MY aunt, who will be 95 in November, took up residence on Elms estate in Whitefield 18 months ago.
Due to her age and immobility, she needed the support of the warden who lived on site and was available for any emergency.
At that time, I felt that she was safe and able to continue to live independently in her own home with my help, knowing that the warden would contact me should there be any problems.
Then, earlier this year, the warden service was discontinued and replaced by mobile wardens who work on a number of older people's accommodations throughout the borough, making them available only for short periods in the day.
This causes me great concern because, due to my aunt's forgetfulness and confusion, she needs more support. I contacted a social worker who agreed that my aunt needed help in the mornings and said she would arrange home care.
This meeting seemed satisfactory but two days later, I was told that she could not have home care as they do not call just to check on people. This service has recently been stopped "by the powers-that-be".
So, where is this "Care in the Community" which is written about at length in the Bury Times?
My aunt wants to live in her own home and I am willing to continue to cook, clean, shop and do her washing. I ask only that social services call in the morning. Is this asking too much?
What is the point of a social worker making a decision then another one on the end of a telephone cancelling that decision, without even seeing the elderly person concerned? Who are these "powers-that-be" and what right have they to take away this much-needed service?
J. PRITCHARD,
Middleton Drive,
Bury.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article