely to be repeated, when I hear those responsible for the problem admitting their errors, mistakes or incorrect assumptions made - and what they'll do differently next time. I would have zero confidence if all I heard were denials or an insistence that all was done correctly and to the best of their understanding. I need to hear what has to be changed - what will be done differently. I heard none of that from Brandon Lewis this morning. He simply seemed hell-bent on not admitting that the government made any mistakes or made any incorrect assumptions; or drew the wrong conclusion or chose the wrong approach from the guidance offered.

Something has gone badly wrong. So what is it? And how is the government going to ensure that it doesn't happen again as a result of a second 'spike'.

I don't disagree with pretty much everything you're asking for but I do feel your constant push for instant answers is just plain ridiculous. We want the same outcomes but we have to be realistic about how and when we achieve them.

We know from the mortality rate that something went very wrong but what it was, we don't know.

Let's make a few assumptions, dangerous things but bear with me; the 'knowledge' of the disease and how well it transmits was sketchy at best at the turn of the year. Diagnosing something that doesn't always manifest itself very quickly. We could add to the list but let's not stray too far from the known into the unknown. And bearing in mind the number of (still) unknowns, is it wise to push for instant answers?

With the above in mind, the instant answer is to default to the most stringent isolation for the most vulnerable.

But a question? Why does the government hold primary responsibility for what might have gone wrong when the vast majority of Homes are privately owned? We've seen the strategy and guidelines change, and I expect as more is known of the disease, those guidelines will change again.

Ultimately there will be a review, no doubt a Commons Select Committee or Lord XXX(Chilcott-type) Inquiry. It won't happen quick enough for what is happening now, realistically that's impossible. But, equally, I very much doubt any Minister will wilfully make a decision that costs lives. And there's a number of reasons why, 1) who would morally do that? 2) Who would knowing that they're under the microscope by the media, the opposition and the electorate? Who would knowing that there will almost certainly be a very in-depth, post-epidemic?

 

[Doon frae Troon]

The will be lots of "could have done betters" - it's called hindsight. What do you expect? But as you say, demonstrate the learning please HM Government.

Meanwhile the Welsh First Minister is publishing his exit strategy. I guess he will when Sturgeon tells him what to say and he finds his crayons! I was going to type his name and I honestly can't remember it.

His strategy will be - demand more cash from Westminster, waste it and then blame London for not giving him enough.

Heard it this afternoon and it sounds pretty sensible to me.

BTW have you any idea how arrogant your post sounds.
Scotland, NI and Wales are standing together against a UK government that seems to only listen to the views of one country.

BTW2 Sturgeon is polling over 80% support in Scotland for her lead on Covid19
How is Johnson polling? last time I looked it was 54% slightly more than half polled had any faith in him.

 

[rudebhoy]