This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/health/6599155.stm

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Lords consider care home eviction Lords consider care home eviction
(about 9 hours later)
An 83-year-old woman with Alzheimer's disease is at the centre of a landmark legal case to be heard by Law Lords. An 84-year-old woman with Alzheimer's disease is at the centre of a landmark legal case being heard by Law Lords.
The woman, known only as YL, is threatened with eviction from the private care home she lives in. The woman, known only as YL, has been threatened with eviction from the private care home she lives in.
She does not have the same protection under the Human Rights Act as she would if she were in a council-run home.She does not have the same protection under the Human Rights Act as she would if she were in a council-run home.
But - in a case which could affect 300,000 private care home residents - her lawyers say she should be protected because the council pays for her.But - in a case which could affect 300,000 private care home residents - her lawyers say she should be protected because the council pays for her.
There is no justification for the current 'two tier' approach to basic human rights Gordon LishmanAge ConcernThere is no justification for the current 'two tier' approach to basic human rights Gordon LishmanAge Concern
Such residents are currently unprotected by the Human Rights Act if it is decided they must leave a home. Such residents are currently unprotected by the Act, which covers public authorities and those performing public functions.
This can happen if a care home closes, but charities for the elderly say it can also occur if a resident has made a complaint about the running of a home. In Mrs YL's case, her lawyers say there has been an "irretrievable breakdown" in the relationship between her family and her care home, which is run by Southern Cross Healthcare Ltd.
In Mrs YL's case, her lawyers say there has been an "irretrievable breakdown" in the relationship between her family and her care home. It has been alleged that her daughter, who pays additional top-up fees, had broken a fitting in the home and had been aggressive to staff.
Yogi Amin, of Irwin Mitchell solicitors who are representing Mrs YL, said: "Care homes are undertaking a public function in providing accommodation and caring for some of the most vulnerable people in society. Her husband is also alleged to have been violent towards his wife.
"They need to accept the responsibility that goes with it." 'Unprotected'
If the case is successful, private care home residents could be entitled to rights such as the "right to respect for private and family life", the "prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment" and the "right to a peaceful enjoyment of possessions". Mrs YL is currently being allowed to stay in the home after arrangements were made for supervised visits from her family, but her lawyers say the threat to evict her could be resurrected at any time.
'Robust legislation in place' Medical experts have said moving her would be a "grave risk" to her health.
Gordon Lishman, director general of Age Concern England, said: "We hope that this test case will close this loophole in the law so that vulnerable older people are equally protected by the Human Rights Act. If her case is successful, private care home residents could be entitled to rights such as the "right to respect for private and family life", the "prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment" and the "right to a peaceful enjoyment of possessions".
"Approximately 300,000 older people are unprotected from ill treatment or abuse because of the narrow definition of public authority under the Human Rights Act. The Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, is backing Mrs YL's case.
"Sadly, examples of abuses include being fed breakfast while sitting on the toilet and death from dehydration." In January, three appeal judges rejected the idea that a private care home was exercising a public function when it looked after people referred and funded by the local authority.
He added the only reason such people were not protected was that they received their care from private or voluntary services providers, not the local authority. But it said Mrs YL's case should be referred to the highest court possible because of its public importance.
"There is no justification for the current 'two tier' approach to basic human rights," Mr Lishman said. Gordon Lishman, director general of Age Concern England, said: "We hope that this test case will close this loophole in the law so that vulnerable older people are equally protected by the Human Rights Act."
Small private businesses should not be expected to take on the responsibility of the state Sheila ScottNational Care AssociationSmall private businesses should not be expected to take on the responsibility of the state Sheila ScottNational Care Association
Shami Chakrabarti of the human rights group, Liberty, says all care homes should be subject to the law. But Sheila Scott, chief executive of the National Care Association, said: "We have always believed that it is for local government to arrange services to be provided for people in need of care in the independent sector and that there is already significant, robust and pertinent legislation in place within the Care Standards Act to protect people living in care homes from abuse and neglect."
"Decent care homes that have been properly, ethically run have nothing to be afraid of and that's why it's so worrying that some of them resist it.
"It will just require that they treat individual elderly people with dignity and respect; they really shouldn't run away from that at all."
But the National Care Association said care home residents' rights were already fully protected under existing legislation, including the Care Standards Act.
State responsibility
Chief executive Sheila Scott said: "Human rights legislation is intended to protect people from abuse by the state either at a local or national level.
"We have always believed that it is for local government to arrange services to be provided for people in need of care in the independent sector and that there is already significant, robust and pertinent legislation in place within the Care Standards Act to protect people living in care homes from abuse and neglect."
She added: "Small private businesses should not be expected to take on the responsibility of the state."
The hearing is set to last three days, but the decision is expected to come at a later date.The hearing is set to last three days, but the decision is expected to come at a later date.