Morning all,
Great news. Almost want to celebrate, but that would be wrong because of why she needs this 1:1 and she should have got it at the start, so to feel like celebrating is just so wrong in so many ways. You all Should never have been in position to cause a of feeling of celebration that she has 1:1 - again correct words, what I mean, not being written by me....
Oh, 2jays - I know exactly what you mean! When I got the news, I almost felt like punching the air and shouting 'Yes', but that was eclipsed straight away by the feeling of mainly relief, with a good chunk of sadness that this level of care is needed in the first place, and a smattering of disgust and anger that it took such a battle to get it.
However, we are not out of the woods yet, it seems. Late yesterday afternoon, I got a phone call. The woman on the end identified herself as the HB manager - but threw me into absolute confusion because she greeted me as though I was her new BFF! For a minute I couldn't place the name with this cheery voice that told me 'Oh Ann, it's me . . . A********', as though she was an old friend who's voice I'd failed to recognise! Talk about odd, especially considering the last phone call I'd had with her, and what I'd written about her in the email to Mr Gethings office.
She started by telling me that Mil has 1-1 - and you know, it was said as though she was absolutely thrilled that it had been awarded, as if it wasn't her that had delayed and fudged about Mil receiving it in the first place. I told her that I knew that the day before, and that I had also visited Mil earlier in the day, and seen for myself that it meant Mil was safer. She wittered on but basically, picking through the gushing, the assurances that I could phone her 'at any time' if I had any concerns (and she gave me her direct phone line number for me to do so - she may regret that) , the following emerged. Firstly, she won't be at the meeting next week (despite her teliing the CH she would be, and saying to them that this would be about them letting her know if the 12 x 1-1 hours per day was enough) - she said that no, the meeting next week is a 'medical review' with Mils new consultant, Dr S, but then she went on to imply that she knew nothing about it anyway, a bit of a strange contradiction. She also told me that she had arranged for her 'in house' OT to visit Mil with a view to finding 'suitable seating' for her, and that she - the HB manager - would also be on that visit. Now, 'in house' implies to me that whoever this OT is, they will be singing from the same hymn sheet as this manager, which (along with knowing that the manager intends to be there too) is far from reassuring. The CH have already tried Mil on a variety of different chairs, recliners, bucket recliners, deep arm chairs, upright armchairs - you name it, they have tried it. Does this woman really think that if any had been effective in stopping Mil pushing herself or writhing herself out of them, and ending up on the floor, that it wouldn't be being used already? That approached was considered and tried before 1-1 was even mentioned.
She asked me how I felt about the 1-1 being in place then. Was I pleased??? I told her that I was relieved - and would have been more pleased if it hadn't taken so damn long to sort out, that all of us, her family, the CH had spent far too long worried sick about the risks whilst waiting. She then said that they had moved 'as quickly as they could, considering the request was 'only made at the beginning of June'! When I pointed out that actually, the CH had repeatedly asked for support and 1-1 long before that, going back to December in fact, she said that the CH 'hadn't asked her directly'. I pointed out that they had followed the correct channels by going through the Mental Health Team and Mr R - and asked shouldn't the MHT and Mr R have reported this to her and the CHC board? Er - yes they should have - obviously, she said, it was a 'failure in communication that she would have to look in to'.
She then went on to mention quite pointedly that Mil had had 'a lot' of chest infections and UTI's , and that in fact, she was on anti-biotics at the moment. Obviously, this is the preparation for her arguing that infections are responsible for Mil's behaviour. So I pointed out right back that if the notes were checked, that she would find numberous occasions where Mil has been free from infection and yet the behaviours have still been occuring. And that if she checked with the CH and the GP, she would discover that actually, she has no sign of infection at the moment, that the GP has prescribed them as a 'precaution', just in case her recent decline in health could be improved by trying her with them - and that it has been agreed that if there is no improvement (and so far, there isn't) that she will not be prescribed them again. I honestly am convinced that she knew all this, before I said it - this was just her, trying it on again, testing the waters to see if she could get away with that argument as an excuse for withdrawing 1-1.
She swiftly moved on to say that she was also getting the 'falls team' out to visit Mil. And followed that up, just as quickly, with the info that she and the infamous Mr R (Mil's old consultant - and Spamar, btw - I meant to say this earlier - you are right, he is
DR R - its me who calls him 'Mr' to distinguish him from Mils GP, who is also Dr R
) would be holding a 'review' for Mil, next month. I pointed out to her that he was no longer Mil's consultant. She told me he 'knows her best'. So I pointed out all the issues that the CH had had with him, how long they had been asking him for help with Mil and getting no response, and added the snippet about him phoning me at home and asking me to speak to Mil's GP, as the GP 'wouldn't listen' to him. That last was obviously news to her, and it did make her falter for a minute, before she suddenly started raving about Mil's new consultant. I suspect that was a distraction
However, she she still said that she and Mr R would be holding this review, obviously another CHC review, though she didn't use that term exactly. She also slipped in that she had now personally taken 'Mil's case' on. I hope she didn't expect me to greet that news with delight, because for obvious reasons, I am not thrilled at that news.
I told her I would be at that review too, and she gave me a date that I can't make. Fair enough, she did then change it when I asked. I also asked her for the notes from the meeting where the hospital consultant had told me that he believed Mil had suffered brain damage as a result of over medication - I never did get the notes from that, you see. And then, with more pleas to phone her 'straight away' if there was 'anything, anything at all worrying me' (she even slipped in for me to contact her if there was anything at the CH that I was concerned about, to call her?) she eventually got off the phone. But only after I reminded her that I have the video and photographs and how they would 'convince anyone that I showed them to' about how essential the need for 1-1 is. That caused her to stutter a bit too.
I phoned the CH. Because I'd been there earlier in the day, and I knew that as far as they were concerned, this manager had said she would be at the meeting next week, that Mr R no longer had anything to do with Mil's care and that nothing had been communicated to them about any falls team or OT visiting Mil. They knew nothing about a new CHC review either. The manager at the CH instantly came to the same conclusion that I had - this is nothing more than an attempt to find an alternative to paying for 1-1 care for Mil.