I would like a definition that will help me understand the difference between what is called Section 117 aftercare, and Continuing Healthcare funding, and the criteria used for both when assessment takes place? So often terminology is used with carers, alongside an assumption that you know what on earth theyre talking about!
Funding Status
- Thread starter Duracell Bunny
- Start date
Hi and welcome to Talking Point
Section 117 aftercare is an absolute right if a person has been detained in hospital:
for treatment under section 3
or
under a hospital order pursuant to section 37 (with or without a restriction order)
or
following transfer from prison under section 47 or 48.
NHS Continuing Care is a lot less defined. Each person is assessed individually and there is no specific prerequisite condition, nor any specific qualifying condition, which means that it's much harder to obtain.
Section 117 aftercare is an absolute right if a person has been detained in hospital:
for treatment under section 3
or
under a hospital order pursuant to section 37 (with or without a restriction order)
or
following transfer from prison under section 47 or 48.
NHS Continuing Care is a lot less defined. Each person is assessed individually and there is no specific prerequisite condition, nor any specific qualifying condition, which means that it's much harder to obtain.
Hello
Welcome to TP
I do not know if this will be of any help, I found this factsheet on here
about nhs chc
http://www.alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/services_info.php?serviceID=79
I am going to have a look round to see if I can find anything else
Others will be along later who will be able to help much more than I
Welcome to TP
I do not know if this will be of any help, I found this factsheet on here
about nhs chc
http://www.alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/services_info.php?serviceID=79
I am going to have a look round to see if I can find anything else
Others will be along later who will be able to help much more than I
Last edited:
I’d love to understand this further, too. (To help in a continuing voluntary capacity).
Why would one person with dementia have a ‘Section 3’ ... (which might lead to 117 funding ... cor, it really IS jargon, isn’t it?) and someone else not?
What is dementia if it isn’t a mental disorder? And if the means to achieve ‘aftercare’ funding is to be detained in hospital for some period ..... ?????
Open to all pointers, thanks, Karen, x
Why would one person with dementia have a ‘Section 3’ ... (which might lead to 117 funding ... cor, it really IS jargon, isn’t it?) and someone else not?
What is dementia if it isn’t a mental disorder? And if the means to achieve ‘aftercare’ funding is to be detained in hospital for some period ..... ?????
Open to all pointers, thanks, Karen, x
Not the facts but a real case of 117(or not as the case may or may not be!)
My mum ended up being taken to a psychiatric hospital after she refused to stay in hospital after a minor accident (long story and the outcome could have been far worse) . they ended up assessing her and she had no capacity at the time and was put on a section 2 for assessment. I think it must hinge on whether a person voluntarily goes there. For my mum this was not the case and it was an awful experience for us all. She was violent and non compliant with treatment. They use medication to calm people but for whatever reason she could still outwit them and continuously tried to escape, and used violence. She is a complex character and we think she has issues with her childhood. To be honest she has been difficult all our lives but she can also be lovely.
patients can only be held for assessment on section 2 for 28 days. If they have not responded to treatment ( so cannot be released into care or held for longer on an informal or involuntary basis) then a section 3 is applied for and medication can be forced on you (sorry not the right word but still need my morning coffee) and you can be held for 6 months. this is not done lightly and involves expert opinions etc and family have to informed.
When the consultant thinks they have done what they can with meds etc the patient is discharged from hospital. I think the person still needs aftercare or they would end up back in hospital and this can include nursing home and/or deprivation of liberty. This is called section 117 and in theory is free of charge.
Trust me it sounds all well and good, but the reality is seeing a person being destroyed for their own good. Dementia does this anyway but for my mum being locked in forever would have always been her worst nightmare and now it has come true.we are having a nightmare trying to find somewhere for her to go for aftercare. She is in effect a prisoner but has committed no crime, so I suppose this is why they pay for aftercare,,but thats only the theory. The reality is nothing much happens and she stays in hospital. i wish we could turn back the clock and protected her from herself but I am kidding myself. the medication (antipsychotics) can have serious side effects but its a balancing act. I dont want her to die in there and i want her to have a little freedom back, but am not sure it will ever happen.
While my mum has been in hospital other patients come and go. All of them have been very disturbed, all of them characters and still very human despite their problems.I really feel they all should have free aftercare but I think it all just hinges on compliance.It is an eye opener for sure and it is an awful evil illness. It steals our loved ones from us, we lose our jobs and lives trying to care for them, and then they pay for their own care as if they had brought it on themselves and deserve it. When and if imever have the energy i feel a mission coming on.
My mum ended up being taken to a psychiatric hospital after she refused to stay in hospital after a minor accident (long story and the outcome could have been far worse) . they ended up assessing her and she had no capacity at the time and was put on a section 2 for assessment. I think it must hinge on whether a person voluntarily goes there. For my mum this was not the case and it was an awful experience for us all. She was violent and non compliant with treatment. They use medication to calm people but for whatever reason she could still outwit them and continuously tried to escape, and used violence. She is a complex character and we think she has issues with her childhood. To be honest she has been difficult all our lives but she can also be lovely.
patients can only be held for assessment on section 2 for 28 days. If they have not responded to treatment ( so cannot be released into care or held for longer on an informal or involuntary basis) then a section 3 is applied for and medication can be forced on you (sorry not the right word but still need my morning coffee) and you can be held for 6 months. this is not done lightly and involves expert opinions etc and family have to informed.
When the consultant thinks they have done what they can with meds etc the patient is discharged from hospital. I think the person still needs aftercare or they would end up back in hospital and this can include nursing home and/or deprivation of liberty. This is called section 117 and in theory is free of charge.
Trust me it sounds all well and good, but the reality is seeing a person being destroyed for their own good. Dementia does this anyway but for my mum being locked in forever would have always been her worst nightmare and now it has come true.we are having a nightmare trying to find somewhere for her to go for aftercare. She is in effect a prisoner but has committed no crime, so I suppose this is why they pay for aftercare,,but thats only the theory. The reality is nothing much happens and she stays in hospital. i wish we could turn back the clock and protected her from herself but I am kidding myself. the medication (antipsychotics) can have serious side effects but its a balancing act. I dont want her to die in there and i want her to have a little freedom back, but am not sure it will ever happen.
While my mum has been in hospital other patients come and go. All of them have been very disturbed, all of them characters and still very human despite their problems.I really feel they all should have free aftercare but I think it all just hinges on compliance.It is an eye opener for sure and it is an awful evil illness. It steals our loved ones from us, we lose our jobs and lives trying to care for them, and then they pay for their own care as if they had brought it on themselves and deserve it. When and if imever have the energy i feel a mission coming on.
Thank you so much, Karjo for giving that ‘illustration’ – I am so sorry you are all living through the reality.
I have only recently come across ‘section 3s’ etc ..... and fail to understand why some ‘patients’ (forgive my clumsiness with wording) may be violent and aggressive but ‘managed’ (perhaps through medication) within say an EMI unit – while others are hospitalised. It appears the hospitalisation is what triggers the ‘aftercare’ provision under Section 117, where CHC funding may not apply if there is no hospitalisation?
That seems a very crude and elementary summary. Pardon my ignorance but it is a massive learning point.
I do hope there is some light for your mum and all the family,
Thanks again, Karen, x
I have only recently come across ‘section 3s’ etc ..... and fail to understand why some ‘patients’ (forgive my clumsiness with wording) may be violent and aggressive but ‘managed’ (perhaps through medication) within say an EMI unit – while others are hospitalised. It appears the hospitalisation is what triggers the ‘aftercare’ provision under Section 117, where CHC funding may not apply if there is no hospitalisation?
That seems a very crude and elementary summary. Pardon my ignorance but it is a massive learning point.
I do hope there is some light for your mum and all the family,
Thanks again, Karen, x
