The Bill proposes to give Scottish Ministers powers to transfer a broad range of social care functions from local authorities and health boards to the NCS using separate future secondary legislation. Social care functions that will be explicitly included within the scope of the National Care Service include: β« Social care functions related to the support and protection of adults at risk of harm (as set out in the 2007 Adult Support and Protection (Scotland) Act); β« Duties of social work and social care service for those with mental health requirements, currently fulfilled by local authorities; β« Alcohol and drugs support services which Integration Authorities currently have responsibility for directing and commissioning; If you agree with these proposals in the National Care Service Bill click the thumbs up button (π) below. If you disagree with these proposals click the thumbs down button (π) below. If you are unsure about the proposals and feel you need to know more about them click the question mark button (β) below. If you have any additional comments about these proposals please provide them in the comment section below.
It is worth giving this a shot. Some services currently provided are poor - drugs support services for example. Drawing on best practice from the support communities making provision for adult social care will be important.
Does the Scottish Government recognise dementia (100 different types) and Alzheimers as the physical disease which it is, and therefore should sufferers should benefit from the same medical care (paid for by the nhs) as someone with a brain injury or tumour? Or do they intend to charge dementia patients and their families for their care as happens at the moment?
It is not clear what this means in practical terms and more information is required, or an example. It feels like it is centralisation of power of decisions away from local authorities, but not clear if this decision is based on recognition that current model is broken or because new model is considered more effective, or is it driving by need to drive cost savings.
Having previously involved in several Council/NHS review groups, my concern is the unacceptable amount to bureaucy. Look after that patients, spend less time organising committees and sub groups. Adopt the KISS principal. That way, those who need care will me more likely to receive it in good time.
The question of care for dementia suffers crops up here. Dementia is an illness but the NHS has washed its hands of dementia sufferers. How does the bill deal with people who are Ill?
The Bill should contain sufficient detail to avoid all but the minimum of secondary legislation. All consultations so far have exposed lack of detail, a result of hurried and ill-though through legislation. Secondary legislation lets Ministers draw even more powers centrally and whereas IJB's are apolitical and patient-oriented, there is nothing to prevent short-term political opportunism, especially in an election year.
Agree that there should be no βDementia Taxβ which is to say that dementia sufferers and their families should not be charged for the same medical care, as is currently free and paid for by the NHS, for those with other (non-dementia related) terminal illnesses. After all is said and done, Dementia IS both a PHYSICAL and a TERMINAL illness!
This list is ok, but it misses out the general social care support to adults and children, the 2013 SDS legislation. It also misses out occupational therapy services, incl Housing (Scotland) Act, 2006 and Housing (Scotland) Act (Scheme of Assistance) Regulations 2008
I do not have any more faith in politicians to deliver than what we have currently in place. Appointed boards are no better than what we have currently
Moving some services and not all is dangerous. Centrally driven policies seem to be based on one size fits all. Currently - Disparities between policy and legal compliance. eg hospital discharge and supported decision making. Emphasis on one group to the detriment of another trying to address the issues. Local responses are therefore crucial, particularly for very deprived inner city areas. SW in LA's are best placed to do this. Also, We have a SSSC for reg and prof. dvpt. Why an NCS as well?
If it meant for more integrated service then this is all positive. How would the health services relate with the NCS? Who governs this integration, what counts as health care and social care? Some people that are non verbal, they want to express themselves, but they may not be able to, how does it work for them?
No, centralised services will not recognise local populations properly. Expertise likely to be diluted and lost.
Not sure about the whole concept.
I am not sure this is a good ting I have mixed feelings on this one.
This can only be a good thing. There was too much misinformation and guidance being interpreted incorrectly during lockdown. Care home residents ultimately paid the price
We need to know what benefits have been identified to ensure the above services are run more effectively when centralised
Mental Health provision should be included in the new service β with recognition that the impact of trauma on the whole family should be recognised and service provided where required to both adults and children and young people, overall the consistency of experiences should be consistent and enhanced. Therapeutic support required for adult Kinship Carers who also experience trauma and secondary in extremely challenging circumstances. Will all Kinship families have access to therapeutic support?
This content is created by the open source Your Priorities citizen engagement platform designed by the non profit Citizens Foundation