Aged Care Crisis
for consumers, by consumers
Our Columnist has been an advocate for better aged care for over a decade. They have worked in aged-care homes and supported seven family members and friends through the Australian system of aged care and found many aspects of it wanting. They have co-authored several submissions to Senate Inquiries on matters relating to aged care and written widely on social policy issues concerning ageing and accommodation for marginalized people.
Imagine waking from deep sleep to see a strange, expressionless face staring right down at you. Then imagine that this happens many times a week and that you are aged 96 with limited mobility.
This is life for a friend of mine who lives in a high-care residential facility. It also happened to my mother in similar circumstances – and to many others.
Let us put ourselves in the position of an 'average' nursing home resident. You are largely confined to a chair and/or a bed. The only way you can voice your needs is to press your buzzer (if you can reach it and it works) or to tell (if you can speak) those who come to your room to assist in toileting, bathing or dressing.
People are usually stunned to learn that there are no set staff/resident ratios in aged-care homes. They simply assume that frail people in care will be treated like other vulnerable individuals – for example like those in hospital or very young children in kindergarten and day-care who receive the protection of mandated levels of staffing.
Last week the federal government finally got around to announcing its long-promised, aged-care reform agenda. Yet the stunning thing about the announcement was not the package itself but the tenor of the resulting talk-back and commentary.
Radio presenters took call after call from individuals expressing great fear and dread of nursing homes. Stories of distressing neglect were recounted. The public clearly has little confidence in the current system of residential care. It is therefore hard to understand why such negative public comment is not seen as a major disaster in public policy?
There are three groups of people whom are regularly incarcerated in this world. We lock up people convicted of criminal acts; people who have mental health issues and are assessed as being a threat to themselves or to others and old people who live with dementia – for their own safety.
In the first two instances, there are protective processes and procedures in place. Individuals can take their case all the way to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps it might be said that old people too, under the principles of Habeas Corpus, also have the right to have their case heard before a judge.
