Could you all just clarify a few things for me to make sure that I have understood everything correctly. At the time we didn't have PoA.
We should have been told that a CHC assessment was taking place
Yes
A CHC assessment should have taken place.
Yes
A care plan should have been drawn up
Yes
Notice should have been given of any meeting.
Yes. You should have been invited to each and every meeting too, and if the date(s) were inconvenient for you because of short notice, the meeting should have been reconvened - unless the mtgs were extremely extremely extremely urgent.
Any proceedures should have been explained to us.
Yes, all procedures should have been explained to you before the process started, and you should have been given appropriate leaflet/information in writing, so that you had a chance to read and understand before - not after the event.
What actually happened last time mum was in hospital, on previous occasions we have been seriously concerned about various aspects, last time we were frightened:
No mention has ever been made of CHC
No care plan has ever been drawn up.
Only item of concern was a financial assessment.
That often happens, or even often happens when people are not made aware of CHC. The mere mention of 'owns his/her own home' is often/usually followed by a financial assessment. No financial assessment should be carried out unless and until any CHC process has been completed and you are in agreement with the outcome. Because if you don't agree, you have the right to appeal.
Discharge meeting was held with no notice, we were told to get to the hospital straight away for the meeting. When I said that I thought we should be given notice, a memeber of staff told me that we should get mum out of hospital very quickly as there was something on the ward that could kill her (mum had received unexplained injuries and I had seen a coffing removing a body during visiting hours, I didn't question the need for rapid discharge)
Not quite sure how to respond politely, to the suggestion that there was something on the ward that could kill her - so you should perhaps ask for a full explanation of that one! Did they mean a 'person' or a'bug' or 'something else'? The mind boggles - because that kind of phrase is something that is outside of my experience and my comfort zone.
At the meeting variou people associated with mum's care just talked about mum's health, no mention was made of CHC.
There should have been mention of CHC, as you now know.
No-one told the ward that mum was to be discharged.
So how did she come to be allowed to be discharged from the ward? Lack of security and safeguarding?
Our only contact was with the hospital Sw and a person from the Dementia Intensive Support Team, the only interest was in relation to our family finances. We don't have any services so didn't see why this was required, particularly without a care plan of any sort.
The hospital SW appointed an advocate from AgeUK without consulting us, she just appeared one day. We don't know why this advocate was appointed.
Ask further questions about that one. What kind of Advocate? Why?
Other,very serious things, happened.
A final discharge meeting was held at our home, the advocate was there acompanied by her manager, it was a very unpleasant experience, the manager explianed we had no rights in our own home that 'they' can do what they like (SS), 'they' can send anyone into our home and we couldn't stop that no matter how they acted, we could only complain through proper channels ( our concerns relating to something was very serious). The manager told us that, if we did not disclose our family finances 'they have ways of finding things out'. I replied 'including burglary?', no-one replied. At this meeting no mention was made of CHC. We felt intimidated and quite frightened, we had a witness present who had challenged what had been said but was shouted down, afterwards she expressed her shock.
I'm shocked too, to read your words.
I have found extreme reluctance from various organisations to obtain records.
I have no knowledge of the kind of refusals you may have met - but each and every decision about someone who lacks the mental capacity to consent to anything, must be made 'in the best interests'. That is - at long long last - clearly explained in the latest revised version dated November 2012 of the National Framework for CHC. It's already in the Mental Capacity Act 2005, but has been ignored for so long now, in the 'best interests' of those who are not up to speed!! I have helped several people to write letters requesting copies of hospital/care home/social services records 'in the best interests' of their relative, even if they had no PoA in place. We have succeeded. That may be why I am pleased to see mention of those 'best interests' in the latest National Framework.
Sorry this post is mega long but this post has caused an itch that I can't quite reach to scratch.