Your loved one, your rights, your choices?

We issued the latest visiting guidance to our relatives, which also contained information around the wearing of masks. There’s been recent discussions in the media about care homes and whether visiting can go ahead, despite ongoing COVID-19 concerns. Will the Ferris wheel ever stop?

50 million people worldwide were killed during the 1918 influenza pandemic compared to 6.6 million during the recent COVID-19 pandemic.  There were no effective vaccines or drug therapies back in 1918, so communities across the world instituted a host of public health measures to slow the spread of a deadly influenza epidemic.  They closed schools and businesses, banned public gatherings, and isolated and quarantined those who were infected. Many communities recommended people wear face masks in public. Medical advances have moved along a great deal since those days and we now have effective, lifesaving flu vaccines which help control the number of worldwide deaths extremely effectively, which means counties do not need to lockdown, we do not need to wear face masks nor isolate ourselves.

The protection measures taken during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic are strikingly similar to those implemented in 1918. The exception being, we were being offered vaccines within 9 months of the outbreak and, maybe, therefore, the virus wasn’t nearly as deadly as the 1918 influenza. Elderly people and health care workers have now had the opportunity to be jabbed five times in total! So, why do some governments still mandate mask wearing and still debate possible restrictions?

Influenza deaths in England, in 2018, was recorded as 22,000; interestingly, during the pandemic, the figures dropped markedly down to 4,000 and 8,000.  This is largely down to the way deaths were recorded – if you had Covid-19 upon death then the death certificate had to state the main cause of death as COVID-19, which in thousands of cases, was obviously pure nonsense. Some argue that political parties had to justify the harsh measures implemented to control the spread of this new virus? I talked to a GP who clearly identified the cause of death of an elderly person to be the cancer. The person had been fighting the cancer for some time, they had been on end-of-life support for over a week, with an estimated life expectancy of days. They contracted COVID-19, died 24 hours later, as expected, and the GP had to record COVID-19 as the primary cause of death. One suspects the influenza deaths fell for this very same reason. By the end of September, there had been 27,000 deaths in England from COVID-19 and I have no doubt that a significant percentage of these people should have had Covid-19 recorded as the secondary cause of death.

It is far too simplistic to try and compare influenzas and COVID-19, but there may be some relevance when we are considering the implementation of control measures. I strongly believe in the freedom of choice and the rights of the individual. Whilst, we have a social responsibility, if we want to live in a civilised society where liberal and social values flourish, we must, at all costs, ensure we do not impinge the rights of people to live their life how they wish and to make their own decisions.

Everyone has their own take on lockdowns, restrictions to liberty and mask wearing, but the simple truth is, thousands of people will die in the coming years because of the previous lockdown, for example, those who were denied early intervention treatment for life threatening conditions and people who missed hospital appointments for screening, who, unknown to them, developed tumours and cancers. Then there are the thousands of people who developed mental health conditions they now live with and those that have, sadly, withdrawn from society.

Elderly people became more isolated than ever during lockdown and some care homes remained locked down throughout because of the propaganda, scare mongering and frightening media coverage. Do we want to return to this; is it necessary?

Hale Place believes, unequivocally, that the effective vaccine rollout, coupled with good infection control measures, should give people the confidence and the right to choose their own control measures. If the visitor does not want to wear a face covering, they have that right.  After all, it is their loved one they are visiting. The care provider can protect others by arranging visits in separate areas away from other residents, they can sanitise the area after use and the risk assessments should highlight safe routes to the visiting area.

What none of us working with people living with dementia do not want to see, is a person not receiving family members, not having valuable, meaningful connections with people dear to them.

As a care provider, we are responsible for ensuring a safe environment and protecting people within our care, we risk assess every situation and minimise risk. However, risk is always prevalent, risk taking is always your choice, not the providers.

Afterall, it is your life and your decision.