A hot-button issue that affects nearly every Canadian family is that of long-term care for seniors and older adults. Then, there are those older adults, such as I, with since birth/long-standing disability warranting a different approach to care than those who age in ‘typical’ ways. In this age of ‘inclusion’ politicians must be aware of the language they use: just say NO to terms like suffer from; afflicted by; patients; handicapped; differently-abled; challenged (physically or mentally); wheelchair-bound.
Politicians should be asking how care can be provided to persons with disability who may need help with everyday tasks like shopping, cooking, eating, bathing, dressing, going to the bathroom, moving from place to place. There needs to be ongoing dialogue with those on the front lines of health and wellness — doctors, nurses, physical and occupational and other such therapists; providers of mental health counselling, and so on. It’s not just about the roof over our heads — functioning with a condition or disease that affects how independent daily living is accomplished is no easy feat! Policy makers and implementers of ‘care plans’ should endeavour to be on the same page and move forward mindful of one thing - RESPECT for the person needing or seeking assistance.
I’ve been living in my home since 1991 and on my own since 2007, when my husband passed away. To date, I am doing very well and able to maintain the day to day with no help from outside agencies. I have several good friends who assist me with picking up groceries and ‘deep’ house cleaning a few times a year. Housework is exercise and since I ‘know’ the spaces, I feel safe in them. I’m all about reciprocity. Bartering is alive and well in my world.
Given that ‘home is where the heart is’, it’s cost effective in manifold ways to ensure that our elders are able to live in their own home as long as is practical and do-able. The cost savings both to the senior and to the government sponsored care providers is significant and any way in which the senior voter can save money should be the goal in view of our astronomical nursing home fees. Safety in the home is paramount, and case by case, seniors and extended familial care providers should consult to determine what needs to be done to the home and in the home to make it safe in the long term. We don’t want to fork over a piece of our financial pie to the government until we absolutely have to.
We with life-long disability who are aging in to services for seniors expect assurance that our ‘unique’ needs can be addressed and that we won’t be patronized because the ‘able-bodied’ politicians don’t know how to speak to us or about us. Above all else, we’re human beings with pretty much the same wants, needs and desires as those who don’t live with disability. People first. Round table discussions with regard to the ‘bucket list’ of prioritized needs would be valuable as politicians develop their platforms and move forward to ‘get it done’. The focus should be on long-term fixed needs that are shared by many, not just a few token frills to score points.
Candidates who are able to eloquently address questions about funding long-term care, prioritizing community-based services that keep people out of institutions, and giving individuals with disability control over their own care services will grab the attention of voters who live with disability. The aging population will make long term and skilled nursing care more and more important over the next few years and decades. As well, more specialised care may be a requirement when planning for the future long-term nursing care needs of those with pre-existing disabling conditions outside the implications of aging and age-related decline.
So, in addition to learning about what seniors need, politicians need to educate themselves about what ‘special needs’ seniors require; critical as safe accommodation is, many of our seniors live at or below the poverty line and often cannot afford to modify their homes to make them safer. Those concerns must be addressed and since most required items are one-offs it’s not likely to ‘break the bank’.
Repurposing decommissioned schools and hospitals might be a way to address some sort of co-op housing; again, thinking outside the box, while at the same time fully including those who will be availing themselves of the services planned for and ultimately provided is critical. Recent articles have addressed the popular practice of providing adult day care; secondary to that should/could be development of respite (weekend) care schemes for persons of advanced age who may or may not live with a pre-existing disability. Blending of populations is often seen as way for those who are able/adept at certain skills to be buddied with those who are ‘less’ able. An effective matching via the buddy system is also a way to improve mental/emotional health. Nowhere is this more critical than with the senior population who are sometimes isolated from the mainstream. An emotionally healthy, mentally and intellectually engaged senior is invariably going to be less of a drain on the financial resources of ‘the system’ - they’re too busy to get sick!
Give me a home that gives me quality care, and I’m so there! Look for me in a few decades!
Carla MacInnis Rockwell is a freelance writer and disability rights advocate living outside Fredericton, NB with Miss Lexie, a rambunctious Maltese and Mr. Malcolm, a boisterous Havanese. She can be reached via email at: Carla MacInnis Rockwell
No comments:
Post a Comment