Activists’ anger after watchdog supports ministers’ ‘abhorrent’ care home COVID policy
Disabled activists have attacked the care watchdog for supporting an “abhorrent” government policy that will again see older and disabled people who have been infected with coronavirus being discharged from hospitals into residential homes.
Early in the pandemic, hospital patients were discharged into care homes without being tested for COVID-19, which is believed to have caused the loss of thousands of lives.
Ahead of an expected surge in winter cases, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has now decided that patients in England who are set to be discharged from hospital into a care home with a positive COVID-19 test result will first have to be admitted to a “designated setting”.
They will have to be cared for there until the end of their isolation period.
Some of these designated settings will be “stand-alone units” where only service-users with coronavirus will be admitted.
But others will be care homes “with separate zoned accommodation and staffing” for service-users with coronavirus.
Other parts of those homes will be occupied by residents who have not been infected with the virus.
This means that some older and disabled service-users who are not yet infected could again be exposed to the risk of catching COVID-19.
Every local authority in England was told last week in a letter from DHSC (PDF) that it must “identify sufficient designated accommodation to meet current and future demand over winter in their local area and notify CQC of the details of these facilities as soon as possible”, and ideally by last Friday (16 October).
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has agreed to the plans and has told ministers that it has the “necessary capacity” to approve 500 designated settings by the end of November.
The DHSC letter says the government wants every local authority to have access to “at least one CQC designated accommodation” by the end of this month.
Once a setting has been approved by CQC, it would be able to “receive COVID-19 positive people discharged from hospital”, the DHSC letter says.
Manchester Disabled People Against Cuts (MDPAC) first raised concerns last month about the idea when DHSC said in its new adult social care winter plan that it was working on such a scheme with CQC.
MDPAC said this week that the government was trying to solve the problem “on the cheap” rather than funding recovery facilities that are solely for older and disabled people with coronavirus.
Rick Burgess, from MDPAC, said the government “have had months to prepare for this”.
He said: “This last-minute thing is what they have been doing across the board. It suggests a national government running around like a panicked chicken.
“The government’s attitude appears to be underpinned by an attitude that there are lives that are not worth living and they don’t mind losing them… and that’s eugenics.”
Linda Burnip, co-founder of Disabled People Against Cuts, said the policy was “utterly unacceptable and must be stopped”.
She said that thousands of older and disabled people in care homes had “needlessly died due to the reckless mishandling of the pandemic by government, from the lack of adequate personal protective equipment, the wrongful imposition of DNRs [do not resuscitate orders], as well as the murderous discharge of infected patients into these homes.
“Now we find that this scenario is not only going to be repeated but actually supported by CQC, in spite of the fact that it is known the spread of the virus in such enclosed communities is rapid.
“This means there can be no lingering doubt that a eugenics policy targeted at care home residents is in full swing.”
Despite being asked to answer questions about the new policy on Monday, CQC had failed to do so by noon today (Thursday).
*For sources of information and support during the coronavirus crisis, visit the DNS advice and information page
22 October 2020
Regulator refuses to criticise DWP over misleading universal credit statistics
The UK statistics regulator has refused to criticise work and pensions ministers even though they have repeatedly breached its code of conduct by misleading parliament about the impact of universal credit (UC) on disabled people.
Ministers including work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey and Justin Tomlinson, the minister for disabled people, have stated on several occasions that around one million disabled households will receive a higher entitlement under UC than they would have received under the previous “legacy” benefits system.
But every time they repeat the figure, they fail to say how many disabled households are expected to lose out when UC is finally rolled out.
Disability News Service (DNS) first approached the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) about the failure nearly three months ago, after DWP refused to release the figures in its response to a freedom of information request.
Since that first contact, OSR has repeatedly attempt to excuse and defend ministers’ misleading use of the figures.
At first, it argued that the information used by ministers came from an “unpublished policy impact assessment” and that DWP “has confirmed that it does not have the data to provide the actual numbers impacted by the policy”.
It later suggested that as the impact assessment was “unpublished” OSR did not know “if it included any estimate of the number of disabled people who would lose out from the move to Universal Credit”.
Tomlinson told Labour MP Neil Coyle in a written answer earlier this month that “millions of people who move onto Universal Credit from legacy benefits will be better off, including around a million disabled households who will gain on average around £100 per month”.
Apparently as a result of DNS’s discussions with OSR, he referred this time to a 2011 equality impact assessment which still “stands overall”, although he said that “major changes” to UC had also been subjected to later impact assessments.
The 2011 assessment, updated in November 2011 (PDF), states that, even though many disabled households would gain under UC, “it is likely that the average change in entitlement for disabled households would in fact be closer to zero”.
This suggests – although it is likely that the figures repeatedly quoted by ministers are taken from an impact assessment that was carried out in later years – that there will be multiple winners and losers from the UC rollout among disabled households, as has always been assumed by campaigners.
The 2011 document strongly suggests that ministers have repeatedly misled MPs about the impact of UC on disabled households by only quoting the winners, and ignoring the losers.
OSR also argued in its lengthy discussions with DNS that it was “outside our remit to comment on data in Impact Assessments”.
But this does not appear to be true.
Although OSR sets standards for “official statistics” – which do not cover impact assessments – it also oversees voluntary application of its code of practice, which is for “any producer of data, statistics and analysis which are not official statistics”.
This should mean that it is within its remit to criticise DWP over the use of data from impact assessments by ministers.
DNS has now asked OSR 12 times if it will criticise DWP over its misleading use of figures relating to disabled people and the rollout of UC.
By noon today (Thursday), it had failed to do so.
A DWP spokesperson declined to answer questions about the figures, and he advised DNS to submit another freedom of information request.
22 October 2020
DWP blunder sees claimants told their benefit overpayment debt has been written off
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has had to send out a panicked message to staff after its IT system mistakenly ordered benefit overpayments owed by thousands of claimants to the government to be written off.
Last month, following a COVID-related suspension, DWP told staff they could again begin bids to reclaim overpayments of benefits – whether through DWP or claimant error, or fraud – from disabled and non-disabled claimants.
The blunder appears to involve claimants who have been overpaid new style employment and support allowance (ESA) and new style jobseeker’s allowance (JSA)*, but it could possibly also involve universal credit.
The process of recovering benefit overpayments had been on hold since April because of the coronavirus pandemic, partly to allow debt recovery staff to be redeployed to frontline roles.
The process of recovering overpayments resumed in July, although apparently only since late last month has DWP been able to make new referrals through its IT system for overpayments to be recovered from claimants of new style ESA and JSA.
But late last week, every member of staff in DWP’s working age benefits section received a panicked internal email telling them they needed to “urgently pause” further referrals for overpayments of “new style” benefits.
The email said this was because “recoverable overpayments” were being “incorrectly scheduled for write-off rather than being referred through to debt management for recovery”.
The email also said it was not known when the problem would be fixed, although “digital colleagues” were looking at the issue “as a priority”.
It is not clear yet how many people have been affected, and what will happen to those mistakenly told their DWP debt has been wiped.
DWP declined to answer a series of questions about the blunder from Disability News Service (DNS) this week.
DNS had asked whether the repayments related solely to those who had been overpaid new style ESA and new style JSA.
But a DWP spokesperson suggested that it could also apply to some overpayments of universal credit.
He said: “Overpayments of Universal Credit, new-style JSA and new-style ESA that are in excess of entitlement are recoverable.”
But he declined to say how many claimants had mistakenly been told their overpayments had been written off; whether these overpayments would now be reinstated; and how much the department had mistakenly written off.
DWP has also made clear that any overpayments above a claimant’s benefit entitlement are recoverable by the department, even when the claimant was not at fault.
*New style ESA and new style JSA are contributory benefits for those credited with sufficient national insurance contributions, and they can be claimed on their own or at the same time as universal credit
22 October 2020
Victims of inpatient restraint and seclusion describe ‘inhumane’ care
Autistic people have told the care regulator about the “undignified and inhumane” care they have been subjected to in mental health units, including the frequent and traumatising use of segregation and restraint in England.
They spoke to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as part of its government-commissioned review into the use of restraint, seclusion and segregation for autistic people and people with learning difficulties and mental health conditions.
In the report, Out of Sight – Who Cares?, CQC says it found “too many examples of undignified and inhumane care, in hospital and care settings where people were seen not as individuals but as a condition or a collection of negative behaviours”.
The response to this was often to “restrain, seclude or segregate them”.
The review calls for “fundamental change in the way care is planned, funded, delivered and monitored”, so it is “underpinned by a firm foundation of human rights”, and restraint, seclusion and segregation “are no longer accepted and are only used in extreme cases”.
Many of those subject to restraint described to CQC its “lasting and traumatising effects”, with one saying: “I feel absolutely f***ing sh*t about being restrained.
“It makes me feel …dehumanised. I don’t feel like a real human being.”
Another said: “It feels like my freedom has been taken away and I am powerless.”
One of the autistic people the review spoke to – Alexis – described how she sought help from mental health services because of a lack of appropriate community care.
During an initial 72-hour admission to hospital, she experienced a “catastrophic clash” between her autism and the lighting, noise and chaos of the “box” she was kept in, and quickly became “overloaded”.
In the following months, she was restrained 97 times and secluded 17 times, was forcibly drugged, and her body was left “battered and bruised”, and her identity “fractured”.
She told the review: “They didn’t like the autistic part of me. I tried to tell them that autism is all of me, it’s who I am.
“I argued that my autism couldn’t be treated. They said I lacked insight.”
After three-and-a-half years, she was eventually able to flee to Africa where she created a new routine and set up an autism-friendly home, weaned herself off the drugs she was taking, received private treatment from a psychologist, and, after six weeks, started to work as a teacher again.
The key to success, she told the review, “is creating the right environment and treating psychological differences with dignity and respect”.
The review found that 81 per cent of 313 wards for children and young people, people with learning difficulties and autistic people, had used physical restraint in the last month.
The review also found widespread use of medicines as “chemical restraint” to control people’s behaviour.
It found so-called “rapid tranquilisation” used in a third of wards for children and young people and people with learning difficulties and autistic people in the previous month, even though the practice has “significant side effects and should only be used as a last resort”.
The review looked in detail at 66 people who were subject to prolonged seclusion (which tends to be shorter-term) or long-term segregation (used to isolate someone away from the main ward for a longer period).
Out of those 66, the review found evidence that just three people received “consistently good quality care and treatment”.
Some of the people it came across had spent up to 13 years in long-term segregation.
Almost 71 per cent of people whose care was reviewed had been segregated or secluded for three months or longer, and some people had been in hospital for more than 25 years, although it was not clear whether they had been in segregation or seclusion for even longer than 13 years.
Most of the people CQC saw were autistic or had learning difficulties, although some had a diagnosis of mental distress.
Overall, the review concludes, people in community-based services were experiencing a better quality of life than those with “comparable complex needs” in hospital settings, and were subject to less restraint.
And many people ended up in hospital because they did not receive the support they needed in the community, the review found.
The review calls for a system of national oversight of people living in adult social care services in the community who are being subjected to “highly restrictive environments”.
Of the people seen by CQC during its review, 60 per cent had been prevented from securing a discharge from a hospital because of a lack of suitable care in the community.
The review makes 17 recommendations for improvements, including a demand that the commission itself improves its regulatory approach, such as increasing the number of unannounced and evening and weekend inspections.
It also says that disabled service-users, their families and advocates must be involved in the development of services and care plans.
The review concludes: “Immediate action is needed to put an end to the abuses in human rights that we have seen throughout this review.
“This action must be owned and led from the top by government, delivered by local systems working together, and involve people and their families to ensure the needs of the individual are met.”
The review also commissioned a group of “experts by experience” – three parents of autistic people and an autistic person, who also acted as the review’s expert advisory group – to analyse the conclusions of previous reports dating back more than a decade on health and social care for autistic people and people with learning difficulties.
They found that their meetings throughout the review with disabled people, parents, carers, chief executives, psychiatrists and others “almost unanimously came up with the same ideas and themes as those identified in previous reports”.
They found a repeated failure to implement the recommendations of previous reports, which was caused by the failure of governments to ensure “adequate, fit-for-purpose” administration, funding, accountability and inspection.
They concluded: “The lack of upfront community funding seems to be the key contributory factor to the failure on the part of all involved to deliver reform.”
But they also criticised CQC for its inspection regime.
They said: “People with a learning disability and autistic people need CQC to implement an inspection framework that is fit for purpose, one that is focused on upholding people’s rights.
“Without this, human rights abuses… will not only continue, but also be inevitable.”
They said that those paid to “police” the system need to find a way to “find, manage and deal with unlawful practice”, adding: “There must be greater oversight and accountability as we presently see the clear consequences of repeated failure to take on board the recommendations of past reports.”
They said that “power must be handed back to individuals (and their families), enabling them to make choices and be the rightful authors of their own destinies.
“If this does not occur, any additional money will be wasted and make little difference to the lives of autistic people, people with a learning disability and/or people with a mental health condition.”
22 October 2020
Labour silent over why it watered down Foxcroft’s criticism of government
The Labour party has refused to explain why it watered down strong criticism of the government by its own shadow disability minister.
Last week, Disability News Service revealed that an email mistakenly sent to Disability News Service by a member of Vicky Foxcroft’s staff showed that her original draft comments attacking the government were weakened by someone within the party hierarchy.
The changes made by the party included the removal of a reference to the “vital” role played by trade unions in protecting disabled people from discrimination, while the party also removed any reference to disability discrimination from Foxcroft’s comments.
Responding to new pandemic guidance, Foxcroft had also warned that disabled people who might need to shield again needed to be “properly compensated and not left without enough money to survive”, but that call had vanished by the time her draft comments had been amended and approved.
After the story was published, there was widespread concern expressed about the party’s actions on social media.
Steve Paget, president of disAbility Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, said: “What hope do disabled people have, when the opposition water down criticism of prejudice policies that fail to adequately address the myriad of issues disabled people face?”
One autistic campaigner, who tweets at @leoniedelt, said: “This is why I quit @UKLabour – they sure as hell have NOT represented disabled people for the last seven months.”
Another disabled campaigner, who tweets at @Richievilla, said: “Labour seem to think that being slightly less nasty and vindictive than the Tories will mean disabled people will vote for them.
“That isn’t enough for me. They lost my vote last year after I was subjected to ignorance and hostility from my local Labour for daring to challenge them.”
Anita Bellows, a researcher with Disabled People Against Cuts, said: “I am not sure why it was watered, whether there was an intent behind this, or whether somebody along the line thought it was too strong.
“It just shows that disabled people still have a fight on their hands, even within the Labour party.”
A disability rights campaigner who tweets at @mettlesometeri added: “This is extremely concerning.
“Disabled people have endured the biggest cuts to benefits and support leading to thousands of deaths. This is utterly grotesque.”
This week, DNS asked Labour why the comments had been weakened, and who in the party made the decision to water them down.
DNS also asked if Foxcroft’s comments had been regularly weakened by the party since she became shadow minister for disabled people after last December’s general election.
The party ignored the questions before eventually confirming that it had “no further comment to make” following comments made last week by the member of Foxcroft’s staff who mistakenly sent the email.
It also declined to explain how the party justified weakening Foxcroft’s comments.
22 October 2020
Silence from police chiefs over ‘very worrying’ hate crime failure
Police chiefs have refused to explain why the number of cases of disability hate crime being passed to prosecutors has fallen for the fifth year in a row.
It is the second year running that the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) has refused to provide any explanation for why police forces are passing significantly fewer cases to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
The number of disability hate crime cases referred to prosecutors by police forces for a decision on whether to charge the alleged offender fell by 13 per cent to just 320 cases in 2019-20, and it is now only about a third of the level it was in 2014-15 (924 cases).
Last week, CPS suggested that the continuing police failure on disability hate crime was the key reason why prosecutions of such cases had fallen from 19 per cent in 2016-17 (1,009 prosecutions and 5,254 recorded offences) to just four per cent (360 prosecutions and 8,469 recorded offences) in just three years.
The Home Office has also refused to offer any explanation for the fall, or to say if it was due to a fall in police numbers, or even if it was concerned about the issue.
This week, an NPCC spokesperson refused to answer questions about the figures, other than cutting and pasting answers his office had produced in response to completely different hate crime figures obtained by a charity earlier this month.
Asked if the falling numbers of police referrals was a concern, the NPCC said that “statistics can also represent real rises in hate crime, which do concern us”.
But NPCC did say that it had agreed to “undertake a national audit to help identify any issues that need attention”, which appears to include the drop in referrals.
Disabled members of the Disability Hate Crime Network this week expressed alarm at the police failings.
Sue Groves, chair of Medway Independent Police Advisory Group and an independent critical incident advisor to Kent Police, said the drop in police referrals to CPS was “very worrying and will only serve to increase the concerns victims of disability hate crime have around reporting incidents to the police that they will receive an appropriate response”.
She said she had spoken directly to senior officers about the impact of disability hate crime on disabled people “and how their response can be critical to the outcome of the case”.
Groves was herself a victim of a disability hate crime, in London, and the four-week delay before it was investigated as a hate crime – after originally being told by the Metropolitan police that it was “just an on-street altercation” – meant any CCTV evidence was no longer available and the investigation failed to progress.
She said: “I have been able to use this experience to feed into improvements within Kent Police, but others are not so fortunate, and thus there is a desperate need for a concerted national push to ensure all disability hate crime reports are correctly flagged from the outset, processed timeously, being mindful of the very limited time window for evidence gathering… and early referral to CPS to ensure that there is sufficient time built in to carry through to prosecution.”
Stephen Brookes, a former adviser to the CPS and police on disability hate crime, said the “police response right now tends to be that they have not the resources to deal with certain types of crime.
“However, at a time with COVID driving a substantial hate agenda particularly in terms of peer to peer abuse, they should be taking far more notice of disability hate crime.”
David Wilkin, a coordinator of the network and author of a book on disability hate crime on public transport, said there was an “urgent need to speak out”.
He said: “We need real world accounts to bring realistic action and make the authorities buck up their ideas.”
Another disabled network member, David Gillon, said he was particularly concerned by reports that some officers were removing the “tags” or markers that show that offences should be treated as disability hate crimes, which he said not only affects those cases but also “potentially distorts the statistics about how common this is, and the margin of police failure”.
22 October 2020
Round-up: David Toole tributes, COVID rights, DPAC’s video call… and a new EHRC chair
Tributes have been paid across the disability arts community following the death of disabled dancer and actor David Toole, a founder member of Candoco Dance Company.
Among his career highlights were a solo performance at the opening ceremony of the London Paralympics in 2012, and work with companies including Graeae, the Royal Shakespeare Company, DV8, Slung Low and Stopgap Dance Company.
He also appeared in films including Sally Potter’s The Tango Lesson.
Candoco’s artistic director Charlotte Darbyshire said Toole was a close friend but also “an exceptional dancer whose outstanding presence and performance changed the dance world”.
Jenny Sealey, artistic director of Graeae Theatre Company and co-artistic director of the London 2012 Paralympics opening ceremony, said: “Dave was so many things, our darling wonderful, grumpy, opinionated, glorious, silly, funny, kind, sexy, loving, and wise friend.
“The most unique and left-field man ever and funny beyond words.
“And of course, an extraordinary performer and a unique brilliant dancer. But above all, to all of us in Graeae, he was a dear friend and a cherished collaborator.”
Alan Lane, a friend of Toole and artistic director of Slung Low theatre company, said: “We are all so sad to hear of Dave Toole’s passing.
“It was such a privilege to make so many adventures with him. He had an extraordinary talent; he was a brilliant actor and the very finest dancer we’ve ever seen.”
The International Paralympic Committee also expressed its condolences and said it remembered his performance at the London 2012 Paralympics “with great fondness”.
Toole was awarded an OBE for services to dance and disabled people last year.
Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) has launched a new video project that will celebrate the lives and achievements of disabled people during the coronavirus crisis.
DPAC wants disabled people to send videos of between two and four minutes that show what they achieved during the seven months of the pandemic.
The videos could show artistic creations, support that was provided to other people, something that was cooked or grown, reports of campaigns or activism, or even legal actions or journalism.
From Relaxation to Resistance – a Celebration of our Lives in Lockdown will be used for DPAC’s Disability Pride event on the International Day of Disabled People on 3 December.
Videos can be sent to DPAC by email at mail@dpac.uk.net.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has warned that the COVID-19 pandemic is “magnifying inequalities” across the health and social care systems and “risks turning fault lines into chasms”.
In The State of Health Care and Adult Social Care in England 2019-20, the regulator also warned that the proportion of mental health services for autistic people and people with learning difficulties that were rated as inadequate had risen from four per cent to 13 per cent.
It said this rise was almost all due to “deterioration” in independent services, rather than those in the NHS.
It described the social care sector as “fragile” because of the failure to produce a long-term funding solution, and said that this “long-standing need for reform, investment and workforce planning in adult social care has been thrown into stark relief by the pandemic”.
Because CQC suspended routine inspections in March 2020, due to the pandemic, the ratings examine services up to 31 March 2020, but are compared with the previous year’s figures up to 31 July 2019.
The report finds that 80 per cent of adult social care services were rated as good and five per cent as outstanding (a slight improvement on 31 July 2019, when 80 per cent were rated good and four per cent outstanding).
The inequality experienced by disabled people risks becoming further entrenched because of the coronavirus pandemic, according to new analysis by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
In its report, How Coronavirus Has Affected Equality and Human Rights, the commission concludes that “hard-won equality and human rights are at risk of going backwards” for disabled people and other protected groups, including ethnic minority groups and older people.
The report warns that disabled people are likely to have been negatively and disproportionately impacted across employment, poverty, education, social care, justice and personal security.
It says the impact of the pandemic “is already falling disproportionately on groups in society who were already in or close to poverty”, while the economic impact on disabled people and other groups has been “unequal” and is “widening and entrenching existing inequalities”.
It also warns of the concerning rise in domestic abuse during lockdown, which had a “likely disproportionate impact on women, particularly younger women, women from some ethnic minorities and disabled women”.
A new report has highlighted how disabled people across England and Wales have experienced repeated breaches of their rights and cuts to their access to advocacy during the pandemic.
Three-quarters of the 435 independent advocates who took part in the survey the Valuing Voices report is based on said the human rights of the disabled people they supported were not fully upheld during the initial three-month lockdown that began in March.
Almost half (47 per cent) saw blanket restrictions used to confine care home residents to their rooms or prevent them going outside.
Nearly a third (31 per cent) said they had seen “do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation notices” unlawfully applied to groups of care home residents or other people without the necessary consultation with the individuals or their families.
And 20 per cent had witnessed unlawful blanket decisions to withhold medication and treatment from groups of care home residents if they became ill.
Some advocates encountered council staff who believed they were covered by the controversial Care Act “easements” and so did not have to meet their usual legal duties, even though their council had not asked for the easements to be put in place in their area.
The report says: “This meant people were not getting assessed as they were entitled to or supported as they should be and for some people has had a severe impact on their health, wellbeing and safety.”
More than a quarter of the advocates said that providers such as hospitals had tried to prevent patients or service-users from speaking to advocates, while nearly half (48 per cent) had been unable to meet with some of their clients.
The report also says there was a significant fall in the number of referrals to advocacy services during the spring.
The survey was carried out by independent advocacy organisations including the user-led, Cumbria-based organisation People First, with support from the National Development Team for Inclusion (NDTi).
The government has selected a former Liberal Democrat executive as its preferred candidate to chair the Equality and Human Rights Commission, replacing David Isaac.
Baroness [Kishwer] Falkner is a crossbench peer but previously represented the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords for 15 years, before a brief spell as a non-affiliated peer.
Before entering the House of Lords, she worked for the Liberal Democrats in the House of Commons and its party headquarters, including a spell as director of international affairs and policy.
She also worked at the Commonwealth Secretariat and as chief executive of Student Partnerships Worldwide, and was a member of parliament’s joint committee on human rights (JCHR) from 2004 to 2010.
Liz Truss, minister for women and equalities, said: “Baroness Falkner’s experience and commitment to equality means she’s an excellent candidate to take forward the important work of the EHRC.”
Baroness Falkner will appear before a joint “scrutiny” meeting of the women and equalities committee and JCHR next month before her appointment is confirmed.
22 October 2020
News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com
