Introduction
Dr.Ruth Allen is the Chief Executive Officer of the British Association of Social Workers (BASW). A role held since 2016. BASW is the professional association for social work and social workers.
‘‘Some members reported to us that they had been hampered in safeguarding people in care with access being restricted, and in some cases prevented.’’
-Paragraph 68 of statement
‘‘A daughter recalled her father with dementia threatening to harm himself while they were speaking on the phone as he was unable to understand why she could not visit. Other examples included people with dementia being confused or frightened by face masks, damaging relationships with family members.’’
-Paragraph 70 of statement
‘‘Banning contact had an extensive and detrimental impact on residents/patients and on their family members. In BAWS’s views it was an avoidable breach of people’s rights.’’
-Paragraph 78 of statement
‘‘Concerns were raised about the risks of developing "closed cultures" in institutions which could amplify the risk of institutional abuse, something of which there had been horrifying examples in the pre-pandemic period, such as Winterboume View.’’
-Paragraph 93 of statement
BBC
Testimony highlights
Coronavirus act breached human rights.
Social work teams moved out of hospitals during first lockdown as rapid discharges from hospital took place without any assessments.
No oversight in care homes during first lockdown.
‘‘The provisions under the European Convention on Human Rights or under our Human Rights Act, that human rights were being breached.’’
‘‘In the earlier stages of the pandemic social workers could not access care homes.’’
End of life care/DNACPR
Inappropriate blanket use of DNACPR on elderly and vulnerable.
Issues persisted even after concerns were raised.
‘‘Individuals were contacting us saying they were experiencing it…doctors were raising issues…other professionals were raising concerns.’’
Rapid discharges during lockdown
Assessments revoked.
‘‘Clearly rapid discharge without full assessment into care settings..was inevitably going to lead to some people being at risk in those settings.’’
‘‘Social workers couldn’t access care residents who had been rapidly discharged.’’
Statement highlights
‘‘Social workers often play a key role in the discharge from hospital of the most vulnerable and isolated.As an example, the revoking of the requirement to undertake Continuing Healthcare (CHC) assessment of patients being returned home to educe pressure on the health service was troubling at the time as it risked reducing the quality and effectiveness of care for those who did not receive their CHC assessment and raising risks of a deterioration in their condition or re-admission.’’
-Paragraph 40
‘‘Hospital social work changed as a result of Covid-19. Many social work teams were moved out of hospitals. In a number of cases, they have not returned.’’
-Paragraph 41
‘‘Lockdown restrictions impacted on the ability of social workers to undertake safeguarding duties, to arrange mental health assessments and, if necessary, admissions, and to undertake mental capacity and best interest assessments which often relate to the deprivation of an individual's liberty. Social workers were unable to access care settings and were refused access to domestic homes.’’
-Paragraph 43
‘‘There was also concern about a lack of guidance on the duty to apply the European Convention on Human Rights. These human rights are applicable in UK law through the Human Rights Act 1998. A number of the provisions contained within the Coronavirus Acts had the potential to undermine these rights, most specifically Article 5 (the right to liberty and security of the person) and Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life). This was also true of other restrictions such as 'blanket' bans on visiting.’’
-Paragraph 62
‘‘Social workers were thus unable to oversee the quality of provider care and address risk issues for people in `placements' in the same way that they would without lockdown restrictions.’’
-Paragraph 74
‘‘The abrupt ending of visits and the uncertaintly over whether they would resume, caused disruption, confusion and emotional distress, especially for those who were unable to comprehend why such restrictions had been implemented.’’
-Paragraph 79
‘‘The inability of friends and family to visit also meant the loss of an additional channel of oversight of a person's care and wellbeing.’’
-Paragraph 80
‘‘There was a case study of a young adult with a Traumatic Brain Injury who became more distressed when family tried to use video calls to communicate with him. Increases in agitation and distressed behaviour were not unusual in such circumstances, leading to more emotional distress for friends and families and more work and emotional burden for social work and social care staff.’’
-Paragraph 81
‘‘The inability to visit created particular emotional challenges for those receiving end of life or palliative care and their friends and families. There were instances of creative solutions, but often the chance to say 'goodbye' was not permitted.’’
-Paragraph 83
‘‘During the first wave of the pandemic, routine inspections were suspended.’’
-Paragraph 91
‘‘A particular concern for those living in institutional settings was that restricted access meant there was less protection from the potential for abuse or neglect. These individuals also suffered from unequal access to treatment to sustain life and unequal and devastating death rates.’’
-Paragraph 114
Thoughts
As always, those admittedly harmed the most from the inhumane restrictions (chronic fear, masks, prolonged isolation, no human rights, DNACPRs, clinical abandonment) died the most ‘involving COVID-19’ (from Mar-May 2020 often without any testing to prove a novel pathogen) but permissiable because there was a ‘pandemic’ and the focus is not enough people were wearing PPE, testing and digitial exclusion!
Thanks for your attention.
Like, share and comment if you care.
End
It was an utter outrage as anybody with any common sense could see. It went against all social norms and breached people's human rights massively. The whole thing was an institutional f*** up! But it was intentional in my view - given that it was all orchestrated and promoted by the WHO (but cunningly concealed) by channeling it through their regional centres. The big question is, will these people actually stand up and shout about it from the rooftops the next time it happens (which is already on the cards). Or will they just slink away again and tut tut to themselves from the shadows? People need amsome backbone that's for sure!
If a patient had an infectious illness (ex Tb) we gowned up the family. Never before had we isolated people as a response to an infection.