Benefits system needs continuing reform

With a benefit called ‘continuing health care’, you would expect it to be paid out to all those with long-term serious healthcare needs. But apparently not.

Currently, more than 400 people are suing various health authorities after they or a family member were refused continuing health care. They allege they were not given proper assessments and had to pay out hundreds of thousands of pounds in some cases for nursing care as a result.

While the plaintiffs are seeking compensation, it highlights the confusion around what constitutes social care – which is means-tested and carries a charge – and health care, which is provided free by the NHS.

The distinction between the two has been muddled for years, and has often come down to the local Primary Care Trust’s interpretation of government guidelines.

Unsurprisingly, it has led to some frankly baffling decisions. I have heard anecdotally of a man with the later stages of dementia – he could not walk, barely talk, was doubly incontinent and needed help for the most basic of tasks – refused continuing health care.

How a man with such care needs, and who’s health clearly won’t improve, does not warrant continuing health care funding is beyond me.

This provides another example of the urgent need to reform care funding. The guidelines for awarding benefits such as continuing health care need to be clearly set out and the distinctions between the various benefits need to be made clear to all.

If this happens, it could stop people being wrongly forced to pay for their care. Estimates in the press speculate that if the judge were to rule in favour of the 400, thousands of pensioners could be in line to claim refunds from the government – a bill that could run into hundreds of millions.

It is a bill the government could ill afford, but may help galvanise ministers into action to ensure that such cases do not occur again and that the care funding system is finally made simpler and, for many people, fairer.