Thanks "daughter"daughter said:Who says you are not allowed to "trick" your Grandad? It's an awful word to use and I suppose that is what we did with my Dad at times but it was the only way we could see to give everyone a bit of space. We found it best not to mention trips anywhere until the last minute - although this may look cruel and even devious perhaps, but your Nan is obviously at the end of her tether and the easier you make it for her now, the better. At least your family will have some time to think about what to do from now on.
This is a terrible time for everyone in the family but hang on there Lousie, we're all here for you.
It's strange how much of a difference a minor typing error can make, isn't it!daughter said:This is a terrible time for everyone in the family but hang on there Lousie, we're all here for you.
I agree with Jenifer that the EPA in its present form only gives control over finances. The irony as far as the Human Rights Act is concerned is that, while it may stop someone being forcibly put in a nursing or care home, once they are there they are no longer covered by the Human Rights Act!merlin said:Hi all
Have also been reading this thread and have in many ways a similar situation insofar that my wife is in complete denial of her AD and therefore refuses to co-operate with anyone.
The problem of consents puzzles me because it seems to me that somebody is interpreting the human rights act a bit too literally. Surely if there is an EPA in force then the carer who has this EPA can make decisions on the behalf of the patient. This must mean that trickery or whatever is irrelevant.
The wording of the my EPA says you are making decisions on property and affairs. I had assumed that affairs meant any affairs for the benifit of the patient.
In the light of this correspondence I shall have to check this definition with my soliciter.
Anybody any definitive info?
You get on your soapbox as much as you like Brenda, you talk a lot of sense!I would think that in Louise's case her grandad could be argued to pose a danger to her grandmother because of the effect on her health. What about her human rights! If her grandmother just walked away and noone else volunteered to pick up the pieces the Social Services would HAVE to find him residential care.
Whilst I don't condone it, I can understand to an extent the cases you hear of where people either 'abandon' a relative at A & E or refuse to collect them on discharge from hospital. If you phoned Social Services up and said you could not cope with a child any more they would be obliged to act, what is the difference with an elderly person?!
Brenda (climbing down from one of many soapboxes!)
Loiuise, no one could blame you for feeling that way. I know you don't wish harm on him but you are obviously at the end of your tether, as is your poor grandmother.Grandaughter 1 said:You get on your soapbox as much as you like Brenda, you talk a lot of sense!
I feel really guilty for admitting this but sometimes I wish Grandad would have a small fall or something that would cause him to be admitted to hospital because hopefully that could start the ball rolling. I feel really bad for thinking that but desperate measures and all that......
I know it sounds awful but you really DO have to play the game according to the bureaucratic rules. If the "rules" won't allow your grandad to have care without his consent, then it will have to allow granma to HAVE care if she says she must have it.Cate said:How about asking for respite for your nan, she really sounds as if she is the one who needs the TLC at the moment.
Just maybe this will force the SW into some positive action re support for her at home with you granddad. Or simply saying that Nan needs respite, so what at they going to organsie for granddad?
I agree 150% with 'he who shouts loudest gets the action'.