Underfunding causes concern

Anxiety, shame, and a lack of consistency of in-home care is due to systemic lack of funding, says a union organiser.

Eric Clarke, 87, felt so anxious about not knowing who or when a support worker would come to his home he threatened to return his Queen’s Service Medal to the steps of Parliament.

E Tu¯ organiser Lyn Williams said the issues raised by the Feilding retiree were not unique to any one provider of in-home care services.

She said the biggest issues facing the sector was the lack of funding and insecure hours.

In 2017, the Pay Equity act increased the wages of aged-care workers.

But the pay rate ‘‘doesn’t matter if there are no hours’’.

District health boards set the amount of in-home care time a recipient receives, and if they require more than that, the support worker must choose between walking away or working unpaid and potentially cutting into another client’s time.

According to the Midcentral District Health Board’s policy on needs assessment and service coordination, they fund 15-60 minutes for personal care, such as showering, toileting and changing clothes.

The policy states that, initially, a recipient will receive the least amount of time possible to trial the most efficient and safe method of care. Recipients can also receive up to an hour a week of support for household chores. Any additional time would need to be privately funded.

A support worker with several years experience in the industry, who would only speak to Stuff anonymously, said the problems raised by Clarke were ‘‘common place around the country with all different organisations’’.

She said both support workers and clients repeatedly raised the same issues, particularly on having a consistent carer at a consistent time. Support workers were not allocated any time to familiarise themselves with the client, which she said was crucial for gaining trust. These issues led to ‘‘fear and anxiety’’ among recipients, many of whom ‘‘we see in their most vulnerable state, when we shower or dress them’’.

Acting Healthcare NZ chief executive Josephine Gagan agreed forming a ‘‘professionally appropriate’’ bond of trust and care was crucial, and her organisation reminded workers and recipients regularly of that.

However, she said limited DHB funding meant those bonds needed to be formed within the parameters of recipient’s service plan.

Eric Clarke had a meeting last week with management from his in-home provider, Healthcare NZ, and he now felt ‘‘cautiously optimistic’’ about his future care.

Arthur Evans, 88, is another Feilding resident who received in-home care, but from another Dhb-funded provider, Lavender Blue.

He said carers would turn up unannounced or changes would be made to his time without him being notified.

Lavender Blue director Melissa Loumachi said she would not comment on Evans’ case due to privacy, but said her organisation called recipients when there was a change in support worker.