this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023

120 points (98.4% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

10511 readers

12 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

givesomefucks@lemmy.world

120

[UK] Disabled people could be moved to care homes to save council money (www.itv.com)

submitted 1 year ago by DessertStorms@kbin.social to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Disabled people in Bristol could be forced to live in care homes if it is cheaper than providing support for them in their own homes.

Bristol City Council's proposed Fair and Affordable Care Policy says disabled people whose in-home care exceeds the local authority rates could be placed in nursing or residential homes under a new scheme.

The policy is currently out for public consultation until 31 January 2024.

Bristol City Council has stressed that should changes come into effect, discussions will be had with the disabled person they impact, before decisions are made.

However, the proposal has been fiercely challenged by disability equality organisations including Bristol Reclaiming Independent Living (BRIL).

Mark Williams, from BRIL, said he was 'stunned' when he first saw the draft policy.

He told ITV West Country: "At the moment the main people that we're really worried about are autistic people and people with severe learning difficulties because they are more likely to have high support needs and so risk having their support cut and being moved to care homes.

"It is very worrying if Bristol is bringing the policy that other councils would do the same."

BRIL is holding an open online meeting about the threat the new policy poses to independent living on 5 January.

The policy also received significant backlash from Disability Rights UK when it was first discussed in April 2023.

The charity said: "[We] believe that the policy fails to uphold the rights of disabled people in Bristol to receive the care and support they need based on personal preference. And the right to live independently at home with choice and control over care and support.

"The draft policy, as stated, is incompatible with the rights we are granted under the Care Act 2014."

A spokesperson for Bristol City Council said the proposed policy was co-developed with the Bristol City Council Adult Social Care Equalities Forum and the policy stresses that all decisions will be made in collaboration with the disabled person they impact.

The consultation: https://www.ask.bristol.gov.uk/fair-and-affordable-care-policy-consultation

top 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] li10@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Bristol City Council has stressed that should changes come into effect, discussions will be had with the disabled person they impact, before decisions are made.

Council: “We’re putting you in a care home”

Disabled person: “I don’t want that”

Council: “IDGAF what you want”

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Pretty much, it's terrifying.

[–] hurricane155@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

So.... like prison?

[+] Rendh@lemmy.world -16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They can stay wherever they want as long as they can afford it. I feel like it's a good thing to not only have better access to medical personnel but also save some tax payer money.

[–] li10@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago

Yeah, forcing vulnerable people out of their homes so the government can misspend the saved money seems like a great idea.

Obviously we need to save money by taking it from the poorest and most vulnerable people in our society, they can’t fight for themselves so ez money.

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You misunderstand what taxes are. Or you view taxes the way Americans view them perhaps.

Taxes exist to achieve two things individual humans are not good at achieving on their own:

Forcing people to invest in essential stuff they don't want to pay for, like roads, sanitation, research... As in, you might live in a nice secluded cul-de-sac in the boonies, but you're going to fund repairs to the interstate system like all your fellow countrymen.
Forcing generosity out of people - including the mutualisation of health costs, environmental risks... People are not good at being generous on their own. They will let their next door neighbor live in squalor and poverty if they're disabled and can't work because it's "not their problem". Until it is when they grow old and/or disabled themselves...

Taxes are modern secular states' way ot forcing you to be generous with others less fortunate than you, like the Church once did when they collected tithe and (at least in theory) used your tithe to build hospices for the indigent and help the poor.

By definition, taxes pay for stuff that don't make money. Otherwise you wouldn't be forced to pay taxes: you'd voluntarily invest in whatever scheme the government is proposing.

By definition, the sick and the disabled are money pits. They use the taxes you were forced to provide to have a shot at having as good a life as you. The idea being that if you're healthy all your life, you'll have lost quite a bit of money paying for someone else's better living but you'll also have been one of the luck ones. But if you're not lucky, you too could have benefitted from one of the lucky healthy people's forced contributions.

Me, I'm happy to pay taxes. Even high taxes. I know what I get: I get the assurance that I'll never end up broke and destitude because I fall on hard times with my health. I know that wherever I decide to go, the roads won't have potholes. They paid for my kids' education, and now they're all grown up and paying back their debt twice over because they have a good situation, a good salary and they pay twice as much taxes as I do.

When you say "they can stay if they can afford it", it says a lot about your mindset. You don't value what your taxes brought to you and your family indirectly, and you're probably healthy enough at the moment that you don't realize what good taxes will do to you when you're not anymore.

For what it's worth, I'm disabled. But I'm still on my own two feet, I still work full time and I still pay taxes. You know why? Because the free healthcare system in the country I currently live in paid for top-notch surgery, paid for my rehab for a few months, and now they don't pay me anymore because they fixed me up good. If they hadn't, I'd be a full time non-productive person by now. Do you not see how taxes benefit everybody in my case? It's in your best interest as much as mine that you pay for my healthcare!

But I suspect all that flies right above your head, sadly...

[–] Rendh@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My brother. It's all fair and good. I'm not saying not to help. But if you can make it more efficient, then why don't make it more efficient? Instead of nurses having to drive hours and hours around you can provide for and handle more people with less hours and make sure that people get what they need asap. Rebuilding your home to make it viable for you? Or you living in a place that's made for you? Having a doctor and nurses in the same building 24/7, able to deal with any complications that might come up? Sounds like a pretty good deal.

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 year ago

But if you can make it more efficient, then why don’t make it more efficient?

Because you can't make it more efficient without impacting the person's autonomy and integrity.

That's what you don't understand: the point is for society to pay for the support or technology that a disabled person needs to live a life similar to yours in terms of autonomy, dignity and productivity. It's NOT ABOUT SAVING MONEY!

When you start thinking about ways to save money by corralling disabled people in one location so the support staff has fewer miles to drive, the inevitable conclusion is euthanasia - because hey, no more disabled people means no more disability benefits to pay out. Right? They couldn't afford their own care anyway right?

If 1% of the population costs more in benefits than the other 99% provide in taxes, it means 100% of the population can lead a decent life. You don't throw people in care homes because it costs less to take care for them, anymore than you throw people in jail because they live in a high-crime neighborhood to save on policing. It costs what it costs.

The only savings you should be considering are structural - like providing electric vehicles that cost less to run to the care workers, or perhaps subsidized housing so they live closer to the majority of the people they care for. But you don't touch the integrity of the people who need the care. That's off-limits. If it's not off-limits to you, you're a terrible person.

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Drag Bristol city council before the European Court of Human Rights.

Oh wait...

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yup, though it's not like they'd give a fuck, the UN has found the UK government to be in violation of disabled human rights again and again and it hasn't stopped anyone, things are only getting worse..

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The UN can't fine the UK. The EU courts could, before the brexiteers took back control or something.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair point, though either way I think a fine for the government is about as effective as a fine for a corporation, that is - not at all..

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

True enough. But there is another angle to this: when UK citizens were able to sue their local authorities in European courts, they could also get redress on an individual basis, even if the UK government didn't give a shit about their constituents, because the courts were supranational and had authority in the UK in certain matters - human rights being one.

When the UK pulled out of the European Union, one of the controls they took back was the ability to shaft their citizenry with total impunity. And let me tell you: I lived in the UK in the mid 90s, and what it's become now is best described as a shithole. Sorry to be blunt, but I wouldn't want to be poor or sick in the UK. What a terrible, terrible place to live in today.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm with you that the EU provided us some protection, and was very much a remainer almost exclusively because they served as an authority above our government that could at least try to keep the inhumanity at bay, but those in charge here (not only Tories, but ~~New Labour~~ Tory Light, too) have and will continue to be dead set on abusing as many vulnerable people as they can.

As for the blunt part, you're not wrong - am poor and disabled, and yeah, it's pretty fucking grim here, and this shit is genuinely scary.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Just imagine nurses drugging you so you drool more and bother them less. Just imagine orderlies beating the crap out of you, or using your warm body as a fuck toy.

Once you have that experience in mind, know this isn't some Stephen King horror fiction but reality for about a third of US inpatients in mental health facilities.

Dunno the stats for UK or for nursing homes (though we are lousy with anecdotes). But we can expect its non-zero and probably pretty bad, given that societies invariably give few fucks for the people locked away in facilities. Prisons are scary not for the prisoners, but the wardens and the people on the outside glad to forget what they locked away.

Bristol is now a mass horror setting.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately I don't have to imagine, I've witnessed a family member go through it (and much worse, including being repeatedly raped by staff), and have been moments away from being sectioned myself and have had far too many glimpses in my own and via others' experiences in to how badly some medical "professionals" treat patients, especially those of us already arriving to them disabled.

And things have only gotten significantly worse in recent years due to lack of funding and brexshit leading to staff shortages and terrible work conditions (there is literal slavery in the sector), which leads to even poorer treatment, so this is an absolutely horrific, and sadly very real, prospect.

[–] EdanGrey@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think Bristol council are overestimating the amount of care home spaces there are....

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think it's much more likely that they know but don't give a shit.. They clearly don't regard disabled people as humans who deserve any dignity, what do they care what conditions we'd be locked up in?