As a migrant to Australia - now regularly needing to visit my Mum in UK (who is in early stage dementia) with over 20 hours of current home care a week this video puts all the pieces on the table for me - NHS v Social Services or working in cahoots together - I really couldn't pick which one previously....the council house capital purchase in the 90's too thanks Prof Clements this helped a lot - appreciated the clear, concise presentation of the materials as well
Like Clements - what a guy! His resources are an amazing tool for social workers who have to battle all types of systems both in health and social care. Thanks for your continuing commitment to our profession.
Thank you for posting this well reasoned and presented information that highlights the inadequacies of Continuing care funding , I particularly like your emphasis on the inadequacies of the Decision Support tool that is clearly being used as a gate keeping facility for CCGs.
Thank you for this, we are currently in the labyrinth of reviews for CHC, my mother died after we began but we are battling on and banging out heads against the CCG, they are so adept at dodging and ignoring both the law and evidence Errr.
I complete CHC and DST processes for my social service department. Not only do Find myself in constant disagreement with my health colleagues and the CCG regarding decision making. I practically never see recommendation for continuing care being ratified by CCG commissioners. It is now extremely difficult t even attract the FNC component of car if the case is returning too social care for consideration of funding. a travesty when you realise that at the point of hospital discharge the individual was deemed clearly health or nursing pathway and 28 days later at the assessment stage it is generally not upheld. Its a diabolical situation and a process riddled with tension and discord for all involved. There has to be a better way.
Wow. Thank you so much for providing the evidence for me to be able to articulste my thoughts and opinion re health / nursing care v social care and the CHC DST . I'm an early retired RN with elderly parents who have dementia and health needs related to other longterm conditions.
Thank u so much for this Prof. Going through travesty of injustice after injustice with LA & CCG re: pursuing NHS CHC for my elderly & very frail 88 year old mum with multiple health conditions substantially impacting her capacity to self care, if at all now... She wouldn't have 'social care' needs if she did not have, primarily, medical care needs... Mum came to UK after 2nd World War & her Liberation from Birkenhau, Auschwitz. She worked up to retirement, living & paying into the system of the country that freed her (& countless others) from the atrocity of Nazism. Paying into a system that was set up after WWII with the cry of the British people, 'If for warfare why not for welfare!' Mum, after paying into the system (throughout her working life & dad too), a system that promised to look after her in her time of need, she is now, in effect, under duress to sign over her home & pay out of her (paltry) income & savings for her care needs, now she is unable to care for herself. (Dad, bye the way, died a few years before his retirement & never enjoyed his pensionable years.) 'Lest we forget', the commemoration normally associated with annual remembrance of those who gave their lives fighting, notably, against Fascism, takes on an additional meaning when I see what we have become as a nation towards our elderly & vulnerable citizens today. I have come to learn that mum's case is not unique, in 'battling' for ongoing healthcare that doesn't rob her both of her dignity & what little assets she has in her final days...
Well said Sue ,when it comes to CCGs there is a deliberate hegemony in responding to those in most need , it is an outrageous abuse of power , I have both professional knowledge of this and personal in terms of my late Father who was discharged to a residential home when his needs were clearly medical inspite of all my reasoned arguments that he needed different and more intense care I was not listened to .
Thank you so much for making this recording. I am currently going through this problem at the moment and your video has been immensely helpful, reassuring and provides most of the ammunition I need to escalate my Aunt's case. Her situation is almost identical to the Wigan & Bolton Health Authority E.420/00-01 case upheld by the Leeds Ombudsman in 2004. It not very nice to know the NHS is defrauding my elderly Aunt and Social Care is acting illegally by accepting her care without a CHC assessment being carried out by a CCG. This systemic fraud needs sorting out.
A truly amazing video - comprehensive and well delivered. A shining light in the world of CHC and care generally which can get far fouler than most could imagine. Essential viewing if you are thinking of applying for it. I'm actually annoyed I haven't if before because the section on extras resources at the end is something I've spent 18m putting together
Thank you for posting this in the public domain. Whilst there certainly seems good evidence for much of the framework being ignored by unscrupulous administrators (that is, if you can get to a point of being assessed for a DST) there is useful background for those of us fighting cases independently. In my experience, as with other public and civil bodies, the CCG I have dealt with ignores, roadblocks or just plain lies when it comes to correctly applying the framework and indeed, case law. Until administrators can be pursued through the courts for negligence or malpractice (does this ever happen?) it seems likely that the steadfast may eventually get the funding their loved-ones are entitled to but those who waste public money in delay or stalling fair decisions will never be bought to justice.
Immensely helpful. As a lawyer with no experience in this field and with a father in law who is a present in care with severe cognitive and behavioural impairment, I gleaned little from the government website on CHC with regard to the status of the National Framework and Decision Support Tool and also the relationship between the law and practice, i.e. the Government Guidance. All is now crystal clear.
@@thebeneficiary I can't give any legal advice on this matter simply because, as I say above, I have no specialism at all in this field. and I have yet to progress beyond point 0 on the CHC ladder since, despite writing to the director of Adult Care asking for the CHC procedure to be carried out, I have had no reply. I shall complain and appeal. However, I have by now spent many hours on research and one or two things stand out. The tests to be applied in the National Framework for CHC are not definitive but merely guidance. Even if the threshold required is not reached in the Checklist and the Decision Support Tool and the complexity, unpredictability, nature and intensity tests (each is separate) are not satisfied, the law in R v Coughlan and other cases must take precedence. So only if the nursing care is incidental to the social care AND (not OR) is of a type which a local authority could be expected to provide can CHC funding be denied. If the nursing care is not incidental, then the second leg of the definition does not apply. So in theory, even if you fail all the Framework tests but satisfy the Coughlan test, funding should be granted. However, those responsible for conducting the procedure are likely to take the Framework tests as gospel and mark the patient down on those alone, so say the top websites. They should be reminded that the overarching test is the legal one and the definition should be spelt out. I would like to say a lot more but unfortunately have run out of time and probably space.
@Nigel Duckworth Thank you for your response, your response is shadowbanned on my device, I’ve had to improvise to read it, although I’m not legally trained i came to the same conclusion as you in that the coughlan case takes precedence the problem is we have got ccg/icb and the LA’s in bed together and they are will fully acting unlawfully IMO, I’m going to try an initiate a checklist tomorrow with the district nurse, and then push for a full assessment for chc, if you get the time would love to hear of any updates you may have in your position......👍👍👍
@@thebeneficiary Hi. I'm not exactly sure what shadowbanned is but glad you managed to make some sense of it. One thing about your application is that the Health Ombudsman on his website says that if you think your relative MAY be entitled to CHC, then you can ask for a checklist. To me that indicates that one ought to be done barring exceptional circumstances. I'm paraphrasing this from memory. The other point is that the Framework says that the checklist presents a low bar to success and so again, that suggests that getting one done should be straightforward. I agree about the NHS and LA being in cahoots, but I wonder if it might be different if it was the LA who were paying rather than the patient. The main thing to do is to be able to remember the Framework backwards-all 180 or so pages of it- so you have the advantage.
@Nigel Duckworth shadowbanned is basically censorship , I couldn’t see your initial reply on my device, so read it from someone else’s internet... When my mum was in hospital I asked if a checklist had been done, for chc the reply was we haven’t done one for 4 years, i was then fobbed off that my mum won’t qualify because she’s not fast track I had two meetings at the hospital, first time they agreed a package of 4 carer visits by two carer’s per day and a roving night, i stated at that meeting the nightcare is an issue as my mum at the minute can’t do anything herself, was told it was maximum, so then at the second meeting they increased the nightcare to three roving nights, which we aren’t getting due to no care firm having the resources. Family is filling the gap on temporary basis, Then the social worker at the second meeting said that there may be a contribution to which I replied if your funding is taking you above your legal limit, which I think it is because you are asking for a contribution then the care should be referred back to the NHS, ( I didn’t mention that this also puts them into an illegal position ) i was then told she would do her best so as mum would contribute bare minimum, which again missed the point that if the care needed pushes the LA over there legal limit as to how much they are able to fund, then if doing their job lawfully the care should get passed back to the NHS... Thanks again for your input...👍👍👍
Well I do agree with you , your mother paid into the national health system she should get the benefits .What I disagree with the people who have not.,who come from a round different parts of the world and get free access , who have not,paid in but get the same benefits. Our standard of living (the working class ) and theirs concerning the N H S has become equal we have to go on a bigger waiting list at the hospitals , doctor’s surgery, etc. It may be a different way a certain age group in this country think now . But is it really fair to myself ( I am 85yrs ) or my children who are in their late sixties , who have bad health now to endure all this unfairness , I don’t think others countries would be so unfair to there elderly seeing we have paid into the N H S system. Old people have had irb
I am going through the arduous appeals process for my 86 year old mother. She comes under Cambs & Peterborough CCG. Every stage feels like a kangaroo court where they've already made up their minds and try their hardest to cherry pick facts and ignore others to fit their narrative. They are now finally accepting 1 severe and 4 high domain scores, but still make the leap from there of stating there is no primary care need with nothing to back it up.
This may be the theory, but in reality local authorities can carry out unlawfull assesments for NHS Continuing Healthcare as working partners with the health authorities and then use that UNLAWFUL assesment to compel vulnerable people to pay for care. My late mother was: blind in one eye; virtually blind in her good eye; crippled with arthritis of the spine, hips and knees; had broken bones in her right leg; D.V.T. in her left leg; heart failure; kidney failure; lung failure; etc.However, according to Plymouth City Council she did not have a primary health need!
+SonofBlackDefiance Hiya Sonof' etc. The Council cannot make a decision regarding eligibility for CHC funding all on their own. The National Framework does not permit it. The NHS can decide to fund without making an actual full CHC assessment, that in the full CHC circumstances should involve the council. However the NHS leads the process and as such the Council must have the NHS's involvement to allow the NHS to make that decision. I would imagine that the council had carried out some form of checklist or used their own assessment tools. That is not a Decision Support Tool (DST) that is actually required in law, to decide eligibility. Have a look at caretobedifferent.co.uk/ Then you might gain some insight into the rights and wrongs. (Not my website by the way). All the best. CG
+Neddy Seagoon The reality is that social services and health are partners in crime. They use unlawful assessments to steal by making vulnerable people pay for care that is legally the responsibility of the NHS. See: Plymouth City Council v The Estate of Betty Couch, i.e. my late mother.
+SonofBlackDefiance You have my condolences. Thanks I will look it up. I know that they are criminals. I have won three Independent Reviews (IRP) since 2011 for my mum and have just gone to bat for my father in law. At no time will an IRP deal with legal misdemeanours. Not even when I uncovered that the wrong organisations were making eligibility decisions across England for about two years. Not even when I could show that they claim to have stopped doing it wrong and now they do it right, has anyone answered if all those that were refused funding will have it paid out...... After all if the wrong people made the decisions, they cant be legal.
Sorry for delay in answering I have been away. I get updates from Angela Sherman on that site regularly. I also post quite a lot. Even though the law you quoted exists, it does not over rule the legal limit imposed on the council when it tries to accept and to provide nursing care. Or the fact that accommodation should be provided at the NHS's expense unless it is purely ancillary to the nursing care that is required. I take the point of view that if the NHS pays the funded nursing care contribution (circa £110.00 per week), and the patient's doctors insist that nursing care that they are paying for care cannot be provided in their own home, then the accommodation cannot be ancillary to the need for a place in which to provide the care. This is a horrendous issue. For example I have just received seven kilogrammes of paperwork from our local authority as part of a "subject access request". None of the documents are the financial accounts, that I had asked to see. They just think that ordinary people will give up. (P.S) I cant find your mother's case that you mentioned. Have you an actual internet link? All the best.
Very informative and helpful for anyone fighting for CHC for someone. Unfortunately professor Clements does not highlight the 4 key indicators Nature,Unpredictability Intensity, Complexity which are the CHC trump cards. Anyone fighting a case needs to get acquainted with these so called key indicators and think about how they apply to an individual. Just read the National Framework and what is says about them, unfortunately they can be applied very subjectively by assessors so important to have examples, where in your opinion the key indicators apply to someone, not that difficult for someone for example with severe dementia as obviously it is unpredictable by its very nature, also usually a carer will have plenty of examples of intensity if they give it a bit of thought ,but it is imperative to study the Framework and of course the test cases which supercede the Framework.
The worst of theses is unpredictability which the NHS use against you to say that you are stable. But Pam Coughlan was stable and had been for donkey's years as were the two featured ombudsman cases highlighted by the prof. So this part of the DST is a scam, since it requires yo to show that you are unpredictable. This is not the law.
As a migrant to Australia - now regularly needing to visit my Mum in UK (who is in early stage dementia) with over 20 hours of current home care a week this video puts all the pieces on the table for me - NHS v Social Services or working in cahoots together - I really couldn't pick which one previously....the council house capital purchase in the 90's too thanks Prof Clements this helped a lot - appreciated the clear, concise presentation of the materials as well
Like Clements - what a guy! His resources are an amazing tool for social workers who have to battle all types of systems both in health and social care. Thanks for your continuing commitment to our profession.
Thank you for posting this well reasoned and presented information that highlights the inadequacies of Continuing care funding , I particularly like your emphasis on the inadequacies of the Decision Support tool that is clearly being used as a gate keeping facility for CCGs.
Thank you for this, we are currently in the labyrinth of reviews for CHC, my mother died after we began but we are battling on and banging out heads against the CCG, they are so adept at dodging and ignoring both the law and evidence Errr.
I complete CHC and DST processes for my social service department. Not only do Find myself in constant disagreement with my health colleagues and the CCG regarding decision making. I practically never see recommendation for continuing care being ratified by CCG commissioners. It is now extremely difficult t even attract the FNC component of car if the case is returning too social care for consideration of funding. a travesty when you realise that at the point of hospital discharge the individual was deemed clearly health or nursing pathway and 28 days later at the assessment stage it is generally not upheld. Its a diabolical situation and a process riddled with tension and discord for all involved. There has to be a better way.
I am so grateful for this and all the information on your website. Thank you.
Wow. Thank you so much for providing the evidence for me to be able to articulste my thoughts and opinion re health / nursing care v social care and the CHC DST . I'm an early retired RN with elderly parents who have dementia and health needs related to other longterm conditions.
Thank u so much for this Prof.
Going through travesty of injustice after injustice with LA & CCG re: pursuing NHS CHC for my elderly & very frail 88 year old mum with multiple health conditions substantially impacting her capacity to self care, if at all now... She wouldn't have 'social care' needs if she did not have, primarily, medical care needs...
Mum came to UK after 2nd World War & her Liberation from Birkenhau, Auschwitz. She worked up to retirement, living & paying into the system of the country that freed her (& countless others) from the atrocity of Nazism. Paying into a system that was set up after WWII with the cry of the British people, 'If for warfare why not for welfare!' Mum, after paying into the system (throughout her working life & dad too), a system that promised to look after her in her time of need, she is now, in effect, under duress to sign over her home & pay out of her (paltry) income & savings for her care needs, now she is unable to care for herself. (Dad, bye the way, died a few years before his retirement & never enjoyed his pensionable years.)
'Lest we forget', the commemoration normally associated with annual remembrance of those who gave their lives fighting, notably, against Fascism, takes on an additional meaning when I see what we have become as a nation towards our elderly & vulnerable citizens today. I have come to learn that mum's case is not unique, in 'battling' for ongoing healthcare that doesn't rob her both of her dignity & what little assets she has in her final days...
Well said Sue ,when it comes to CCGs there is a deliberate hegemony in responding to those in most need , it is an outrageous abuse of power , I have both professional knowledge of this and personal in terms of my late Father who was discharged to a residential home when his needs were clearly medical inspite of all my reasoned arguments that he needed different and more intense care I was not listened to .
@@richardtimson1361 Just like me. There were numerous fundamental breaches of procedure during my relative's DST
Thanks so much for this, extremely valuable. My mother has just had CHC funding removed so I will be using this information extensively
Very interesting and informative - gives us all hope when fighting for our loved one's rights without making you feel guilty. Thank you.
Hello can you be kind enough to update your wonderful youtube videos regarding NHS Continuing Health Care. Thank you.
Thank you so much for making this recording. I am currently going through this problem at the moment and your video has been immensely helpful, reassuring and provides most of the ammunition I need to escalate my Aunt's case. Her situation is almost identical to the Wigan & Bolton Health Authority E.420/00-01 case upheld by the Leeds Ombudsman in 2004.
It not very nice to know the NHS is defrauding my elderly Aunt and Social Care is acting illegally by accepting her care without a CHC assessment being carried out by a CCG.
This systemic fraud needs sorting out.
A truly amazing video - comprehensive and well delivered. A shining light in the world of CHC and care generally which can get far fouler than most could imagine. Essential viewing if you are thinking of applying for it. I'm actually annoyed I haven't if before because the section on extras resources at the end is something I've spent 18m putting together
Thank you for posting this in the public domain. Whilst there certainly seems good evidence for much of the framework being ignored by unscrupulous administrators (that is, if you can get to a point of being assessed for a DST) there is useful background for those of us fighting cases independently. In my experience, as with other public and civil bodies, the CCG I have dealt with ignores, roadblocks or just plain lies when it comes to correctly applying the framework and indeed, case law. Until administrators can be pursued through the courts for negligence or malpractice (does this ever happen?) it seems likely that the steadfast may eventually get the funding their loved-ones are entitled to but those who waste public money in delay or stalling fair decisions will never be bought to justice.
sid wheeler
Well said Sid, I agree with every word you have said.
I came here from the carers uk website. Very informative. Thank you
Incredibly helpful and informative. Thank you!
Immensely helpful. As a lawyer with no experience in this field and with a father in law who is a present in care with severe cognitive and behavioural impairment, I gleaned little from the government website on CHC with regard to the status of the National Framework and Decision Support Tool and also the relationship between the law and practice, i.e. the Government Guidance. All is now crystal clear.
Further legal pointers would be helpful, if you can add more value to this great video that would be greatly appreciated...👍👍👍
@@thebeneficiary I can't give any legal advice on this matter simply because, as I say above, I have no specialism at all in this field. and I have yet to progress beyond point 0 on the CHC ladder since, despite writing to the director of Adult Care asking for the CHC procedure to be carried out, I have had no reply. I shall complain and appeal. However, I have by now spent many hours on research and one or two things stand out. The tests to be applied in the National Framework for CHC are not definitive but merely guidance. Even if the threshold required is not reached in the Checklist and the Decision Support Tool and the complexity, unpredictability, nature and intensity tests (each is separate) are not satisfied, the law in R v Coughlan and other cases must take precedence. So only if the nursing care is incidental to the social care AND (not OR) is of a type which a local authority could be expected to provide can CHC funding be denied. If the nursing care is not incidental, then the second leg of the definition does not apply. So in theory, even if you fail all the Framework tests but satisfy the Coughlan test, funding should be granted. However, those responsible for conducting the procedure are likely to take the Framework tests as gospel and mark the patient down on those alone, so say the top websites. They should be reminded that the overarching test is the legal one and the definition should be spelt out. I would like to say a lot more but unfortunately have run out of time and probably space.
@Nigel Duckworth
Thank you for your response, your response is shadowbanned on my device, I’ve had to improvise to read it, although I’m not legally trained i came to the same conclusion as you in that the coughlan case takes precedence the problem is we have got ccg/icb and the LA’s in bed together and they are will fully acting unlawfully IMO,
I’m going to try an initiate a checklist tomorrow with the district nurse, and then push for a full assessment for chc, if you get the time would love to hear of any updates you may have in your position......👍👍👍
@@thebeneficiary Hi. I'm not exactly sure what shadowbanned is but glad you managed to make some sense of it. One thing about your application is that the Health Ombudsman on his website says that if you think your relative MAY be entitled to CHC, then you can ask for a checklist. To me that indicates that one ought to be done barring exceptional circumstances. I'm paraphrasing this from memory. The other point is that the Framework says that the checklist presents a low bar to success and so again, that suggests that getting one done should be straightforward. I agree about the NHS and LA being in cahoots, but I wonder if it might be different if it was the LA who were paying rather than the patient. The main thing to do is to be able to remember the Framework backwards-all 180 or so pages of it- so you have the advantage.
@Nigel Duckworth
shadowbanned is basically censorship , I couldn’t see your initial reply on my device, so read it from someone else’s internet...
When my mum was in hospital I asked if a checklist had been done, for chc the reply was we haven’t done one for 4 years, i was then fobbed off that my mum won’t qualify because she’s not fast track I had two meetings at the hospital, first time they agreed a package of 4 carer visits by two carer’s per day and a roving night, i stated at that meeting the nightcare is an issue as my mum at the minute can’t do anything herself, was told it was maximum, so then at the second meeting they increased the nightcare to three roving nights, which we aren’t getting due to no care firm having the resources. Family is filling the gap on temporary basis, Then the social worker at the second meeting said that there may be a contribution to which I replied if your funding is taking you above your legal limit, which I think it is because you are asking for a contribution then the care should be referred back to the NHS, ( I didn’t mention that this also puts them into an illegal position ) i was then told she would do her best so as mum would contribute bare minimum, which again missed the point that if the care needed pushes the LA over there legal limit as to how much they are able to fund, then if doing their job lawfully the care should get passed back to the NHS...
Thanks again for your input...👍👍👍
Well I do agree with you , your mother paid into the national health system she should get the benefits .What I disagree with the people who have not.,who come from a round different parts of the world and get free access , who have not,paid in but get the same benefits. Our standard of living (the working class ) and theirs concerning the N H S has become equal we have to go on a bigger waiting list at the hospitals , doctor’s surgery, etc. It may be a different way a certain age group in this country think now . But is it really fair to myself ( I am 85yrs ) or my children who are in their late sixties , who have bad health now to endure all this unfairness , I don’t think others countries would be so unfair to there elderly seeing we have paid into the N H S system. Old people have had irb
Just wondering if this information is still relevant 9 years later? Has much changed?
I am going through the arduous appeals process for my 86 year old mother. She comes under Cambs & Peterborough CCG. Every stage feels like a kangaroo court where they've already made up their minds and try their hardest to cherry pick facts and ignore others to fit their narrative. They are now finally accepting 1 severe and 4 high domain scores, but still make the leap from there of stating there is no primary care need with nothing to back it up.
May I ask were you successful with CCG funding? fourcandles68@gmail.com I have a MDT meeting today at 2pm!
This may be the theory, but in reality local authorities can carry out unlawfull assesments for NHS Continuing Healthcare as working partners with the health authorities and then use that UNLAWFUL assesment to compel vulnerable people to pay for care. My late mother was: blind in one eye; virtually blind in her good eye; crippled with arthritis of the spine, hips and knees; had broken bones in her right leg; D.V.T. in her left leg; heart failure; kidney failure; lung failure; etc.However, according to Plymouth City Council she did not have a primary health need!
+SonofBlackDefiance
Hiya Sonof' etc. The Council cannot make a decision regarding eligibility for CHC funding all on their own. The National Framework does not permit it. The NHS can decide to fund without making an actual full CHC assessment, that in the full CHC circumstances should involve the council. However the NHS leads the process and as such the Council must have the NHS's involvement to allow the NHS to make that decision.
I would imagine that the council had carried out some form of checklist or used their own assessment tools. That is not a Decision Support Tool (DST) that is actually required in law, to decide eligibility.
Have a look at caretobedifferent.co.uk/ Then you might gain some insight into the rights and wrongs. (Not my website by the way). All the best. CG
+Neddy Seagoon The reality is that social services and health are partners in crime. They use unlawful assessments to steal by making vulnerable people pay for care that is legally the responsibility of the NHS. See: Plymouth City Council v The Estate of Betty Couch, i.e. my late mother.
+SonofBlackDefiance
You have my condolences.
Thanks I will look it up. I know that they are criminals. I have won three Independent Reviews (IRP) since 2011 for my mum and have just gone to bat for my father in law. At no time will an IRP deal with legal misdemeanours. Not even when I uncovered that the wrong organisations were making eligibility decisions across England for about two years. Not even when I could show that they claim to have stopped doing it wrong and now they do it right, has anyone answered if all those that were refused funding will have it paid out...... After all if the wrong people made the decisions, they cant be legal.
+Neddy Seagoon It might help you to see the "Care to be Different" website, particularly the new legislation called "The Care Act" as I recall.
Sorry for delay in answering I have been away. I get updates from Angela Sherman on that site regularly. I also post quite a lot. Even though the law you quoted exists, it does not over rule the legal limit imposed on the council when it tries to accept and to provide nursing care. Or the fact that accommodation should be provided at the NHS's expense unless it is purely ancillary to the nursing care that is required. I take the point of view that if the NHS pays the funded nursing care contribution (circa £110.00 per week), and the patient's doctors insist that nursing care that they are paying for care cannot be provided in their own home, then the accommodation cannot be ancillary to the need for a place in which to provide the care.
This is a horrendous issue. For example I have just received seven kilogrammes of paperwork from our local authority as part of a "subject access request". None of the documents are the financial accounts, that I had asked to see. They just think that ordinary people will give up.
(P.S) I cant find your mother's case that you mentioned. Have you an actual internet link?
All the best.
Sewing
Very informative and helpful for anyone fighting for CHC for someone. Unfortunately professor Clements does not highlight the 4 key indicators Nature,Unpredictability Intensity, Complexity which are the CHC trump cards. Anyone fighting a case needs to get acquainted with these so called key indicators and think about how they apply to an individual. Just read the National Framework and what is says about them, unfortunately they can be applied very subjectively by assessors so important to have examples, where in your opinion the key indicators apply to someone, not that difficult for someone for example with severe dementia as obviously it is unpredictable by its very nature, also usually a carer will have plenty of examples of intensity if they give it a bit of thought ,but it is imperative to study the Framework and of course the test cases which supercede the Framework.
The worst of theses is unpredictability which the NHS use against you to say that you are stable. But Pam Coughlan was stable and had been for donkey's years as were the two featured ombudsman cases highlighted by the prof. So this part of the DST is a scam, since it requires yo to show that you are unpredictable. This is not the law.
It would appear that something being against the law is not an obstacle to some bodies.