Thanks Helena for updating the link. I'm just reading through it.
Perhaps I'm being a bit thick, but I still find I have trouble distinguishing the difference between 'health care' and 'social care'. If I was in, say, a traffic accident and was unconscious for a while, I would still need to be fed and the 'other end' dealt with. I would still need to be washed. Are these all deemed to be 'social care'? However, I would need someone to do them for me because the accident, the 'health issue', would prevent me doing them for myself. And, of course, if you're in hospital after an accident, I can't recall anyone being asked to 'pay', or be assessed to see if they aught to pay, for being fed, watered, washed.
So ....... someone with dementia needs to be supervised, fed, washed, etc ........ but it is the disease that has caused this need ....... so why isn't it a health issue? The need for someone else to do these things is a consequence of the disease....... a health issue ........ a health need!
Also, having started to read the consultation document, I notice that on page 7, point 9, it says:
This Framework does not apply to individuals who are detained under the Mental Health Act 1983,
and who are the responsibility of the NHS under the provisions of this Act.
How is this not a 'get out clause'? I don't mean to be flippant, but the consequences of dementia ........ the aggressiveness, mental incapacity etc .......... seem like a candidate for classification under this Act???
........ and then the NHS pays for everything????
There is obviously something missing in my line of thought......... but it makes my blood boil to think of all the many thousands of people who have paid into this country for so many years ......... and when they need help they get treated terribly.
[end rant]
Elaine