ONE of the indices of a country’s level of civilisation is how it treats its elderly and, on that assessment, Scotland’s capital has been found wanting. Last year, the Care Inspectorate and Healthcare Improvement Scotland reported a series of failings in care of the elderly in Edinburgh, with some patients waiting 100 days for support. On nine quality indicators, four were “adequate”, four “weak” and one “unsatisfactory”.
Now a progress review by the same watchdog has found that performance has actually deteriorated in some areas and that, overall, only “limited progress” had been made. Despite improvements in risk management planning, and the continuing strong commitment of frontline staff and “some managers”, the situation looks dire. Adam McVey, Edinburgh City Council’s ruling SNP-Labour coalition, has in the past denied there was a “crisis”; a much over-used word, admittedly.
But when opposition councillors claim, as they did recently, that someone has to die or move away before the next person on the list can secure care, no one can say there is nothing to see here. The council’s social care problems have been described as among the worst in the UK, even if – as with other hard-pressed local authorities – it has tried to meet increased demand by making savings where it can.
Crisis or no crisis, it knows there is a problem and has promised to take action. Edinburgh Health and Social Care Partnership, the joint council-NHS Lothian organisation in charge, is developing a new carers’ strategy, with a pilot study showing a dramatic reduction in average waiting times. Less promising, arguably, is the creation of two new “leadership” positions. An approach that says, “Quick, appoint some new, well-paid officials”, might help. But we suspect it isn’t the answer. The answer, we know, isn’t easy to find. But if Edinburgh is to retain its reputation as the civilised city we all know it to be, it must ensure proper care for its elderly.
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