Rights Of Carers Research Articles

Origin and development of the family carers’ movement in the United Kingdom in the 20th century

The history of the carers’ movement in the United Kingdom began in the second half of the 20th century. Demographic, social, and cultural changes in the UK made it necessary to define the role of a family carer in light of the needs of an ageing population. The Carers UK organisation, together with government representatives and researchers, fought for recognition and understanding of the challenges faced by carers, recognition of the rights for carers, as well as adoption and dissemination of the term ‘carer’ in social awareness. The main purpose of the essay is to show the origin of the family carers’ movement in the UK in the 20th century, and the integration process of different entities. The presented information can be an example for other countries facing similar challenges with informal care of those who are dependent due to age or illness. Palliat Med Pract 2020; 14, 1: 26–34

Rights for carers.

In April 2018, the Carers' Act comes into force in Scotland to ensure the rights of adult and young carers are recognised and upheld, and that they receive consistent and appropriate support to continue their caring role.

Managing Wandering Risk in People With Dementia

In many societies, the prevalence of dementia is increasing, posing many challenges, not least for carers. Wandering is a common symptom of dementia, potentially compromising the safety of the person with dementia and constituting a traumatic experience for carers. Thus, there is a need for services that help carers anticipate and manage the inherent risk of wandering while maintaining an appropriate equilibrium between the rights of carers, those with dementia, and indeed society, from a privacy, safety, and duty of care perspective. This paper reports on a usability analysis of one such system that seeks to aid carers manage and alleviate the risk implicit in wandering episodes.

Carers and Empowerment in the UK: A Critical Reflection

This article provides a critical reflection on carer empowerment in the UK, an issue which has received limited attention in policy and research. The arena is characterised by considerable conceptual confusion around key terminology, carer, care and caring, and by limited understanding of the meaning and outcomes of carer empowerment. Despite increased national acknowledgment of carers, a politically active carers' movement and a number of policies intended to enhance the recognition and rights of carers, many carers remain invisible and receive little support from services, to the detriment of their own health and well-being. Addressing these challenges, alongside developing a robust theoretical foundation for taking the ‘carers' agenda’ forward, is needed if carers are to move towards a more empowered status in the twenty-first century.

Kuasa Hak Ijbar terhadap Anak Perempuan Perspektif Fiqh dan HAM

This article discusses the rights of carers based on the opinions ijbar priest sect. Authorization rights ijbar guardian provide more authority for a guardian to marry off their daughters without first asking approval from the child. This is because a guardian is considered the most knowledgeable people about what is best for his daughter, so this happiness perspective formulated by the guardian. Women are considered not proficient in formulating the best things for him. Therefore, her consent is not a priority. In this case a gap between girls and parents, where full power is finally monopolize the interests of women. Right ijbar guardian has the potential to cause various kinds of violence against women which was distanced from the goals of marriage itself. Luckily the Marriage Law in Indonesia does not recognize the concept of rights ijbar. Just as education in the pesantren, one of the institutions of informal education, education curriculum was introduced that the materials are biased patriarchy. Book uqud dul lujain for example, used as the principal study on marriage presented with even marginalize women disproportionately. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE AR-SA /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:Table Normal; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

‘Confidentiality smokescreens’ and carers for people with mental health problems: the perspectives of professionals

This paper reports on some of the findings from a collaborative study funded by the Big Lottery and led by Crossroads Caring for Carers about carers for people with mental health problems. The protection and use of information in mental health are firmly rooted in ethics and professional codes, law and policy, as well as values and professional practice. While government initiatives have attempted to augment the role and rights of carers, policy guidance involving information sharing between professionals and carers has failed to deal with the practical dilemmas of patient confidentiality. Professional codes and training neither explore nor develop the moral and ethical ground that stands between the service user's need for privacy and the carer's need for information. Policy and training guidance on confidentiality is scattered, ambiguous, confusing for professionals and inconsistent. There is uncertainty in practice about the information that professionals may share, and many professionals do not take into account carers' rights, not least to basic information to help them care for service users. 'Confidentiality smokescreens' may sometimes lead to information being withheld from carers. Professionals sometimes find it easier and safer to say nothing. In order to explore these issues from the perspectives of professionals, 65 participants were interviewed. The sample included directors and senior staff from the health, social care and voluntary sectors. Respondents were asked to comment at length on their understanding of confidentiality and information sharing with carers. Findings highlight confidentiality smokescreens that erect barriers that limit effective information sharing; issues involving confidentiality, risk management and carers in crisis; examples of good practice; and the need for the training of professionals on confidentiality issues and the rights of carers. This paper explores the challenge of confidentiality smokescreens from the perspective of professionals, and draws out implications for professional practice and training.

Ambivalence, Contradiction, and Symbiosis: Carers’ and Mental Health Users’ Rights

This article explores the emergence of separate rights for carers and psychiatric service users. Although political rhetoric and policy documents largely assume symbiosis between carer and cared‐for person, increasingly the law reflects that their rights and interests may conflict and operate in opposition one to another. This article examines the social and policy factors that lie behind these developments and disentangles some of the ambivalences, contradictions, and symbioses that characterize this area of law. While service users’ rights in relation to decisions about their care have emerged from the shadow of family rights, carers’ rights to community support services have emerged as an adjunct to service users’ rights. The article explores the development of the rights paradigm in promoting the welfare of mentally disordered people and their carer, and the current limits of separation between their respective entitlements.

'Sam's bill' could bring benefits for carers.

A private member's bill designed to improve the rights of carers has passed to the committee stage of the House of Commons, where it will be examined in detail by MPs.

The third way in mental health policy: negative rights, positive rights, and the Convention.

Mentally disordered patients may be said to have rights in two senses: negative rights to freedom from arbitrary detention or interference with their person; and positive rights to expect a certain minimum standard of service, be that in terms of treatment as an in‐patient, or as a patient in the community. The Labour government has appointed a ‘scoping group’ to carry out a root‐and‐branch review of the Mental Health Act 1983. The 1983 Act was mainly concerned with in‐patient treatment. The group is to look at the scope for introducing further compulsory powers in the community, enhancing the rights of carers and relatives, and is to take account of recent British and Strasbourg case law. The primary impact of the Convention on psychiatric patients has been in relation to protection against arbitrary detention under Article 5, unsoundness of mind being one of the permitted grounds of deprivation of liberty under Article 5(1)(e). This article explores the potential impact of Convention rights in developing what Gostin referred to in the early 1980s as a ‘new legalism’. The new legalism linked concern for traditional rights to due process and review by the courts or other external bodies with the ‘ideology of entitlement’ to adequate treatment and services. The article outlines the current policy context of mental health services and looks at the development by the European Court of Human Rights of positive Convention rights to services out of Article 5, whose purpose seems at first sight to be the protection of due process rights. It examines the relevance of Convention rights to community powers.

New act protects rights of carers

New act protects rights of carers

Community care policies and gender justice.

The current approach in the United States to the provision of community care to the elderly interacts with the feminized structure of family care-giving to foster inequities for women, who provide the bulk of informal, unpaid care. The central concern of present policies with limiting eligibility and rationing benefits results in policies that reduce the choices of these carers, many of whom are already substantially disadvantaged by their economic position in society. What is necessary for gender justice is development of policies that address the needs and rights of carers and elders by providing necessary supports to families, including, when appropriate, adequate compensation to carers. We argue for an approach that takes into account the relationship of the adequacy of government support and the capacity of individuals to freely choose the caregiving role.