THREE years ago Alex Neil, the then Health Secretary, visited the annual homecare conference organised by Scottish Care and pledged to end 15-minute visits to the vulnerable elderly.
But today, at the event, Scottish Care’s chief executive Dr Donald MacAskill will claim that one-third of all commissioned visits to elderly people to provide care at home are still less than half an hour.
Late last year Dr MacAskill branded such visits an “obscenity”. This is strong language from someone who clearly has an interest in speaking up for the companies which provide the care.
But most reasonable people would agree with the principle that providing care within such a short time scale is deeply unsatisfactory.
A worker will have to arrive, perform a set task – perhaps getting someone up and dressed, or ensuring they get breakfast or tea – and probably check that they have taken any necessary medication, before moving on to the next appointment. Quite apart from the likely impact on the quality of care that can be provided, such visits almost completely eliminate “soft” care – a bit of company or the chance to pick up on a minor health issue which might become major.
Scottish Care has other concerns about the way care is commissioned. Insecurity of contracts means a parallel insecurity for staff. Little wonder that despite the recent introduction of a living wage of £8.25 an hour for care workers, many new staff stay less than a year and one-third of staff overall leave each year.
There is no national care at home contract, so the outcome of negotiations around the country can lead to a postcode lottery of provision. When you add in different approaches to deciding who qualifies for free personal and nursing care, often austerity-driven, Scottish Care’s frustration is understandable.
The conference will hear calls today for a radical review of care at home. Current Health Secretary Shona Robison – who will speak at it – must consider this, in the interests of those who rely on services and of the hard-pressed staff who provide them.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here