UFFC rally not happening this year

It seems that the annual rally organised by the United Families and Friends Campaign (UFFC) won’t be happening this year. If it is true then it is such a shame. I have attended the previous processions (some I have documented) and it is such a powerful event. I remember one year listening to Pauline Campbell in her usual defiant yet dignified manner. A year later mourning her. I don’t know why it is not happening this year.

For me, probably selfishly, is a chance to see people I have met through campaigning. And for me, it is a chance to remember the people I was close to at some point in time who died within the psychiatric system (mainstream and high-secure) who never got justice.

DLA: just what is going on ‘ere?!

From Hansard

Asked By Lord Ashley of Stoke

To ask Her Majesty’s Government which elements of disability benefit they are considering integrating into the wider social care budget in England.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Communities and Local Government & Department for Work and Pensions (Lord McKenzie of Luton):  My Lords, the Green Paper, Shaping the Future of Care Together, proposed that one way to deal with the challenge of an ageing society may be to bring some disability benefits and the new care and support system together into a single system as a better way of providing support. At this stage, we do not want to rule out any options and so are considering all disability benefits.

Lord Ashley of Stoke:  I thank my noble friend for that reply. Is he aware that any attempt by the Government to withdraw these benefits, or any benefits at all, will be very strongly resisted by disabled people, by their organisations and by many Members of both Houses of Parliament?

Lord McKenzie of Luton:  My Lords, I reiterate that no decision has been made on this matter—it is a consultation—and I acknowledge the benefit that many disabled people see in the current benefit structure, particularly DLA and attendance allowance. However, there is a case for bringing some disability benefits and the adult social care system together to provide better support through a new national care service. We should remember that the social care system and disability benefit system have in many ways developed in isolation from each other—they are separately assessed and have separate applications—and there may be benefits for individuals in bringing them together. However, we have made clear in the Green Paper that should we make a change in this direction, individuals receiving the relevant benefits at the time of the reform will continue to receive an equivalent level of support and protection.

Perhaps I may illustrate the nature of the challenge that we face. There are currently 1.26 million adults who get their care and support needs addressed. Over the next 20 years, 1.7 million more adults will need to be supported. Currently, 20 per cent of cases cost less than £1,000 a year and 20 per cent cost more than £50,000 a year.

And later on in the debate Lord McKenzie reiterates, My Lords, as I said in answer to the first Question, currently no particular benefit is ruled out of consideration.

Now cast your minds back when CPAG and other disability rights organisations asked the government whether DLA was under threat that led to Care Services Minster Phil Hope stating:

All the models that we have done have not included DLA … DLA is not under threat and people can be very happy …

So much for Phil Hope’s assurances, it also shows you can’t trust what comes out their collective mouths. Who’d have thunk it?

Just who is to be believed?

Inquest to open into the death of Mrs Stockill

From Inquest

The inquest into the death of 61 year old Moyra Stockill opens on Monday 19 October and is expected to last for up to six weeks. Mrs Stockill was found dead in a cell at Middlesborough police station on 10 December 2003 just hours after being conveyed from St Luke’s psychiatric hospital, where she had been detained under section 3 of the Mental Health Act.  

 As part of her illness, Mrs Stockill would frequently self-harm by placing objects in her mouth.  She would then alert nursing staff by pointing at her throat so that the objects would be removed.  On the morning of 10 December 2003 Mrs Stockill had self-harmed on nine separate occasions, eight of which involved putting objects in her mouth.  Following an alleged violent incident later that morning, the police were called. Before the police arrived a male staff member impersonated a police officer in an attempt to calm her down.  Following her arrest and transfer to the police station, Mrs Stockill was placed in a cell and was later seen banging on the cell door and pointing at her throat.  Custody officers did not respond and she was found dead a short time later having choked.

Mrs Stockill’s daughter, Clare Barker, who has waited six years for her mother’s inquest to take place, hopes that this inquest will examine her serious concerns, including:

• ·   Whether Mrs Stockill should ever have been removed from the hospital premises without the authorisation of her consultant, as required under s.3 MHA.
• ·   What effect the police impersonation might have had on Mrs Stockill.
• ·   What information about the risks Mrs Stockill posed to herself was passed to the police and was that information sufficient.
• ·   Whether Mrs Stockill’s care and observations at the police station were adequate.
• ·   Why custody staff did not respond to Mrs Stockill’s banging on the cell and gesturing.

 Mrs Stockill’s daughter, Clare, said:

‘After six long years I hope that we at last find out the truth and that the outcome of the inquest has a real effect on psychiatric and custodial care in the future.’

 The fact that the family of Mrs Stockill had to wait 6 years for an inquest is appalling in itself (and why do families have to wait for this length of time?). I hope the inquest does examine the concerns outlined above. Indeed, should Mrs Stockill have been removed? Did a doctor examine her fitness to be removed? And it has been shown before in similar cases the woeful breakdown of communication and a failure (?) in passing on relevant information about the individual such as self-harming behaviour, and suicidal feelings. And there are so many myths that surround self-harming behaviour that highlights the lack of education and also a can’t-care-less attitude by agents of the state.

Also it exposes lack of care, awareness and institutionalised neglect. And this leads me to question why the cops got involved and why an ‘extremely vulnerable’ woman was placed in a cell? From the statement above Mrs Stockill was on a Section 3 thought it also reminds me of the surreal section 136 of the MH Act where a police cell can act as a ‘place of safety’… That statement couldn’t be further from the truth. And the reality is a death in custody. Even though she was on a Section 3 and had been removed from the hospital she became another death in custody statistic. Why?

 I hope Mrs Stockill’s family get justice along with answers as to why and how she died.