Long-time lurker (years!), now first-time poster. This forum has been incredibly helpful, thank you.
My 85 year-old mother is in end-stage vascular dementia, cared for at home by my father and a team of carers. 3 months ago she was hospitalised for a broken wrist. She is fussy with food and did not want to eat much of the hospital food, plus was not happy being out of her normal surroundings. A SALT assessment was done in the hospital, saying she needed pureed food.
On return home, she made a good improvement and was able to eat normally. She has had two setbacks since then – a UTI and now what we assume to be a TIA. Each has brought a decline in her condition, yet she is still able to eat, slowly, her normal food. For example, cheese on toast cut into small squares which she eats using her fingers.
My father does not want to start the pureed food diet as it seems to be the one thing remaining that my mother can still do and which gives some quality of life. All else is gone – mobility, communication, interest in surroundings etc. The carers are saying he could be in serious trouble and be accused of negligence, leading to SS sweeping in, safeguarding triggered, and removal of my mother ultimately, which would be much to his distress and undoubtedly, hers too. My father is furious that, as her constant companion, he apparently cannot be relied upon to be the best judge of my mother’s needs – throughout her condition her best interests and quality of life have been his priority
He has requested a new SALT assessment via the GP, but meanwhile, does anyone have any views as to how seriously we should be taking this? Is there no scope for the use of one's own judgement in this sort of thing?
My 85 year-old mother is in end-stage vascular dementia, cared for at home by my father and a team of carers. 3 months ago she was hospitalised for a broken wrist. She is fussy with food and did not want to eat much of the hospital food, plus was not happy being out of her normal surroundings. A SALT assessment was done in the hospital, saying she needed pureed food.
On return home, she made a good improvement and was able to eat normally. She has had two setbacks since then – a UTI and now what we assume to be a TIA. Each has brought a decline in her condition, yet she is still able to eat, slowly, her normal food. For example, cheese on toast cut into small squares which she eats using her fingers.
My father does not want to start the pureed food diet as it seems to be the one thing remaining that my mother can still do and which gives some quality of life. All else is gone – mobility, communication, interest in surroundings etc. The carers are saying he could be in serious trouble and be accused of negligence, leading to SS sweeping in, safeguarding triggered, and removal of my mother ultimately, which would be much to his distress and undoubtedly, hers too. My father is furious that, as her constant companion, he apparently cannot be relied upon to be the best judge of my mother’s needs – throughout her condition her best interests and quality of life have been his priority
He has requested a new SALT assessment via the GP, but meanwhile, does anyone have any views as to how seriously we should be taking this? Is there no scope for the use of one's own judgement in this sort of thing?
