Thursday, 25 April 2013

The Liverpool Care Pathway

It has come to the Writer's notice of a rumour that the NHS has given £30m to the NHS to practice this method of nursing and care. On making enquiries whether this rumour is true, it transpires that this may only be a misunderstanding of the facts.

However it is a fact that the Government has awarded a certain amount to Hospices for palliative care. This is to alleviate the suffering and pain experienced by terminally ill patients. Now the worry is that there is a very fine line between rendering palliative care and practising the Liverpool Care Pathway which requires the withholding of food and water and indeed painkillers where it is deemed that the patient will not, in any case survive.

Palliative care should be rendered to those suffering terminal diseases but this does not mean that those with cancer and similar diseases should be denied food and water and dignified comfort. The Liverpool Care Pathway is it seems, a euphemism for euthanasia which is still a crime, illegal in this country. It leaves patients at the mercy of hospital staff and family. Many suggest that this is O.K. on condition that the family have been informed. This is most unacceptable and dangerous. Many families, it is sad to say, would welcome the enforced departure of their elderly members and the State should recognise this and behave in an ethical and protective way.

The elderly are most vulnerable and The Liverpool Care Pathway is not the way to deal with the problems of the terminally ill elderly who, if we are not careful, will fall victim to the unscrupulous many of whom regard the elderly as an unwelcome burden on society.

More financial attacks to come on pensioners?

The 'Fabian' attack in the Daily Express
THE FABIANS "STRIP OAPS of benefits" According to a report in the Daily Express on the 22nd April 2013 and further comments in the Independent of today (23.4.013) Better Off Pensioners could be taxed and/or means tested on benefits such as Bus Passes and Fuel Allowance and so save the Government millions, the so-called Think Tank of the Fabian Society suggests.

We suggest that there wasn't much thought given to this dangerous idea. Who decides who the "Better Off Pensioners" are and where should the line between the better off and poorer pensioners be drawn?

The Independent following the debate today uses phrases like those on Tax Credits would be deemed the poorer section. Well the Writer does not qualify for Tax Credit or any other supplement to her pension, yet remains struggling to meet fuel bills and Council Tax.

A prime example of misguided designated line is that of the PDSA who will not treat animals belonging to pensioners who do not receive Housing or Council Tax Benefit. There are many people existing just above these mistakenly placed demarcation lines but who are certainly not better off. Someone receiving just over £10,000 per annum cannot be classed as "Better Off" but this silly idea will attack them just the same.

The State Pension in Britain is the lowest in Europe so these "perks" are much needed by the majority of pensioners, most of whom are certainly not "Better Off". The Fabian "Think Tank" had better think again.