Search :  
Add New Message
Charles H
Nov 16 2016 13:20 PM Post #107
Location : Base UK

The handover of 200 NHS services to Virgin Care

The handover of 200 NHS services and especially three statutory services to private enterprise cannot demonstrate more clearly the depth to which the social and moral consciences of this nation have sunk.
That a nation will be judged by the manner in which it treats its more vulnerable citizens says it all.
Yet it was totally predictable, for the downhill descent of decency and moral values has been graphically spelt out in the appalling history of the devastation of support services for people with learning disabilities over the past 30 years.
By ignorance, default, or intent, those who purport to protect and advance the best interests of this most vulnerable section of our society have hypocritically and ruthlessly betrayed them.
Honours have been granted, fortunes have been made, careers have been enhanced, in the pursuit of fame, glory, financial gain and power by those who have used the innocents of our society as pawns to advance their own agendas.
The abdication of responsibility of social care to the extent that is now being revealed would not have happened so blissfully 30 years ago – it would have led to a massive reaction that the politicians responsible would not have survived. Press coverage and public reaction at that time would not have allowed this to happen on this pathetically casual basis.
But to whom do carers turn now? The press and media are only occasionally interested and selective in the short term unusual or sensational event but lack meaningful interest in long term preventative or moderation aspects of flawed policy applications.
To turn to Mencap would be a joke. This organisation has been so busy turning itself into a multimillion corporation (about £190,000,000 a year) it has lost touch with so many of their members it has lost its grip on the realities of the current situation.
The care in the community outlook has become so bleak for these people and their carers as the clock is being turned back half a century that the depression being created can only create immense future demands on an NHS that is already struggling to cope.
Regrettably, despite the horrendous outlook for the most vulnerable people in our society even at this momentous occasion in social history nobody has the slightest interest in redeeming the now badly and sadly soiled reputation of our country.
Charles H
Nov 12 2016 13:47 PM Post #106
Location : Base

A monograph 'The TRAGEDY of WINTERBOURNE VIEW Good intentions and the Law of Unintended Consequences' is now out of print. Has been replaced by WINTERBOURNE VIEW The Betrayal of the INNOCENT A limited number are still available @ £6.50 including postage by emailing (reduced price for carers)
Charles H
Nov 12 2016 0:18 AM Post #105
Location : Base UK

Virgin Care to take over statutory Bath and NE Somerset adults social services commitments April 2017.

The chaotic state of care in the community surely cannot be more clearly illuminated than by the takeover of three statutory services by a privately owned profit-making firm. Previous outsourcing deals have taken place but only by local authority owned trading companies or not-for-profit social enterprises.

Handing policy and implementation of services for people with learning disabilities to local authorities in the first place has been an unmitigated disaster.
LGAs with the willing cooperation of major charitable organisations and the unions have dragged what was a successful evolutionary national development policy for these people and their carers from a sound and promising position in the1980s to what over the past 30 years has become and increasing painful spiral of decline and policy fiasco.
What hope can there be that a profit making company can turn this disaster around when the national policy regarding appropriate services for people with learning disabilities remains unresolved?
All those who should have put the interests of this most vulnerable section of our community foremost have betrayed them abysmally by failing to have vital issues concerning their welfare debated objectively in the public domain.
These people need their problems to dealt with and formulated and implemented by a specialised department overseen by experienced humanitarian professionals. This was proving successful in the 1980s - although few will be aware of this as the academics have conveniently written this early success story out of history.
It will require a dedicated Minister to remedy the current situation but it will be only by engaging a greater level of public support that there be the slightest hope that this prospect could materialise.
Carers must now rely on the leading charitable organisations recognising the seriousness of the current situation and focus on trying to do a great deal more about it.
For more background info re the historical lead up to the current situation please see my website:
Charles H
Nov 01 2016 17:26 PM Post #104
Location : Bass

Copy of Facebook posting 1st November, 2016

Many thanks for the positive response to my “Here we go again’”posting on Facebook for it is right that the injustices that people with all levels of learning disabilities and their carers have suffered should be recognised and rectified. This will never happen until the true pattern of events that adversely changed the course of policy direction is more widely known in the public domain.
If you would like to know more about the wider picture of my personal campaign can I refer you to my website?
I am also on Twitter @CharlesHenley (although not very good at it) You might find some of the tweets of interest.
Historical events have had very significant outcomes over the past 30 years – in my view the greatest betrayal of trust ever. Far too much suffering has been caused and there is no clear sign that relief is within sight. Nobody should be involved in influencing and implementing policies in this area unless they are fully acquainted with the errors of judgement of the past half century – it is an education in itself - but who is there to educate them?
The Universities have failed abysmally, with very few exceptions they have condoned and encouraged radical change and political correctness. I wrote two books especially for the benefit of University Departments – but the academic clique who controlled opinion branded me and my type as ‘dinosaurs’.
Equally unhelpful has been the fact that many people who should know just do not know, whilst others who should know just DO NOT WANT TO KNOW. I have written three monographs to abbreviate the main elements of the train of events hopefully for readers to be informed without being overloaded. As a matter of interest I sent two different copies of these monographs free of charge to National Mencap to broaden its vision of the current situation. These monographs were returned to me UNREAD - as nobody at MENCAP HQ HAD TIME TO READ THEM?
How can one hope to share knowledge when the very people who should be distributing it would prefer that that it remained out of sight?
The more this info is shared the more it helps to break through the suppression of the truth either by default or intent. I would appeal to everyone who has contact with other carer groups to share their views concerning my posting, which you are free to use as you wish, with them as widely as you can.
I have tried for many years to get these issues discussed in objective debate in the public domain but nobody listened. Perhaps if enough voices can be heard together at one time, someone with influence really just might listen.–


With regard to the books; these are nonprofit making but hopefully to provide enlightenment.
For those who might be interested; three are available from Amazon – one is out of print.
The last monograph hard copy WINTERBOURNE VIEW The Betrayal of the Innocent is available by emailing £6.00 + £1.50 postage.
Should anyone want a copy but not be able to afford it I will send an e-copy free on request.
Charles H
Oct 30 2016 21:55 PM Post #103
Location : Base

Here we go again - the same old story. Mencap has started a new campaign and there is little doubt that a real campaign is vital. Mencap however, has built its campaign on a 1968 statement made by a dinosaur academic who wanted to keep big institutions open. From 1958 onwards this outdated view was repeatedly rejected by humanitarian academics who fought to close the big institutions and keep adults and children within the community which, with the current exceptions, they succeeded in doing.
UPDATE. New Mencap ‘Here I Am’ campaign
Responses on social media to the recent Mencap ‘HereIAm’ campaign which is based upon irrelevant information regarding policy attitudes from the 1960s until the present time have been illuminating. It is clear that very few people, including Mencap, have the slightest idea of the manner in which historical policy developments have been manipulated to suit personal agendas rather than to benefit people with learning disabilities and their carers.
Herewith, a basic historical outline of the train of events that replaced a successful evolutionary care in the community policy with the current policy confusion that currently exists. All points raised are supported by hard verifiable evidence.
Late !958 -1983. Almost 60,000 adults and children were isolated in large sterile institutions with limited support for adults and children within the community. Policies introduced by internationally recognised humanitarian pioneers enabled about 30,000 of those incarcerated in institutions to be liberated by the mid-1980s and a further 20,000 by 2001. Day Centre support during this period increased from 4000 places for children and adults to over 50,000 places for adults alone
At that time people with learning disabilities were seen as valued people in their own right deserving specialised and structured support that could respond to their individual ’special’ needs. Towards this end they should benefit from a continuum of opportunities enabling them to demonstrate their full capabilities regardless of their apparent limited potential.
A well-researched policy document, National Development Group Pamphlet 5 1977, helped change community support from its mainly ‘caring and minding’ role into one providing specialist and structured occupational, educational, recreational and socialisation programmes.
Any further progress in this respect was halted in the mid-1980s by the publication of King’s Fund Centre Project Paper No. 50 An Ordinary Working Life (1984) which proposed radical one-size-fits-all normalization solutions. This basically conveyed that people with learning disabilities could only become ‘valued people’ when and if they were socialising and working alongside ‘normal people’ who would present positive role models to which they could aspire.
With very few exceptions, according to the KFC group, regardless of the profoundness or complexity of their disabilities most people with learning disabilities could be found paid jobs – and those that could not get a job would have their needs met at colleges of further education! On these assumptions, the KFC concluded structured and specialist input should be discontinued and all day centres should be closed. The KFC did not, however, offer viable or reliable alternatives.
Although the KFC proposals were based on speculation and misinformation and lacked reliable and validated research evidence, it’s extremely radical proposals were neither challenged directly nor brought into open public debate by the major charitable organisations.
Instead, the Independent Development Council (IDC), a group of major charitable organisations led by Mencap published ‘Living like other people’ (1985) which not only supported the KFC proposals but reinforced them. Although published in the name of the Independent Development Council, evidence supports the reality that this paper was in fact the work of the King’s Fund Centre who clearly had a controlling influence on the IDC. Whilst neither the KFC nor IDC publications had immediate effect on policy direction, what was to follow had repercussions that still resonate today.
A newly appointed Director of Social Services by East Sussex in 1982 gave credibility to the KFC/IDC publications by using them to promote local radical changes he had in mind despite the County’s already highly successful existing evolutionary policies.
East Sussex published two papers of its own ‘Working it out’ (1986) and ‘Responses to ‘Working it out’ (1987) but provided no research evidence to justify its commitment and intention to base future development on the generalisations of the proposals of the King’s Fund Centre.
The outcome was disastrous for care in the community as ‘trade ‘journals picked up the story but converted rambling generalisations into a ‘Bold Vision’. The publicity that this concept generated helped airbrush the previous successes of the ‘traditional’ services out of history - the relentless decimation of structured services began nationwide and continues today.
The East Sussex Intervention: the ironic consequences of national policies not being influenced by sound research, knowledge and experience.
When East Sussex County Hall management staff began their ‘consultative’ process they were warned by their LD establishment managers about the obvious deficiencies of the KFC one-size-fits-all solutions. By normal standards the main KFC proposals were so irrational they bordered on being bizarre. Further establishment management advice to County Hall was to continue the existing evolutionary process - but to open up the continuum of opportunities for attendees by dispensing with large single purpose centres. Ideally, there should be advanced industrial based units with general purpose units based elsewhere.
County Hall rejected this proposal and went ahead promoting its ‘bold vision’ unhindered by lack of challenges from the major charities. Nationwide local authorities closed day centres by the dozen in the name of KFC normalisation dogma.
Modernisation and extreme inclusion have caused havoc for 30 years and even today continue to negatively influence current policy direction. In the meantime, whilst throughout the rest of the country care in the community has become a farce what has happened to East Sussex’s ‘bold vision’? Since 1987 - practically nothing.
Almost all East Sussex day establishments have remained open and operated on practically the same basis as they did 30 years ago - despite efforts by County Hall to disrupt orderly management and close the Centres completely. Only now, 2016, has East Sussex come up with a clearly defined new policy.
This is to open up the continuum of opportunities for attendees by dispensing with large single purpose centres. There will be an industrial based units and a general purpose units based elsewhere.
Currently, the NHS/LGA are failing to learn from historical experience because the academic world has re-written the factual process of care in the community development.
Irrational unproven KFC dogmas were accepted as fact and consequently have adversely influenced policy judgements affecting up to 1.4 million people. This will not change until it is recognised that the shaping of policy for the past 30 years has not been determined by skilled, experienced and knowledgeable experts based on extensive and validated research but by a small clique of people lacking in appropriate hands-on experience pursuing their own agendas.
Charles H
Oct 05 2016 10:16 AM Post #102
Location : Base

Was this the Subtlest but Most Damaging Deception in Social History?

This is a saga that has its roots in the early 1980s but is still highly significant today. At that time a progressive care in the community policy with a basically simple admin structure that had taken more than ten years to evolve was providing a comprehensive range of residential and day options to successfully meet the widely diverse needs of people with all levels of learning disabilities.
In 1984 the reputable King’s Fund Centre (KFC), irresponsibly and without adequate and reliable research published Project Paper No.50, which sought to replace this policy with a revolutionary but irrational one-size-fits-all alternative dogma. Regardless of the profoundness or complexity of disability of those concerned KFC proposed that specialist and structured policies would be replaced by ‘normalisation’ policies that would find open employment for all of these people thereby enabling all day centres to be closed. Incredibly, major charitable organisations led by Mencap supported these proposals. Initially, through lack of publicity this had no immediate impact on the continuation of the successful evolutionary policy - but this was to change dramatically once East Sussex County Council became involved.
In 1982 East Sussex County Council appointed a new Director of Social Services clearly inspired by a ‘pioneering’ spirit disproportionate to his insight into basic needs of the learning disability section of our community. His immediate action was to set up a working group to “Devise an action plan to promote significant changes in our day care approach to mentally handicapped people …..” – a glaringly irresponsible proposal compounded by the appointment of the three main group leaders. 2 admin staff officers and a lady clearly philosophically orientated – who all clearly totally lacked sufficient knowledge and experience to recognise the vastness of the task involved. This was a serious error of judgement that when coupled with the support of the KFC and Mencap seriously adversely affected the direction and value of residential and day care services nationally thereafter. Following the publication of KFC Project Paper No 50 (1984) the Director delegated to the two staff officers already involved in the East and West of the County the task of implementing plans to deal with the shape of future services.
As an experienced East Sussex County Council day centre manager in the East at this time I was seriously concerned about the extent that these staff officers were impressed by the misleading information being fed by KFC and Mencap sources. Regrettably they had no inclination to carry out extensive research.
Although he neither sought nor welcomed my opinions, I nevertheless provided my own staff officer with detailed information regarding the glaring deficiencies of the KFC dogma and recommended that the logical option was to put this project aside and pursue a more evolutionary solution. Instead at having one large centre, have two alternatives to cater for different levels of ability - a practical work centre located on an industrial estate and a broader based unit elsewhere. (18th October, 1985.)
He nevertheless went ahead with his project in 1987, and under the banner ‘WORKING IT OUT’, ESCC reinforced all of the negative aspects of KFC one-size-fits-all dogmas including the decimation of structured and specialist support day centres closures - but offered no proven viable alternatives.
Alarmingly and paradoxically, this biased and misleading publication received immediate immensely favourable publicity despite a complete lack of a reliable and validated research base! What was in reality a wish list of misinformation, speculation, and mythology was hailed as a ‘bold vision’!
It was at this stage in developmental history that ‘normalisation’ and ‘inclusion’ were readily taken on board as the ‘politically correct’ ways forward by fringe elements and academics, and gained unjustifiable and irreversible influence over future policies without serious challenge. Many of these fringe people with limited hands-on experience regarding real learning disability needs set themselves up as normalisation/inclusion/ personalisation ‘experts’ and have consistently gained and influenced ongoing policy trends ever since.
Most significantly in June 2016 East Sussex newly announced its new policy. It did not even refer to its deluded ambitions of 1986/7 that had been instrumental in wrecking the successful evolutionary policy of the 1980s but only to its planned main intention. This focussed on having ‘two main facilities – one a practical work centre on an industrial estate and a broader based unit elsewhere’!
Policies have been cruelly diverted down the wrong path for 30 years – advice continues to be taken from the wrong leaders. Evidence supports the view that this must has been the most insane diversion and misuse of public funding to the cost of the most vulnerable section of our society in social history. The cost in billions of pounds is inestimable - the personal cost to people with learning disabilities and their carers is criminal.
Despite an admission by Norman Lamb MP, D of H, on the 18th September 2012 that the one-size-fits –all policy was inappropriate the farce continues; until there is a designated Minister for these issues, and until there is a highly experienced and qualified leader with the hands-on experience and compassion as policy leader - nothing will change. The tragedy will continue and the threat of further re-institutionalization will remain.

Inclusion is a vitally important objective, but the King’s Fund Centre, Mencap, and East Sussex County Council have by default or intent given extreme forms of inclusion unjustifiable levels of credibility that cannot be achieved to the benefit of moderately, severely, and profoundly disadvantaged people and their carers. These people need and deserve adequate, appropriate, and affordable continuums of opportunity.
Yet the reality speaks volumes; since the intervention of this trio in the late 1980s care in the community has gone downhill. Whilst nationally day centres have been decimated the day centres in East Sussex remained open working along ‘traditional’ lines, residential communities have been broken up and essential staff skills have been squandered: Winterbourne View has come – but not gone - the spectre lingers, NHS beds are still blocked and a ‘revolving door’ process of a sort still exists, money continues to be poured down a bottomless pit – yet care for the neediest is still not being addressed rationally! So much for the effects of pursuing a “bold vision”!
Charles H
Aug 06 2016 10:50 AM Post #97
Location : Base

Recent Correspondence with NHS England 30th July 2016

Many thanks for your prompt and helpful response; I have forwarded two monographs under separate cover.
You will appreciate these are not intended to be serious academic treatises but general overviews concerning the past half century of social care development particularly with regard to the provision of fulfilling day time occupation. Essentially, the intention is to encourage further debate and exploration into why nothing appears to have been learnt from past historical mistakes and experiences.
With regard to current policies any comments therein are based on information that has been widely available to the general public whether layman, professional, or practitioner who have been free to reach their own conclusions based on the evidence available.
With regard to historical events that have had definite and serious negative consequences with regard to current developments the situation is more complicated. Unfortunately, substantial verifiable evidence bears out my personal belief that a true record of past events has by default or intent been suppressed and manipulated at great cost to people with learning disabilities, especially the severely and profoundly disadvantaged and their carers.
I believe it has suited the agendas of a wide range of organisations and individuals to distort or airbrush out of history the positive aspects of past social support developments. This has enabled questionable dogmas to gain unjustifiable credibility and the pursuit of a succession of unachievable objectives.
This puts those currently responsible for influencing and implementing current policies at a distinct disadvantage, denies service users possibly more appropriate alternative optional provision, and why I consider that events that eventually led to the Winterbourne View outcome should be subjected to more objective scrutiny and analysis in the public domain.

The forwarding address given was the Chief Executives Office to which the monographs were duly despatched with the above covering email. Receipt was kindly acknowledged.

28th July 2016

The Office of the Chair and Chief Executive NHS England

You kindly responded on the 7th September 2015 to my email of the 1st Sept. and would be grateful if you would oblige again by forwarding the following. I would also be grateful if you could provide an address to which I would be pleased to forward hard copies

Professor Jane Cummings, Chief Nursing Officer
Dear Professor Cummings
I last contacted yourself and the CEO NHS England expressing my concerns regarding the viability of the High quality care proposals on the September 2015, and although followed up by Building the right support published in October 2015, it is clear that the needs of very many of the patients who are currently creating your bed blocking problem are still being totally ignored.
Until specific needs of profoundly and severely disadvantaged people are addressed comprehensively and rationally the revolving door syndrome is highly likely to kick in and increase demand. To continue to ignore this potential problem is to delay the inevitable.
Understandably, you have limited background knowledge of the developmental history of care in the community support for people with learning disabilities as very little is available or has been corrupted. Understandably, you turn to experts in this field for advice but unfortunately for the past 30 years the Government has been taking advice from the wrong experts.
I know many of these experts have been conscientiously dedicated to working successfully with people with learning disabilities in specific areas of this extremely widely ranging and immensely complex area of needs - but limited specialist knowledge without awareness of the bigger picture is proving fatal. A mass of evidence, a degree of common sense, and not least the current failure to learn lessons from the Winterbourne View scandal confirms that the involvement of some of these experts in care in the community policies has been an unmitigated disaster.
I have accumulated a mass of verifiable evidence, written books, and published in trade journals to try to bring the fundamental failures of current policy direction to a wider audience without success. I am not asking you to try to digest this material but have simplified the basics into two short monographs which should give even the layman enough knowledge to recognise the irrational premises upon which policies have been based for the past three decades. One of these monographs has now been modified to take account of 2014 Care Act.
I duly attach e-copies, but as e-copies so readily go astray I would like to forward under separate cover hard copies that I am appealing to you to read yourself, or get someone else to read them for you and feedback, as they cover current problems from two different practical perspectives
I promise you that if you do read them, each is only about 70 A5 pages, you will have a greater insight into current problems, historical relevance, and potential solutions, than have 99% of the experts who you are depending upon to sort these problems out for you.
charles H
Jul 27 2016 18:34 PM Post #96
Location : Base


Good analyse, well done for reading the whole speech! this minister is obviously d&eteutc; connect&eacuae; and realist. in any case on can think that for her, one should stop thinking. At least thats clear

Thank you for your contribution , Tracy, apologies for the delay
Jul 22 2016 19:02 PM Post #95

Bonne analyse, bravo pour avoir lu tout le discours ! Cette ministre est manifestement d&eteutc;connect&eacuae;e de la réalité. En tout cas, on pourra retenir que pour elle, il faut "cesser de penser". Au moins c’est clair…
Charles H
Jun 11 2016 21:48 PM Post #93
Location : Base

Charles Henley
31 May at 08:33

A few more thoughts over the weekend.
which fit in with the following;
The following is my response to the publication of Care Crisis Manifesto published last week.
Care standards for people with learning disabilities will slip back if the government does not provide more funding for vital services, with the risk that the transformation agenda prompted by the Winterbourne View scandal will fail, learning disability care providers have warned.
The call, by a new coalition of providers called Learning Disability Voices, has been backed by former Care Minister, Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb, who has challenged the government to do more to support the UKs most vulnerable people. (Newa 25th May 2016)
These warnings coincide with the launch today of Learning Disability Voices Care Crisis Manifesto to mark the start of an intensive campaign to secure better funding for people with learning disabilities.
My heart sinks in despair and disbelief when I read again this insular and sterile appeal for more money. Despite billions of pounds of public funds having been poured into pursuing politically correct but fundamentally flawed and irrational dogmas for the past three decades the folly continues unabated. The past extravagant waste has led only to a spiral of decline in service support for the most vulnerable people with learning disabilities and increasingly demoralizing pressures on elderly and harassed carers. Even now nothing has been learnt from the Winterbourne View scandal as vital needs remain unaddressed by the current transformation agenda of Care Act 2014 introduced in April 2015.
There is scant prospect of change until serious and objective debate concerning policy direction in the public domain is encouraged rather than evaded. The Learning Disability Today team took a positive lead in reflecting the need for debate in early March, as have Action for Children, and Weekly News in the recent months - but how much reaction did it actually stir from major charitable organizations? The crucial issue so far unresolved remains the identification of a coherent and achievable equitable national policy.
What is there to learn from historical experience? It is a matter of record (Valuing People, 2001), that prior to year 2000 about 50,000 inmates had been liberated from large institutions and relocated within the wider community by a successful evolutionary process introduced in the 1960s and supported by caring hands-on pioneers.
The process of providing adequate residential and day care support which began in the 1960s was proving successful by the early 1980s. Day care particularly had transformed from a caring and minding service to a developing multi-faceted service where the attendees were respected as adults and offered an increasing range of options. Basic educational and social skills, recreational and vocational activities including work experience and paid jobs and self-advocacy were introduced along with involvement in local activities and use of community facilities. Key worker roles, individual personal programs (IPPs), short term and long term goals were set for each individual based on their choices and potential for development.
By the mid-1980s day centres had not simply become occupation centres but mini communities intended to become stepping stones to greater community integration in the form of resource centres geared towards greater independence. The challenge facing dedicated staff at that time was towards meeting a full range of needs from the mostly profoundly to those with more able levels of intellectual and physically disadvantages.
But incredibly and irresponsibly these aspirations and an evolutionary process that offered great prospects for carers and service users alike were written off and have virtually been airbrushed out of history by proponents for revolutionary change in the 1980s. Why?
Most regrettably, verifiable evidence suggests that the main responsibility for this dramatic setback can be traced back to three main contributors to radical policy change direction in the 1980s; the Kings Fund Centre led by academics, Mencap, and the East Sussex Social Services Department. These three organizations introduced and reinforced a one-size-fits- all doctrine that all adults, regardless of complexity or profoundness of disadvantages could be found paid open employment and, as specialized and structured services were unnecessary, all day centres could be closed.
Incredibly, this dogma has influenced policy decisions creating confusion and decimation of vital support services that have been covered up for over thirty years by the very organizations responsible for the most vulnerable section of our community. The untimely intervention of this trio accelerated the transfer of policy direction from a specialist led structured service to the diverse priorities of 140 different local authorities a recipe for chaos that Care in the Community has become, as confirmed by the Winterbourne View outcome.
The cost has not only been immense and overwhelming in material and human resources but most irresponsibly in the trauma and deprivation imposed on service users and carers in the past and in worrying uncertainties for the future.
The main aim should still be to seek a rational and achievable national policy on an equitable basis. It is incredible, but factual, that whilst there is an urgent need for all major charitable organizations and individuals to reappraise their current roles in ongoing policy developments some specifically are reluctant to support the need for open and objective debate in the public domain.
Ironically, it was Mr Lamb, as Care and Support Minister, who admitted on the 18th September 2012 that the one size fits all policy that existed was not appropriate. It seemed that, with the Liberals involved, sanity had returned to social policies. Not so, however, as almost immediately, under the Coalition and Mr Lambs stewardship, preparations began to formulate another quick fix one size fits all politically correct solution. This surfaced before the election and blossomed into Care Act 2014, which could be the final death knell of any humane care in the community policy for the mental health section of our society.
Yes, there could well be need for extra finance, but without an objective debate leading to the formulation of a rational, achievable, and equitable national policy any finance from any source will be poured into a bottomless pit.

Please note that the quotations heading my response to the Care Crisis Manifesto are from the publication from Learning Disability Today Newsletter 25th May 2016
[First Page] ... [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] ... [Last Page]
Who is Online
Our visitors have posted a total of 173 messages
In total there is 1 user online
Most users ever online was 23 on Dec 15 2013 17:33 PM

Powered by Free PHP VX Guestbook | Counter Widget