My very limited understanding is that a local authority has a duty to provide care to a person who has the appropriate needs, and the person’s well being is at the core of the decision as to the nature of the
care provided. If the well being test shows care should be provided at home, not in a nursing home, can the local authority say they will not pay for this as their budget only allows them to opt for the most cost effective route of meeting the needs-ie a
nursing home with the house being sold to pay for it?
This is the suggestion I have come across recently, which seems to completely undermine the patient’s well being as being the determining factor. If it is correct, what is the authority for it?
My understanding is that the local authority have a statutory duty to provide for the ‘needs’ of the patient, but they can also point to budgetary considerations when providing those ‘needs’, and hence a care home may be an option offered over care at home mainly for ‘budgetary considerations’ but I stand to be corrected by others with more expertise in the field.
Haroon Rashid
I Will Solicitors Ltd
The local authority have a legal duty to provide for an individual’s care needs without requiring a top up payment from relatives. Several authorities face being taken to court for breach of human rights for forcing individuals into care homes when their needs could be provided for at home, because meeting their needs in a residential home is cheaper. https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/health/you-could-forced-care-home-14435599
Does this apply to nursing needs only, or both care and nursing needs. It appears from the article referred to, that the issue relates to NHS funding as opposed to LA funding. Presumably the same would apply by analogy?