|
 |
 |
| |
| |
| Needless fear and doubt about care homes |
By DR RICHARD HAWKINS, Editor-in-Chief of Caring Times and The Journal of Dementia Care
|
Caring Times, February 2010
|
I have often heard the care home sector described by government ministers and others as paranoid.
This word implies a fear or distrust which is irrational, yet the New Year brought a perfect example of why the sector has every reason to feel distrustful of others - in this case the national media.
The lead front cover story for the Guardian on Wednesday 6th January read 'Care homes forcing elderly to have feeding tubes fitted so that they can be artificially fed if they want to be admitted to a care home, a major report warns today'. Similar stories were repeated by other national newspapers and at one stage the story was the third most frequently accessed on the BBC News website.
So what was the 'major' report that shed such compelling light onto the devious efforts of the care home sector to maintain occupancy in their homes. Oral feeding difficulties and dilemmas: a guide to practical care, particularly towards the end of life was published by the Royal College of Physicians and the British Society of Gastroenterology.
A multidisciplinary team of authors, which did not include a representative from the private or voluntary sector, said its purpose was to 'provide healthcare professionals, patients, their families and carers with practical advice that has a sound legal and ethical basis, and to prevent distressing and complicated disagreements'.
It certainly was not designed as an attack on the care home sector. Indeed, in an email to Caring Times, the College's Public Affairs Officer, Frank Soodeen, says 'I should also point out that as a result of the press coverage (which rather paints care homes as sinister) some people have come back with the (not unreasonable) point that placements of PEG (the feeding tube in the stomach referred to in the media stories - Editor) is a medical decision. In other words, he is confirming that it is doctors not care homes who decide whether a PEG is suitable for a particular person. It should also be noted that inserting a PEG is done in hospital by a doctor and not casually popped in by care homes as implied in some national reports. Figure In addition, it is difficult to see where the figure quoted of 'thousands of elderly people' comes from. For example, the Introduction to the Report says 'The Working Party was struck by anecdotal accounts of poor practice, some of which involve both withdrawal of feeding and its inappropriate artificial continuation'. Surely anecdotal evidence should not be the basis of front cover Guardian stories. It is bad enough that the reputation of the care home sector has again - without reason - suffered at the hands of the media. What is worse is the doubt and anxiety now created in the minds of those who have received a PEG and their relatives that the procedure, which may have been appropriately done, was not appropriate and that they have been the victims of care home skulduggery. All in all, this was an instance not of care home paranoia but rather exposure to the grim reality that, for many, facts are never allowed to get in the way of a good story. Think about this when you are next wondering whether to believe a good newspaper story about which you know nothing at all.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
