Covid-19
infected client before the service caring for them. Client confidentiality is clearly
important, but this left the care provider in an impossible position. They had no way of knowing if and how quickly the client’s family might share the news and, while they waited, had little choice but to act. That would typically mean alarming all clients who had been tested at the same time by sending in carers wearing enhanced PPE to mitigate the risk of spreading possible infection. However, had the team providing the
care been district nurses they would have been seen to be within the confidentiality loop, and would have been the first to know. Effective action
would have been taken immediately, risks managed, and with unnecessary concern to other clients and carers avoided. The above examples reflect a wider
malaise within the healthcare industry, being that those within residential and domiciliary care are seen by many to be separate from, and less valued than those within the wider care system. I appreciate this issue is impacted by
concerns about the role the private sector should have within healthcare, but in the first example many people did come to harm, and in the second a number of people were either put at risk of harm or unnecessarily worried. My first question is therefore will Covid-19 lead to a resetting of these
relationships whereby those providing residential and domiciliary care are trusted partners?
Fairly valuing care and carers Another consequence of Covid-19 is it has placed carers in the spotlight, and the overwhelming majority have come out looking very good. Given that the care industry was formerly the go-to source for negative stories on quiet news days, carers and care homes are now being lauded for the invaluable service they provide. Save for recent misguided comments
by Boris Johnson, they are also receiving much sympathy for being the unintended victims of the rush to clear hospitals. So while carers and care homes are now receiving positive press, as with any employer-employee relationship, their outcomes are intrinsically linked. My second and third questions are whether this renewed respect for the care industry will lead to a fairer deal for those who work within it and the providers themselves? The moral arguments for increasing
pay levels are strong. Nobody wants to feel the only way they can make ends meet is to rely on state benefits, which is the consequence of the current level of industry salaries. A fairer rate would be at a level where this was no longer necessary, and which would make carers feel more valued. It also makes sense from a national point of view. Paying people part of their wages as
benefits, which is effectively what is happening, is very inefficient as it
August 2020 •
www.thecarehomeenvironment.com 15
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34
