Man paralysed from neck down ‘not eligible’ for night-time care

[Eldorado]

A quadriplegic man was told his care funding would be revoked, after NHS officials deemed him not disabled enough to qualify for support.

Simon Shaw, 54, has received 24-hour care since he was left paralysed from the neck down after a car accident in 1984.

He relies on carers at night to help him with everything from turning in bed to having a drink of water. They also intervene with medical aid if he develops life-threatening complications related to his paralysis, which could happen at any time, without warning.

But a recent NHS assessment controversially ruled Shaw’s health needs were not severe enough to warrant full-time medical care.

Guardian report at MSN

[Silver]

Imagine the cost of providing 24 hr attendance, just in case he develops an emergency! He has a family, where are they? His wife is driving off to see to her mum.

There was a GP on the radio yesterday, who says he has an alcoholic patient who has an ambulance sent to him nearly every day, as a member of the public sees him passed out somewhere. He is taken to A&E, assessed, discharged after an overnight stay sometimes, and the cycle just repeats. There are other patients with mental health problems who call ambulances out sometimes several times a day.

I am a staunch supporter of the NHS being free at the point of need, and very much against the privatisation by stealth that is going on, but cases need to be looked at individually to avoid pointless waste of resources. 

Edited June 19, 2022 by The Silver Shroud

[Still Waters]

Care packages always take into account if there's anyone else living in the house. They won't pay for anything that they consider not needed. In his case he has a wife even though it says she's away a lot looking after her mother, it's still possible she's been counted as someone who can provide his night time care. Whether or not she can is another matter. When caring for someone you're expected to be an all round expert at doing everything that's needed. As long as it saves them money and it ticks all their boxes.

[Essan]

Quote

After the Observer contacted South East London CCG, it contacted Shaw again, claiming it had never intended to withdraw his care funding while he waited for his appeal and apologised that this “was not made clear”.

A spokesperson said: “The CCG will continue to provide funding contributions towards the care and support package of Mr Shaw, with no reductions to the funding or the package. We have contacted Mr Shaw to advise of this, and to apologise if this was not clearly communicated by the CCG.

So it's really a non story (for now).   

And no proper explanation as to why, after 40 years, his local council decided the NHS should now take over the full cost of his care.   

More context needed.

Edited June 19, 2022 by Essan

[Silver]

42 minutes ago, Essan said:

So it's really a non story (for now).   

And no proper explanation as to why, after 40 years, his local council decided the NHS should now take over the full cost of his care.   

More context needed.

I wonder why his insurance compay isn't being asked to chip in?