Another benefit rule which makes little sense for many reasons.
But one of the reasons it is there to offset double charging for while in hospital it is deemed that the hospital will provide all means of care so therefore there should be no costs for any other person to do so. However, this does not take in to account persons with Complex needs, whereby care needs to be provided by someone who really knows the person.
But is it really cost effective, as how many instances does this occur in, and in doing so is the cost of stopping the benefit and then recommencing more than paying the benefit double.
Then in this instance when the usual care is required in order to to stop suffering for the cared for person to be present, then it needs to be paid but there are no mechanisms to do so, so this requires and urgently requires a change in the payment rules. For it would not be cost effective and again no mechanism to do so for the hospital to take over payment to the carer.
What also needs to be considered as by not paying a carer what is the carer supposed to do, for they will most likely not be able to care for themselves without the payments and may need to start caring for another person and therefore not be available when the original person is eventually to be discharged from hospital. So then is the person discharged without suitable care being there, or not discharged thereby retaining a bed from being freed for another patient.
The common thought that care can be provided by anyone is is very misunderstood, for in most instances, if not all, it is not true, that is for good quality care to be provided. To get someone will take time and then to be well trained even more time, so discharge could be delayed for months.
Care is very skilled to do it correctly, again not fully realised if realised at all by many, especially the Government who make up all this ridiculous rules and regulations, without any consideration for the carers and those being cared for.
All this , also assumes that there are sufficient people available to do care which there is not again down to the Government in many ways, some which are
great insufficiency of investment in care
this also does not provide sufficient funding for a sufficient salary to be paid to the carer for providing care
lack of reasonable terms and conditions of employment for carers
restrictions in UK Immigration policies to allow more persons to enter the UK to be employed in the care profession
plus much more
Everything is against carers and care being provided of good quality and sufficient remuneration, so the care for are being abandoned by not only this Government all all previous Governments and this and those other Government should be ashamed and made accountable for their inactions with regards to care and allowing carers and the cared for to suffer.
A disabled man who had his welfare benefits paused when he spent more than 28 days in hospital, is hoping to challenge the rule in court.
Cameron Mitchell, 20, from Carlisle, cannot walk or speak, and has seizures. He spent 128 days at the Royal Victoria Infirmary.
Current rules mean he lost his payments while still needing carers, and he has applied for a judicial review.
The Department for Work and Pensions has been contacted for a comment.
‘Needs don’t change’
Mr Mitchell receives Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and his mother and carer – Nicola Clulow – receives a Carer’s Allowance.
Under current regulations, known as the “hospitalisation rule”, a person’s entitlement to their benefits is suspended if they have received care in hospital for more than 28 days.
Legal firm, Leigh Day, has applied for a judicial review – where a judge considers the lawfulness of a decision or…
View original post 165 more words