IMG_0390It is spring, the gardener is back.

He has observed Issy through the windows, and, in the garden.

I had briefly mentioned our predicament.

But as usual, he makes no enquiry of her.

I ask how his Christmas went, he returns the curtesy.

The social necessity of a favourable reply irritates.

‘It wasn’t that good’, his ‘oh’ expression, encourages me to continue,

‘ Issy might be taken; she is worth £4,000 a week’.

His head cocks slightly, but his fixed richter grin, does not falter.

I go back in.

Furious, amazed, humiliated.

No words express, invisibility.

He boasted he was a devote Christian.

‘See how they love one another’, must be reserved for the chosen.

I email the social worker, to check if they are coming, they say yes.

Both arrive, as usual on Wednesday.

They ask what day time activities we’ve arranged for Isabel.

I had emailed the only day centre provision that was closeish.

Isabel is generally in a better mood, and Angel Eyes has managed to read and colour with her.

She rushed down the path with me to pay the window cleaner, but is still reluctant to put her coat on and go out.

All is spring.

All is uncertain.

IMG_0401 IMG_0399

Rip off of Disabled Care and Education

Over the past two years, I have been deceived, and manipulated.

But most of all, ignorant, of the Local Authorities, and Government’s policies, for the mentally disabled.

Through my experiences, and being a lawyer, I have researched, the law, and practice, of the despicable, clandestine, ruthless policies, initiated, by our last government.

Now implemented by our present, with the help of charities, care agencies, courts, and Local Authorities.

They, not only exploit, our most vulnerable, that should, in a civilised society, be our most protected, but, use our money to do so.

So in this post, I would like to share with you, how this is happening, so at least, parents can be forewarned.

Naively, I thought what our government meant, by privatisation of welfare, was personalised budgets, where families would be provided with lists of carers.

Rather like rated.dot. Com carer, and be able to choose, and employ the right ones, with the help of an administration charity.

But I now realise, personalised budgets, were always doomed to fail, as logistically, there is no effective system, to find carers.

With a maximum of 7.50 per hour, and the LA bureaucratic red tape, the system, is no more than a sop, to real privatisation.

The term, has been hijacked, by the personalised services  money, being paid to spying support packages, over which the consumer has no control.

Our government’s privatisation, is privatised monopoly corporate care agencies, run for maximum profit , cultish, on message, employing, a sea of itinerant, zero hour workers often immigrants.

Or, small ad hoc care agencies, and education packages, on a commercially aware basis, desperate for your ‘pot of money’, paid to them, and controlled by the Local Authority.

‘Education’, has  been privatised, under EHCs, for those with special needs, after 16.

SEN statements no longer exist, replaced by ad hoc, on message public/ private partnerships, combining social care with ‘independent’ skills training to encage.

After 16, there are no longer schools.

Or respite centres, as a home from home.

Or day centres, to meet up with chums.

Do not let anyone, try to convince you this is about cost cutting.

This is about redirecting, the money, we pay in taxes, to fund our public services, into large corporate monopolies, some owned by venture capitalists, outsourcing companies, or self preservatory charities, on a ‘sustainability’ basis, recycling profits tax free ,who service the social care, and independent living industry.

It is an orchestrated rip off, not only of our taxes, but of our statutory rights.

These corporations, are basically out sourcing companies ie employment agencies, easily disposable, and unaccountable; they can rip off and disappear, and reappear, under another name.

‘Independent living’ for life, is in secret, there are no spy cameras, complaints are futile, and, the Care Quality Oversight a tick box exercise.

So social ‘care’ is the perfect business model.

Our government’s privatisation has already ripped off probation, prison and court translation service by SERCO, and soon our child protection service, and courts.

In breach of the disabled, and their families human rights to a family life, and freedom from oppression, and inhumane treatment, Carers Act, Equality Act, Autism Act, and Education Act.

But, as these rights, cannot effectively be enforced, they can be ignored.

Encagement, under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, is the biggest, and most draconian weapon.

Since August 2013, applications to the court of protection for deprivation of liberty orders by LAs, have risen over 60%, but not, the number of judges.

Who continue to complain of impossible case loads.

Courts, are effectively forced, to rubber stamp applications, relying on the presumed paternalism of the LA, that ‘independent’ 24/7 supervised living, will always be in a person’s ‘best interests’.

To maximise profit for the Local Authority,‘incapacity’ is being too liberally, and, therefore illegally applied.

It is generally accepted, that the MCA, is not doing what it was intended to do, or is it?

We have the terrible conflict of interest, that the more severe the disability, the less the capacity, and the more the need to encage, and the greater the profit from ‘care’.

Making it not in the LA’s interests, to provide adequate care, for the disabled.

As the more distressed, a vulnerable person is made, by their ‘care’, or removal from home, the more evidence, the LA get of their’ incapacity’,so its win win.

My daughter is a prime example.

Since 2013, £200,000 had been spent on her.

A million, on her 5 yr 6 month NAS home, despite her being a third of the time, at home/holiday.

Her education regressed, her teeth rotted, faeces impacted, she suffered PTSD, had had no school,nor any overnight respite away from home.

Care and education, has made my daughter, ripe for processing under the Mental Capacity Act.

SEN has been replaced by a 75 million government fund, to provide bespoke ‘education’ packages

Anyone, and everyone, can set up such packages, but will have to be in with the LA to be paid.

Their quality appears unaccountable, as the LA commission the service, it has a vested interest, in finding it fit for purpose, and would be liable, if it were not.

The parents have little say, the threat, of loss of access to their children silences them, and, complaints are futile.

Legal action, for breach of statutory duty, without legal aid and the risk of court and LA costs, is impossible.

Education provision, does not appear subject to any oversight.

My own experience of such education packages, was not good.
We were lead to believe, that my daughter at 16, would attend a named local special needs school, and a teacher from the school assessed her.

I assumed under SEN.

A teacher from our local special needs school, attended our home in June 2013, for what was ‘termed’ an assessment of Issy.

But consisted of my filling her in, on the dire regression in her reading and writing, her one and a half million ‘special needs’ provision had produced.

She said nothing as to how, where, or, what our daughter would be taught.

I had asked, would it be in her school building, she replied not usually, inferring lack of space.
Then,in the September’s Children in Needs Meeting, I was introduced to a man from XY, I was not told his function, and thought him a general overseer, and actually nicknaming him, the ‘umbrella man’.

At the end of this meeting, he discussed Isabel’s ‘education’, which he said would commence mid October, with an assistant teacher from the said local school, and, an existing agency care worker.

I thought Isabel was being phased into the named local special needs school,eventually attending fulltime until 18/25.

Instead, her education consisted of a twice weekly, 10.45.-3 pm, increased to 3 in January, outings.

Issy had lunch in a cafe, visits to a farm, two visits to the local school, and swimming.

The assistant teacher, showed me a picture of her classroom, and, I noticed there were computers stacked on the floor.

She provided Issy with a large cloth calendar with weather symbols, books from the local library, handcraft materials, but all had to be stored in our house, often it appeared the ‘classroom’, was not available, and locked.

I later found out, by looking at the address of the education provider’s office, that her ‘classroom’, was in fact a spare office in their headquarters.

And, a worker told me, Issy was often unhappy there, and office staff had complained of her noise.

There was no evidence of scholastic improvement, her ‘report’, stating she had acquired skills, she already had,like putting hat and coat on, carrying own bag, table manners, this package, supposedly, preparing her for her future ‘ independent’ living.

Making her even more profitable.

This ‘education’ was also used, to obtain evidence of parental incapacity, and/or neglect.

I was told, by a worker, that  the education workers,were spying on me, and discussing me in Costa coffee, after their education sessions, with their education package manager.

The education manager man asked me, ’Do you want us to continue to support Isabel ?’.

Confused I replied,’ You have a statutory duty to do so’.

Weeks later, he asked again.

I said, ‘You ’ve already asked me that’.

He said, ;Yes but you didn’t give me an answer’.

I said.’ is there any other option’.

He said, ‘He didn’t think so’.

The documentation sent, before our April Children in Need Meeting, said funding was in place until 2015 for this education package, but needed the parents’ consent.

Which, was why, he had pressed for my consent.

I withdrew my improperly implied consent, at a children in need meeting in April 2014.

The manager then took his workers, and left us without any support, or, Issy any ‘education’.

The same education package provider, has an internet site, and operates a drop in, for all parents with teenagers with behavioural problems, in confidence.

Desperate parents, reveal their problems, which, can then be used by social services, to show you cannot control and/or your parenting is abusive and/ or neglectful, and in your child’s best interests to live independently, and you  cut out of his life for ever, as an abusive/incapable/neglectful parent.

There is a conflict of interests here.

Your social worker will offer your child/ adult psychological help; this can then feed into their lack of capacity, and best interest’s reports, needed for a deprivation of liberty order.

Your social worker, will ask, as mine did, if you are depressed, anxious, and offer you psychological help, and you will be assessed.

And, as psychologists, are paid by the state, and want to continue to be paid, it is likely, their report will not be in your favour.

Depression, and anxiety, and by now, no doubt paranoia, can be easily diagnosed.

If you start suggesting illnesses, your unable to communicate child might have, they could add fabricated illness disorder, the newly named Munchausen.

Meanwhile, your on message GP, will want to examine you to ascertain present, or future health issues, that could affect parenting capacity, weight, age, diabetes, cholesterol, and, any conditions, you do actually have.

There is a similar modus, used, to obtain care orders, and as with the care courts, all is done in secret.

If you go to the media, you could be imprisoned for contempt, and, you will be gagged for life.

Where is the Cavalry ?

I post on Monday the 13th October .

Issy still in bed.

She was up most of the night.

Yesterday, she arose late, with bloody footprints all over the hall.

We felt relieved that her anguish over the past few days, had a natural cause.

It is now 9 days, since the agency staff walked out.

And, still no sign of support.

My poor husband, has to work all day on little sleep.

I am a little fearful, as these times of the month, and, so far Issy has refused her ibuferon.

The autistic mute, who wrote,‘Through The Eyes of Aliens’, describes how horrific periods were for her, all her nerve endings felt, as if, on fire.

I mention this to the social services etc, but gain little reaction,

medical help, is not part of their ‘remit’.

And GPs are many, itinerant, illusive, work by computer.

And, support is an encagement policy, for which, it would appear, my health, and, Issy’s neglect and self- harm, are the only boxes to be ticked.

The long awaited meeting with the genteel education package manager, and Measured Lady,was held last Thursday.

A funding LA manager also attended.

As usual, little of substance was said.

And, as usual, I was left wondering, why we needed yet another meeting.

The LA funding/service manager introduced herself, and, then persisted in asking why agency had withdrawn their support.

We persisted in telling her, we didn’t know.

But  omitted to ask, why, as the service manager, she didn’t know.

She explained personal services funding twice.

‘We will give you a pot of money, which you can use to support Isabel’.

I explained, I knew the mechanics, thought it preferable, to itinerant, unaccountable to us, agency support, but on going on the internet, had only managed to find, one wheelchair bound man, seeking a carer for the LA’s maximum payment of 7.50 per hour, and worried how I could find workers per se.

I  asked, why, the LA had paid our ex agency, more than 4 times this hourly rate.

But she just replied ‘I know’.

The genteel education package man, explained that he, and Measured Lady, were putting a package together, for our consideration, and, would let us have their proposals.

I  thought that was the purpose of this meeting, but thought there little  point in saying so.

It was now 3 months, since he, and the Measured lady, had become involved in Issy’s life.

And 6 months, since Issy had effectively stopped engaging with the previous, agency care package,

The Measured lady said, she had, ‘just the right person’.

I asked if she was fit, and liked walking, she replied yes, as she was a dancer.

No one asked about Issy.

Issy was up dressed, hair washed, and, wandered into the kitchen for juice, so I introduced her by name, to each of the circled throng.

She stared at them all intently, probably worried at her fate,

but, said nothing except ‘juice’.

The funding lady, must have been social worker trained, as she then asked, how Isabel had got the scratches on her arms.

I explained, we had been unable to cut her very sharp nails, due to her recent distress, and like me, she has rather dry skin, and also like me, liked nothing better than a good scratch.

But, I knew she would have been trained to note them, as self- harm, or, abuse.

I hoped for the former.

She asked no more about Issy’s eating, sleeping, or, distress.

My husband had to work away from home, and worried he may be called back, asked if some support could be put in place for Monday.

The funding lady seemed reluctant to find different agency workers, so the Measured Lady, said she would be able to get someone to come on Monday, but didn’t.

The funding lady, again described the mechanics of personalised services,  even using exactly the same words.

I replied, that in any event, the money would  be paid to the Measured lady, as it is her company, who employed the future support, and she agreed.

An hour had been spent in the kitchen, and they left.

Issy, was particularly agitated.

She was probably wondering why these, official looking people, were in the kitchen, and, so were we.

Social Care is unaccountable yet agencies make millions…

On Tuesday afternoon, some 3 days after the final hissy fit, we received our first communication, from anyone.

An email from our social worker, as follows;

I met with X and Y from the agency yesterday. Agency will no longer be supporting Isabel. Agency have ended their contract with Social Care and will no longer provide staff to work with Isabel. Please can we discuss’.

So endth, mine and Issy ’s, 18 month relationship with the carers in kitchen.

A damning indictment, on a large well known agency, who purport to be,

committed in developing our services to be a continuous, responsive and reflect the services required’.

And, the two workers, who left us, after nearly a year of knowing us, high and dry, without explanation, looking forward to a day out.

But, then, how is ‘Social Care’ accountable?

Obviously, not by conscience, and humanity,  or even the constraints of a normal working relationship..

You can make a complaint. We were not invited to.

But what would then happen?

Nothing, as such complaints do not affect agencies commercially.

We do not employ them and their is no choice or competition.

Internal complaints systems are without teeth, and, as such just a worthless sop to service provision.

We do not pay, or commission the services, so do not have the contractual rights of an ordinary consumer.

We shall see what happens to our indirect complaint to Social Services.

Last week I was contacted by the service manager, who I must meet with, before getting to stage 2.

So that’s an hour with team leader, then social worker, and then drafting a reply to their report, and, now this lady, before I can get near the ‘ independent’ investigator.

And at the same time, I have to look after, a severely autistic child, with no support, and, no overnight respite for 18 months.

I am certainly doing, a lot of unpaid jobs, for a lot of people, and, they are then claiming this, as part of their support system.

And the NHS now want to do an inspection of my house, I think to justify my carers allowance of £70 per week. Reduced In 2015 to £62.

If only, we had such diligent inspection of the huge amounts, the state are spending, on state ‘care’ … that is the scandal.

The profiteering from our taxes, of money spent on our inadequate ‘social care’, respite, and education.

In May, the Care Quality Commission, on one of their standard checks of our agency, had rang me.

A lady in front of a computer form, asking if my workers were reliable, ie turned up on time.

Presumably, a sop to checking care quality, as a result of the undercover spying of the poor old lady stuck in her bed ringing an agency, when her care did not arrive.

I mentioned to the CQC lady, that a second worker, had not been sent on Saturdays for months, and, asked how this might affect the agency.

She said it could affect their star rating.

Would that affect their commissioning by the LA, potentially liable, for their inadequate services ?

The lady, was not interested in the agency spying on me, and lying about me behind my back and discussing my private home life in public cafes.

That was not in her form.

Even if they lost a star,which would be unlikely to happen, it would not affect their contract with the LA.

Look at SERCO, they over claimed 70 million, and, allowed prisons to escape, overcrowding and record suicides.

Their court translator service was chaotic and expensive, and this merely increased their outsourcing empire.

They were, and still might, get all LA’s contracts for child protection.

Our social worker, on her last visit about my formal complaint, had stated this particular agency, were, ‘perhaps not the most appropriate care‘, and, ‘why did we chose them’,

but, then answered her own question with a , ‘but then you weren’t given any choice‘.

And then, when we asked, who could now support us, stated, she was not allowed to recommend social care…..( only  commission)

It would appear, that the amount paid does not improve the service, as our agency was paid, at least 4 times the £7.50 hourly rate, allowed by LA, on a direct payment basis.

Later the same day, our social worker emailed me back,

It would help me if you email me a list of tasks /job description for the worker. The worker will not know Issy, but will need to know what the expectations are in supporting her and what the role involves’.

So after 3 hour long home visits, amended care plan, core assessments, all the agency risk assessments, and, commissioning of agency support costing  tax payers nearly £100,000 she still does not know what their duties should be ?.

I, caring alone for a severely disabled child, that has cost the state to date £200,000 since 2013, for their purported ‘care’, have to also do her job.

I reflect, but will never know, that her required information, may have been, our agency’s excuse, for their withdrawal of care.

And, she, wanted to ensure, any new agency, could not do the same, and, that I could not complain, as I had given her their remit.

So, I email her back, repeating as usual, what they already know.

All is time wasting pointless bureaucracy.

Such is Social ‘Care’…..