UK : Most Grandparents in care homes are too poor to play Santa




Document sans titre


Most Grandparents in care
homes are too poor to play Santa.

Buying Christmas gifts for grandchildren or friends this year
is going to be almost impossible for many of the quarter of a million most deprived
people living in care homes. 260,000 care home residents survive on a Personal
Expenses Allowance of a measly £19.60 a week.

This allowance is meant to cover personal items such as clothes,
transport and toiletries. However it doesn’t even cover basic necessities
– let alone Christmas gifts.

While the average Briton is expected to spend £3781 this
year on Christmas gifts an older person would use a whole month’s allowance
of their Personal Expenses Allowance to afford this year’s must-have child
present – a Roboreptile. With an extended family to buy for, including
grandchildren and great-grandchildren, care home residents could quiet easily
find even the cheapest Christmas gifts out of their reach.

Age Concern is calling for the allowance to be raised to £40.
It would cost only £275 million a year and is one of the simplest ways
the Government can help some of the poorest in society to retain some dignity,
remain engaged with their communities, friends and families and pursue their
interests. Under national means-testing rules, people in care homes have to
surrender their pensions and most of their assets to pay for their care home
fees. They are then entitled to retain just £19.60 per week.

Gordon Lishman, Director-General Age Concern, said:

“It is shameful that some of the poorest older people
aren’t given the means to participate in society to the extent that many
can’t even afford the basic let alone to give Christmas presents.

“The Government talks
of dignity and reducing social exclusion of older people, but without the means
to participate in society, they are reducing the chances of people doing anything.
£19.60 a week can mean that keeping in touch with friends by phone, replacing
clothes and shoes, getting a haircut or getting a gift for a friend isn’t
possible These things can mean the difference between existing and living.”

Despite guidance on the
use of PEA some people also do not have an option but to spend their allowance
to pay for services such as chiropody and physiotherapy. Such services should
be free on the NHS for those who need them, but long waiting times, restricted
eligibility criteria, or lack of awareness amongst residents about their entitlement
forces them to use their allowance. Local Authorities and Primary Care Trusts
must ensure that older people living in care homes are aware of and have access
to these services.

Real-life example:

Winifred Warburton, 99,
from the Midlands has a weekly overspend of £54.24 after a normal week.
She said about her life in a care home, the “stresses and strains of my
current hand-to-mouth living, which I never experienced until I was compelled
to come under the ‘protective’ umbrella of the Council Adult Finance
Services.”

An example of one weeks
expenses include:
Telephone £8
Newspaper £3.25
Magazines £1.50
Hair perm £25
Local taxi to clinic £6
Toiletries £8.50
Summer hat £4.99
Suit from charity shop £4.50
Chiropody £12.50
(private, as local clinic refuse to call on me). During previous 6 weeks £30
for 2 visits.

TOTAL: £74.24
Overspent: £54.24

Her extra needs for winter
include:
Shoes
Slippers
Underwear, some of which have been in use for 15-20 years.
Warm overcoat
Warm hat
Warm winter dress or suit

End Notes
1) Average Gift spending – Deloitte, November 2006

Note to Editors

* In April 2006, there
were 421,000 people living in care homes in the UK (Laing & Bussion, Care
of Elder People Market Survey, 2006, page 10, fig. 5.6)
* Over 90% of people living in care homes are 65 or over and 53% are 85 or over.
(Based on Continuing Care Conference 2006 survey of care home residents)
* Around 60% of people living in private and independent care homes in the UK
are receiving help with their fees from their local authorities. (Laing &
Buisson, Care of Elderly People Market Survey, 2006, page 13.)

;


Laisser un commentaire