Care at home

SIR – The most important point in Rob Wilson’s article (Comment, January 15) is that the Government “must also invest in charities, social enterprises and voluntary groups to provide local support for families”.

Our local charity, which provides and delivers hot meals for the elderly housebound, is dependent on 14 staff, about 80 volunteers, a commercialstyle kitchen and an income stream from two charity shops (to say nothing of donations in kind and in cash from local people) to help to maintain up to 100 clients in their own homes.

The cost in time, money and effort is immense, but the benefit to the country is that these elderly people – many in their nineties, some over 100 – are living independently and out of care homes. This saves the Treasury hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Government, of whatever persuasion, does not understand the value of these small charities but, should they collapse for lack of funding, the truth would be brought home suddenly and painfully, accompanied by those fateful words: “too late”. Dr Daphne Pearson

Chairman of Trustees, Age Concern Forest of Dean

Redbrook, Gloucestershire

SIR – Mr Wilson misses a vital element in any reform of our health and care system: technology. Around the world, health-care systems are incorporating remote monitoring technology to help frail older people remain independent for longer and to assist people with chronic health problems in managing their conditions.

Remote monitoring of daily routines can help prevent chronic conditions getting out of control and reduce the risk of falls that lead to hospitalisation. Not only does this reduce the pressure on the NHS, it also offers peace of mind to the six million family carers who are the backbone of our system.

Technology is not a substitute for social contact but, just as it has transformed the way we work and communicate, in health and care it has the potential to make the system more predictive, proactive and preventive. Paul Burstow

Cheam, Surrey