Tag Archives: Joan Rapaport

Older People’s Health and Social Care: LIVING WITH CHOICE & CONTROL?

Posted on by

Dr Joan RapaportVisiting Research Fellow at the NIHR Health and Social Care Workforce Research Unit, Dr Joan Rapaport, reports from the 11th Annual Joint Conference from Age UK London and NIHR HSCWRU and Making Research Count (MRC) at King’s College London. It was held on 7 March 2019 at the Guy’s campus of King’s. On Twitter: #olderpeople11 (3,328 words)

Welcome

Joint chairs Professor Jill Manthorpe, Director of HSCWRU, and Paul Goulden, CEO of Age UK London welcomed nearly 100 people to the 11th Annual Joint Conference. The packed room included social workers, health care workers, researchers, and a diverse cross-section of ageing activists, users of services and their family carers, drawn from London’s older population.

Paul was pleased to report that since the last conference that London had signed up to the World Health Organization’s ‘Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities’. Network members are committed to promoting healthy and active ageing and a good quality of life for older people. Many of the presentations and debates during the day addressed aspects of this theme. Continue reading →

Resilience II: Older People and Social Care

Posted on by

Joan RapaportDr Joan Rapaport was inspired at a conference organized by the Social Care Workforce Research Unit at King’s College with London Age UK London and Making Research Count, that was also supported by the British Society of Gerontology. She provides her views of the event. Presentations are available on the conference website. (1,282 words)

In his welcome, Paul Goulden, Director of Age UK London explained that the conference was the second half of the Annual Joint Conference which had been held in March but was curtailed because of snow storms. This was indeed an event that had tested everyone’s resilience and explained why this conference was being held again thanks to the speakers and to the overall organizer, Jess Harris.

Paul Goulden, Daniel Webster, Lynne Phair and Dave Martin at the conference in Bloomsbury

Paul Goulden, Daniel Webster, Lynne Phair and Dave Martin at the conference held at Age UK London’s offices in Bloomsbury on 29 October

Using the Sit&See Tool to capture and celebrate Care and Compassion for Older People: Lynne Phair, Independent Consultant Nurse and Expert Witness

When investigating an allegation of hospital neglect, a manager had asked Lynne: ‘How do I know if staff are caring and compassionate?’ This started her on the road that ultimately led to the development of the Sit&See Tool, designed to capture care and compassion. Continue reading →

Mental Health Social Care 2016: Research findings informing policy and practice

Posted on by

Dr Joan RapaportJoan Rapaport reports from the annual event co-hosted by the Social Care Workforce Research Unit and Making Research Count. The day started with a presentation from a user-led study. (1,173 words)

‘The Girls Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest’: Perspectives from a user-led study on service user experiences of mental health related violence and abuse in the context of adult safeguarding: Dr Sarah Carr, Associate Professor of Mental Health Research, Middlesex University and Alison Faulkner, Independent Survivor Researcher, Mental Health.

‘It’s rather like writing a dark thriller’ were Sarah Carr’s opening comments regarding the research into service user experiences into and concepts of targeted violence and hostility, and prevention and protection. This small-scale exploratory study, led and entirely conducted by mental health service users, fills a gap in safeguarding research. It further provides an embedded knowledge exchange approach between service users, practitioners and agencies throughout the research process. Continue reading →

From our annual joint conference: End of Life Care

Posted on by

Dr Joan RapaportThe Annual Joint Conference of the Social Care Workforce Research Unit and Making Research Count at King’s College London and Age UK London, with support from the British Society of Gerontology was held on 11 February 2016 at King’s College London. Joan Rapaport reports. (1,633 words)

By way of introduction, Professor Jill Manthorpe, Director, Social Care Workforce Research Unit, explained that the focus of the conference was on good practice in the day-to-day delivery of palliative and end of life care. The Unit’s Longitudinal Care Work Study had highlighted the importance of collaborative working between health and social care agencies and ensuring staff were prepared and supported when working with people in the last stages of life. In spite of all the bad news about social care being ‘in crisis’ and of poor quality, research has shown that four out of five people describe positive experiences: ‘We can work on the one in five’. Continue reading →

Four studies in mental health social care

Posted on by

Dr Joan RapaportOn Thursday 8 October the Social Care Workforce Research Unit held its second annual Mental Health Social Care conference, in conjunction with Making Research Count. Joan Rapaport, Visiting Research Fellow at the Unit, was there. (2,275 words)

In her opening comments, Jo Moriarty, Deputy Director of the Social Care Workforce Research Unit, highlighted that the seminar was taking place as part of Mental Health Awareness week and that 10 October is World Mental Health Day. She observed that as well as mental health social workers, delegates from a wide range of organizations, in particular housing, were represented in the audience. This confirmed that adult mental health was not specific to one area of practice. Continue reading →

New directions in child welfare: good news from the Canadian province of New Brunswick

Posted on by

Geraldine Poirier BaianiDr Joan RapaportGeraldine Poirier Baiani (left) and Joan Rapaport report from New Brunswick. (931 words)

These days, high profile reports of child care tragedies, rising numbers of children being taken into care and social workers struggling with high caseloads are commonplace. Stories of positive developments in children and family services are rare. However, a chance meeting whilst on holiday led to a remarkable discovery: the caseloads of child welfare social workers in the Canadian province of New Brunswick now stand at an incredible seven. Continue reading →

On compassionate care

Posted on by

Dr Joan RapaportDr Joan Rapaport reports on the seventh Annual Joint Conference of the Social Care Workforce Research Unit, Making Research Count, and Age UK London (with support from the British Society of Gerontology), which took place at King’s last week. (2,508 words)

In her welcoming introduction, Professor Jill Manthorpe (Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King’s College London) said the topic ‘Compassionate Care’ had been chosen to explore what we mean by compassion, where it might be needed in older people’s care, its place within the hierarchy of priorities and whether it concerns individuals or wider social relationships. She said the purpose of the conference was to find out:

  • Where is the passion in compassion?
  • Should we all be compassionate all the time?
  • Do all older people want compassion?

Continue reading →

My House or My Home? The challenges of ageing and housing

Posted on by
Joan Rapaport

by Joan Rapaport

Last week (6 February) the Social Care Workforce Research Unit hosted its sixth joint annual conference on the theme of older people. It is organised jointly with Age UK London and Making Research Count and, this year, supported by The British Society for Gerontology. The topic: housing and older people. Speakers included Jill Manthorpe, Vic Rayner, Jeremy Porteus, Simon Evans, Maureen Crane, Louise Joly and Maria Brenton. Joan Rapaport reports.

 

Why the interest in older people’s housing?

Professor Jill Manthorpe (Director, Social Care Workforce Research Unit) highlighted increasing interest in the role of housing and environment on health and wellbeing in later life. She pointed to the sudden (re)discovery of the triangle of health, housing and care contributing to quality later life. Poor housing and environments undermine the potential benefits of social care and technological advances. Depressing environments may foster depression and inaccessible or hazardous environments compound isolation. We have long known that dampness, mould and cold are bad for health; recent research also suggests that loneliness can be as bad as smoking on health. Whilst some commentators accuse older people of stealing the pensions of their younger counterparts and draining health resources, and denying them access to the housing ladder, the idea of a ‘jilted generation’ has scant evidence. If anyone had been jilted it was the generations who were promised ‘homes fit for heroes’ many of whom who spent their old age in cold, disabling and poor housing.

Jeremy Porteus

Jeremy Porteus

Drawing on a recent personal experience, Jeremy Porteus (Director, Housing, Learning and Improvement Network (LIN)) highlighted the problems people face when planning for old age. There is no central ‘Ideal Home Exhibition’ point from which to make the perfect choices, there are psychological barriers to facing the future and a decision may have to be made in a crisis. Although the government is greatly concerned about the ageing population, the Select Committee on Public Service and Demographic Change (Lord Filkin, 2013) found that the housing market is delivering much less specialist housing for older people than is required and that national and local government and housing associations urgently need to make plans. Jeremy commented that if we are to build better homes then we also need to shape communities: making this more just a question of supply and demand.

Jeremy described the benefits deriving from purpose built projects and the emerging evidence base for positive outcomes. As just one example, people who were lonely with high needs had moved into Extra Care accommodation that had been funded by the Department of Health (DH). Within six months to a year many had experienced improvements in their wellbeing, ability to self-care and autonomy, creating savings in health and social care budgets. Extra Care projects are provided in a wide variety of ways including community led housing, cooperatives and cohousing as well as sheltered housing, retirement villages, almshouses and homesharing. Jeremy exhorted conference participants to join Housing LIN to keep abreast of strategic developments and opportunities and service innovations. Housing LIN is the leading ‘learning lab’ for a growing integrated network of housing, health and social care professionals in England involved in planning. As such, it is at the forefront of policy, research and practice developments and is a member of the Prime Minister’s The Dementia Challenge health and care champion group.

Vic Rayner (Chief Executive, SITRA) questioned the source of the ‘drain’ perceptions of older people in society. The evidence shows that contrary to these ‘doom and gloom’ predictions, people living longer lives are an asset to their communities and families, many working as volunteers, providing neighbourly support and helping with childcare responsibilities.

Vic Rayner

Vic Rayner

And the pictures of older people being drains on taxpayers are exaggerated, she observed. Close analysis of available data illustrates that the average annual unit cost of sheltered accommodation is just £311.10 – an amazing bargain! An investment of £198.20 in sheltered accommodation yields a saving of £646.90; of £32.40 in sheltered accommodation for older people with higher needs, savings of £123.40 and older people receiving floating support £97.3 and £628 respectively. Service user objectives of having access to assistive technology, security of tenure, personal security, greater autonomy and contact with family and friends are largely met. Yet supported provision for older people when compared to other population groups, is meager and may now be additionally under threat from local authority budgetary constraints.

‘On the Pulse’ case studies show how good practices in housing and health delivery can achieve good outcomes in:

  • Transferable care packages from housing to hospital and vice versa
  • Supporting re-ablement through telecare
  • Creating solution orientated partnerships across traditional health, social care and housing sectors

Vic highlighted the importance of commissioners’ valuing what matters to service users and including in their audits ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ outcomes, rather than focusing on a set of outputs defined by funders. She endorsed views that deeply ingrained attitudes towards older people needed to change.

Dr Maureen Crane and Dr Louise Joly (Honorary Senior Research Fellow and Research Fellow respectively at the Social Care Workforce Research Unit) drew on their current research on the housing and support needs of older homeless people.

Louise Joly

Louise Joly

Emerging findings from this unique study investigating what has happened to homeless people since they were rehoused five years ago demonstrate the potential problems of withdrawing support. Their research suggests that homelessness amongst people aged over 50 years is increasing, although no accurate figures are available. Homelessness in later life happens for a variety of reasons, such as breakdown in long-term marital or partnership relationships, death of a parent or spouse as well as mental health and substance misuse problems. Some people have poor budgetary skills and become evicted from the former family home. Some have literacy difficulties. While homelessness can be short term, so far nearly half of their research sample had been homeless for more than five years before being rehoused.

In this study, participants were first interviewed six months after they had been rehoused. Most, by far, not surprisingly, were glad to have been rehoused, regarded their accommodation as ‘home’, valued their privacy and control, and felt safe and comfortable. However, almost half were in debt. Significantly, those in sheltered accommodation were less likely to be worried or to mention they felt depressed.

Maureen Crane

Maureen Crane

Five years on about a third were still in their original accommodation. Of the minority who had moved, some had changed to live in more supported accommodation. Of those in their original accommodation, case examples highlighted struggles that had increased once their support workers had been withdrawn. These people were living impoverished, isolated lives. Unrealistically, some with health problems were being required to look for work. Maureen had been unable to interview one individual, in a great state of despair about her finances, until she had helped her to complete an application for welfare benefits. Some of the questions were difficult to understand. The form was 57 pages long and had to be printed: for this the internet café was the only option. The individual, who had relied on friends for money for two months, had to pay £8 from her benefits’ for her application to be printed!

This research is indicating that many older homeless people want permanent accommodation but many require supported or specialist living arrangements. The support needs of homeless people can fluctuate once rehoused and some do not seek help when faced with difficulties. There is currently a lobbying vacuum following the demise of the UK Coalition on Older Homelessness in 2010. Maureen and Louise highlighted the need for a new campaigning group to raise awareness of the particular needs of older homeless people.

Next to present, Dr Simon Evans (Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Health and Society, University of Worcester) asked what Extra Care housing offered older people? Drawing on emerging findings from the ASSET research project (funded by NIHR School for Social Care Research), Simon explained that Extra Care housing covers units for rent, purchase and includes some retirement villages. Extra Care is typically characterized by having facilities that enable social interaction, activities, outside support and the ability to buy in flexible care packages. The model provides many opportunities to meet the diverse needs and circumstances of older people. For example, the characteristics and needs of residents are wide ranging. Schemes may rely on multiple funding sources, multiple partners and multiple commissioning agencies. There is a range of financial and legal considerations such as for rent, or purchase, and charges for service, support and/or care packages. There are many types of building options such as ‘top of the market’ facilities, specific age friendly designed complexes, or converted council tower blocks. The literature on social care and support in housing for older people is meager.

When planning for their ‘ideal home’ consumers may be faced with differing local authority arrangements, the effects of welfare reforms and budgetary constraints, new models of commissioning and different approaches regarding levels of need. Simon explained that agreement on priorities and tendering arrangements with local authorities preoccupy commissioners. Key factors regarding the commissioning of social care in housing include the relationship between the housing and care provider, the building type, layout and location, the facilities on offer, tenure and letting policy and the mix of care needs required by the residents. However, ideas about what facilities are wanted by people with high needs are changing. As one example, meals and restaurants on site are proving popular but they may not meet everyone’s preferences.

Despite these complications, Simon ended by highlighting some of the benefits of extra housing such as:

  • Serving as community hubs for services
  • Supporting couples to stay together (in contrast to traditional models of residential care)
  • Promoting independence
  • Potential for saving money when compared with the costs of care homes.

Concluding the day, Maria Brenton (Project Consultant to Older Women’s Cohousing Company) outlined the concept of cohousing: which essentially aims to combine personal autonomy with community in old age. Maria explained that there are a small number of cohousing schemes emerging in England where people are coming together with the intention of living in a community and a commitment to mutual support. They share values and each agrees to share responsibility for the group as a whole. Each ‘cohousee’ has her or his own accommodation and own front door. The model is well established on the continent but is starting to gain some momentum here.

Maria Brenton, Jill Manthorpe and Simon Evans

Maria Brenton, Jill Manthorpe and Simon Evans

Maria highlighted the potential strengths of cohousing particularly in respect of combatting loneliness ‘which is probably a killer’. As people come together to design, build, develop and manage the project, they get to know each other well. Cohousing offers the prospect of good social contact, opportunities to share skills and the benefits of old fashioned communities with help at hand right next door.

In the UK 14 schemes are in the pipeline. The scheme she is involved in ‘OWCH’ (Older Women’s Housing Cooperative) is likely to be the first of its kind in the country. However, the model is very new to commissioners and cohousing pioneers face many challenges. A shift in perspectives is required.

For social workers and social care practitioners there were several key messages from the day

  • Loneliness is a potential killer – it is important to consider when thinking about outcomes. The contribution of housing and the built environment to contributing to loneliness should be assessed and addressed.
  • Attitudes about ageing and older people need to change and social work can play its part in this by working with older people and their organisations.
  • Extra Care is often cost effective and outcomes are often good; social workers should be familiar with what is on offer and its opportunities.
  • Not providing Extra Care may cost the public purse more so local investment in it could be supported. As well as providing construction jobs, Extra Care offers local work.
  • There is wide variety of supported housing schemes and social workers need a local ‘map’ to know what people might consider or should be confident that there are local information and advice agencies that can provide person-centred services.
  • The potential of older people to design their own schemes has not been realized; social workers can put people in touch with national bodies.
  • The importance of older people engaging in national and local consultations to improve their housing and wellbeing is one that social workers can convey in community development work.

This conference was the 6th annual joint event (CPD certified) held by Making Research Count at the Social Care Workforce Research Unit with Age UK London. This year the conference was supported by the British Society for Gerontology. It was held on 6 February 2014 at Henriette Raphael House, Guy’s Campus, King’s College London.

Dr Joan Rapaport was, until recently, Visiting Research Fellow at the Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King’s College London and is a lay member of the Mental Health Review Tribunal.

Conference photographs: Cliff Chester

For more on the conference (including presentations) go to the Event website.

For your attention:                                                                                                            Gordon Deuchars, Age UK London, stated that the Mayor of London had issued a Public Consultation on a New London Housing Strategy. This also concerns housing for older people. The consultation ends on 17.2.14. Please contribute to this consultation: www.london.gov.uk/priorities/housing-land/consultations/draft-london-housing-strategy  

What do social work and research have in common?

Posted on by
Joan Rapaport

by Joan Rapaport

At the Practitioner Research seminar on Tuesday 30 April Joan Rapaport will ask: ‘Why should social workers do research?’ Here she explains how she personally became interested in this question as an Approved Social Worker and PhD student. And, focusing in this post on Action Research, she points out the degree of overlap between methodology in research and social work practice.

There are still a few places left at the Practitioner Research seminar, which takes place at King’s College London, but please book by end of day Friday 26 April. | #practres

Imagine a world where social workers were enthusiastically sharing ideas, holding seminars to share their latest research findings and encouraging research developments through various support networks. Given the current shortage of practitioner research, could this position ever be achieved? And why should we strive to ensure that it does?

It was only during the course of my PhD study on the neglected role of the nearest relative under the Mental Health Act 1983 (for e-summary see Rapaport, 2012) that I began to be aware of the importance of research and theoretical frameworks to guide and develop practice. Officially recognised as a patient safeguard against unwarranted hospital detention, the nearest relative had attracted considerable concern, especially amongst social workers, because of the potential for the role to land in the hands of poorly motivated relatives. My research confirmed that it was better known for its vices than its virtues. However, it also found that when the nearest relative powers and social work duties worked reciprocally for the ‘patient’s’ benefit, the nearest relative was indeed an effective safeguard. This finding led to a development of normalisation and social role valorisation (‘SRV’) theories and the discovery of reciprocal role valorisation (‘RRV’). This was found to occur:

where the nearest relative and social worker supported each other to achieve mutually respected and identified goals to help the patient which were also recognised by the professionals and significant others involved. (Rapaport, 2012)

Although a discovery of the nearest relative study, RRV is relevant to practitioners because of its versatile potential for other social work settings, especially where professional duties and family responsibilities combine. It also demonstrates how social workers, in the course of fulfilling their duties, can simultaneously enhance their own professional image. The importance of practitioner engagement in research and theory development is once again gaining ground in professional circles (McLean et al., 2012). How might this laudable objective become a reality?

A PhD is a huge undertaking in terms of time and money. Typologies such as Action Research may therefore be more accessible and appealing especially as it is closely linked with practice and uses approaches familiar to practitioners such as qualitative interviews.  It is a strategy for change, can be undertaken by practitioners and service users alike, and readily meets the social work ideals of user empowerment. Models described by Beddoe and Harington (2012) and Frith (2012) amply demonstrate these characteristics. The former describes a project ‘Growing Research in Practice’ (GRIP) to enhance the research capability and confidence of groups of social workers in Auckland, New Zealand. The latter, conducted in Iceland, explored ways of helping children and young people facing predicaments. Both studies, (and also that of the nearest relative) involved full stakeholder participation and methods such as interviews, group discussions, evidence-based trials and evaluations and debriefing sessions – all part and parcel of social work – to gather data. The New Zealand project reported several positive outcomes including opportunities for professional enhancement, shifts in organisational culture, improved collaborative working and opportunities to educate and involve others. The main finding of the Icelandic study was a shift from practitioners making decisions for young people to giving them the knowledge, skills and resources to empower them to make decisions for themselves. In short, both studies had extremely valuable outcomes for all concerned.

Whilst the case for professional development is well made by the above, Action Research may also provide managers with a cost-effective way to conduct in-house evaluations and to shift obstructive cultures and help redefine objectives. Opportunities to develop leadership skills and gain recognition through the dissemination of project findings are also likely outcomes. As an illustration, the findings of the nearest relative study were used to inform the reform of the Mental Health Act 1983 and also a number of other carer and advocacy-type projects.

With the high standards of professional registration and regulation in mind, Action Research would seem to hold promise for the social work profession and service user empowerment. Given its approaches are familiar to social workers, it could arguably become part and parcel of social work practice. Promotional seminars, product champions and support networks will be required to spread the word and further its worthy objectives.

References

Beddoe, L. and Harington, P. (2012) One Step in a Thousand-Mile Journey: Can Civic Practice Be Nurtured in Practitioner Research? Reporting on an Innovative Project. British Journal of Social Work, 42; 74 – 93.

Frith, E. (2012) Child-Directed Social Work Practice: Findings for an Action Research Study in Iceland. British Journal of Social Work, 1-19; doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcs099.

Maclean, S. with Collins, P., Dean, A., Moore, S., and Tucker, G. (2012) The food of good practice. July/August, Professional Social Work.

Rapaport, J. 2012 Reflections on ‘A Relative Affair’: The Nearest Relative under the Mental Health Act 1983. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/scwru/pubs/2012/reports/rapaport2012reflections.pdf

A version of this piece originally appeared in Professional Social Work.

Joan Rapaport is Visiting Research Fellow, Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King’s College London.

Invisible communities: Working with older people from Europe and beyond

Posted on by
Joan Rapaport

by Joan Rapaport

Our fifth annual older people conference hosted jointly with Making Research Count and Age UK London was held on 30 January at the Guy’s campus of King’s College London.
Joan Rapaport, one of over a hundred attendees and a Visiting Research Fellow at the Social Care Workforce Research Unit, reflects on the findings reported during the day.
Presentations from the day are on our website.

 

Professor Jill Manthorpe: Addressing ‘invisible’ inequalities in social care – Why now?

In her opening comments, Professor Manthorpe described an ‘elastic’ Eurovision definition of ‘White Other’ which included non-EU and EU nationals who were also often defined as White Other as well as the more frequently cited migrants from Canada, USA and Australia. As usual, she noted, London is a hotbed of change. The backgrounds of ‘White Other’ people are extremely diverse, with huge implications for appropriate social care provision. However, although the Equality Act 2010 is now in force, the needs of this population group as they age have not been explored.  Professor Manthorpe acknowledged the challenges faced by busy social workers and the constraints of assessment forms but asked:

  • How can appropriate services be provided if vital biographies and life stories have not been recorded?
  • What happens to people with memory problems or whose speech is impaired after a stroke – who provides the life experience to inform the care plan?
  • How can we help people to recall their memories and help care staff to see the person behind the care plan, so that social care truly reflects their needs?

Professor Karen Christensen: Older Scandinavians in London – how do they fare?

Professor Christensen identified the longstanding historical connections between Norway and Britain. Norway’s population is small (5 million) and scattered amongst 429 municipalities. It is difficult to find out the exact numbers of Norwegians living in the UK today, as the government figures are workforce related.

Her recent and unique life course interviews of seven Norwegians living in London, ages ranging from 59 – 75, revealed that these women came to London for love and marriage, au pair work, freedom from close knit communities and disappointment about Norwegian welfare services. Their passage was made easier because their fathers had encouraged them to learn English, as a ‘useful’ language. Those who had trodden the au pair and marriage route had stayed for family reasons and had chosen part-time work to suit. Others, who had come for career reasons and later married here, had made their decision to stay right from the start. These women juggled their careers with family responsibilities and worked until retirement. None had come ‘to get a better life’ in the traditional migrant sense.

Only one, married to a black man, had faced discrimination. Although settled in Britain, none wanted to become British citizens. They had all their rights, bar the right to vote. Professor Christensen considered that if there had been the option of dual nationality, their decisions might have been different. However, they could keep in touch with their Norwegian culture through their community networks and work and telling their grandchildren about Norway. There was also the Norwegian ‘injection’ of the holiday cottage – but then straight back to Britain! These women had no fear of getting old in Britain, as long as they could avoid residential care. They hoped for help from their families in return for caring for grandchildren. Those who had worked for Norwegian agencies received higher pensions than their British counterparts. They could thus afford private care.

Dr Shereen Hussein: Older Turkish migrants’ care needs in the UK: cultural encounters and unmet needs – how do these compare?

Dr Hussein identified three distinct Turkish population groups: Turks, Alevi/Kurds and Turkish Cypriots living in the UK, sometimes referred to as ‘invisible minorities’. Although separate in their homeland, ethnic divisions are less apparent over here. However, each group has different ethnic histories. Old age is taking some by surprise.

With a Turkish colleague, Dr Hussein has been interviewing older Turkish men and women (ages ranging from 55 – 102) as well as Turkish care and community care workers. These interviews were conducted in Turkish (crucial to the study). Typically, and in stark contrast to the Norwegian experience, people came to London for a ‘better life’, to find work and possibly to flee persecution. The jobs they found, often through friends, were low-skilled, with poor working conditions and without ‘formalities’ (regulated). They did not have to speak English because the whole workforce spoke Turkish. Many had been over here for 50 years and never learnt English. Once they left the labour market, they found a ‘sudden’ need to speak English and know the system. Language posed a huge barrier, although those with adult offspring who had grown up in the UK were more aware of services and activities. However, for others retirement has meant ‘when I became old’, nostalgia for their homeland, loss of identity and feelings of disempowerment. Whilst inter-changeable care responsibilities from and for older people were assumed within the culture and elsewhere, these expectations could not always be met and older people were sometimes obliged to use social care services with trepidation. The gap between actual and perceived social care needs was large and culturally sensitive services were viewed by the research participants to be limited. Overall, the Norwegian participants painted a far rosier picture of growing old in London than their Turkish counterparts.

What needs to change?

  • Awareness that family is an important care provider but is not always available;
  • A focus on working with younger and older Turkish communities to bridge language and care barriers;
  • Assessment of the cost implications of not providing culturally sensitive early intervention and preventative measures, on crisis and intensive care services.

Jo Moriarty: The Equality Act 2010: Protected or ignored characteristics?

Jo Moriarty explained that most of the provisions of the Equality Act had come into force in October 2010, and those relating to Age Discrimination later in October 2012. Direct and indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation are now outlawed. There are nine protected ‘characteristics’ of which seven apply in her review on the needs of older people: age – disability – gender reassignment – race – religion or belief – sex and sexual orientation. The study considered the impact of the Equality Act for Age UK across five different services. However, the task was very difficult because of the invisibility of the population in question and the dearth of research focusing specifically on equality and diversity. Routine monitoring for different protected characteristics is uneven, there are differing reporting standards and detail relating to the characteristics is not picked out. For example, in respect of Falls Prevention and the known benefits of exercise classes, areas such as accessible publicity, opportunities to socialise, religious preferences and single sex facilities have not been researched and the impact of discrimination on take-up is unknown. Day service provision is similarly neglected. Faith-based services may provide communal social activities, but these too are very under-researched. Furthermore, as more older lesbian, gay and bisexual people live alone than other groups – does this mean they have an increased need for home and hospital services?

Jo Moriarty warned of the risks of making assumptions and cited the example of the famous film star, Merle Oberon who was elusive about her Anglo-Indian background, to the extent she hid the fact that her Indian mother was actually her dresser. Jo highlighted the similar trap of erroneous assumptions of heterosexual relationships and the impact on people’s feelings.

What are the key messages?

  • Carry out more research on the needs of people with protected characteristics;
  • Provide inclusive publicity to reassure people;
  • Show staff have been trained in equality and diversity issues;
  • Avoid stereotyping;
  • Seek service users’ views even on sensitive matters; people like to be asked, especially if they are consulted on how to ask the question.

Dr Nan Greenwood: Does ethnicity matter? Working with older people from minority ethnic groups

Dr Greenwood said that her literature review had confirmed that health and social care issues for older people from minority ethnic groups were truly invisible. There was some information, but no one collates it. Statistics are unreliable and research is limited. Older refugees in particular may be isolated because of health and social problems and cultural differences and face multiple layers of disadvantage. If they have no permanent address they may have difficulties registering with a GP and thus accessing health services. Cultural perceptions about illness and the process of ageing may also act as barriers to accessing services more generally. The experiences of carers from minority ethnic groups are additionally compounded by disadvantage and marginalisation and culturally insensitive services. The effort to obtain help (phone calls and forms) is a major barrier to seeking help. Carers value information, accessible, culturally sensitive services and, most importantly, face-to-face contact and first language support.

People from lower socio-economic status groups from all minority ethnic groups describe their health as poorer. This information is complex as ethnicity is multi-faceted and changing and given the opportunity people may define themselves as belonging to more than one race. Homogeneity within groups may be overemphasised and mask heterogeneity. Ethnicity needs to be considered against other aspects of identity such as gender, age, religion, disability and health. Dr Greenwood stressed that the general principles of good care need to be embedded throughout and cited recent research that showed people from minority ethnic groups also wanted to be treated with dignity and respect.

Dr Greenwood acknowledged pros and cons in respect of separate or mainstream services. Separate services may be more culturally sensitive and innovative and mediate with general services. However, they may also bleach culture and set people apart. Evidence is as yet lacking to help tease out these and other issues.

What are the key messages?

  • Be aware that the concept of ethnicity may sometimes obscure other facets of identity and difference;
  • Health and social care evidence about the needs of people from ethnic minorities exist despite the limitations of the research;
  • Stop problematising ethnicity and blaming the characteristics of ethnic minorities e.g. for low take-up of services;
  • Keep abreast of changing patterns of health and disease to improve take up of screening and early intervention;
  • Keep the common factors of care in sight.

Jean Lambert MEP: Does London work for older Europeans?

Jean Lambert explained that it is assumed there about 100,000 EU nationals living in London who are over 60 years of age. They have come at different times and for different purposes, some as a result of WWII, refugees fleeing persecution, Jews from various parts of Europe, to join families, for work and so on. Under EU directives, discrimination is forbidden. Information is available in twenty-three languages on the EU website to help people attain their rights. Whilst discrepancies exist between different health and welfare systems across all member states, problems for non-EU nationals living within the EU are even greater.

In respect of workforce mobility issues and the UK, Jean Lambert expressed concern about attitudes in the UK in respect of transitional arrangements relating to people coming into the country from Bulgaria and other parts of Eastern Europe. Previously, even when apparently welcoming people from Poland, a whole host of problems had arisen: lack of support, language problems and people not understanding their rights and entitlements and often those on the administering side likewise. People when they arrive know they have rights but not what these are. Nothing has since changed.

This is the Year of European Citizenship and to mark the occasion one million Euro has been set aside to put on a number of events. As part of the Year, the European Parliament has commissioned and will report on discrepancies between the different systems, including those between Europe and the UK. In addition, funding from the Citizen Rights to Equality Programme (under the former European Year of Active Ageing) is expected to report on the needs of people needing dementia care.

What are the key lessons?

  • More research on the needs of older people from these minority groups could be helpful;
  • People need to be able to access information about their rights in their own language;
  • People need a single point of expert help and someone to assist them through the process.

Conclusions and closing comments

Professor Manthorpe highlighted the importance of ensuring that the histories of people from ‘White Other’ population groups were not forgotten, given their relevance to appropriate health and social care provision. The day had demonstrated that people have very different trajectories and these need to be acknowledged. In particular, the question remains how can social workers respond under their current work pressures at a time of dwindling resources? Attention to a person’s story may help at least to get things right first time by making sure that services are both accessible and acceptable.

Joan Rapaport is Visiting Research Fellow at the Social Care Workforce Research Unit, King’s College London. The Invisible Communities conference was organised by Jess Harris. Twitter hashtag for the conference is #olderpeople5