How councils fund long term care is due to be picked apart by seven judges considering whether social workers can limit the services they provide to the elderly according to available resources.
The Supreme Court has already ruled once on the point – in the case of ballerina Elaine McDonald who took action against Kensington and Chelsea Council when they withdrew overnight care in favour of providing her with incontinence pads.
She lost her challenge – allowing councils the right to supply long term care according to their budgets rather than the needs of those relying on the service.
For those approaching retirement and already in their later years, the case is significant because the ruling sets the limits for how much a council will contribute to long term care – and how much an individual may have to pay themselves.
The McDonald case was heard by five judges, who will all be present for the new case – R(KM) v Cambridgeshire County Council. Two additional judges will make up the panel.
At risk for the councils is the Resource Allocation Calculator (RAS), an arcane an often impenetrable calculation that converts an assessed need in to cash.
Counsel for KM – whose identity is yet to be revealed – are arguing that the rules governing the calculation are not transparent, are often unfair and seem to be applied in different ways by different councils.
The case will be before the court on February 7-8, with a judgment expected in the late spring.
If the court finds in favour of the complaint, the whole system councils work to to provide long term care will need reworking.
The McDonald decision triggered a deal of controversy, especially against Baroness Hale, one of the judges who will also hear the new case.
Elaine McDonald’s action was backed by the Equality and Human rights Commission and many later life charities, who were more than disappointed with the result.
Related Posts :
