Councillors criticise Trust chief on human rights compliancy response

Fermanagh and Omagh District Council sought assurances last year, after a 92-year-old man with multiple medical conditions was deemed fully independent and requiring no support post-discharge, despite being significantly visually impaired, reliant on continuous oxygen delivery, and unable to walk upright or without assistance.

He was admitted to the South West Acute Hospital after sustaining severe head trauma from a fall, where his treatment was exemplary.

However, as a registered patient with the Southern Health and Social Care Trust, it was responsible for his ongoing care post-discharge, yet his extreme vulnerability was dismissed and assessors insisted he was “fully independent”.

After battling authorities, his family secured a re-assessment which established a maximum care package was essential – completely contrary to the original decision.

The handling of the assessment brought concerns around Human Rights – particularly Article 3 [No-one shall be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment], and Article 8 [Right to respect for private and family life].

Although Article 8 is Qualified, interference can only be in very specific circumstances, Article 3 is Absolute and legally required to be upheld and protected by all public authorities.

In response to the initial enquiry, the Western Trust’s Chief Executive, Neil Guckian, said: “I can confirm assessment for Domiciliary Care Packages is Human Rights compliant and is based on a regional framework.”

Having originally been raised by Councillor Emmet McAleer, Independent, he described the response as: “One of the worst ever received. He [Mr. Guckian] says [assessments] are Human Rights compliant, but doesn’t give any evidence.

“I propose we write back asking what further details or clarification he can provide, or is he content that his say-so should be sufficient?”

Also criticising Mr. Guckian’s response, and seconding Councillor McAleer’s proposal, Sinn Fein’s Councillor Deborah Coyle expressed anger at “that ridiculous letter”, continuing: “It’s very, very disappointing and just not good enough.”

A further response from Mr. Guckian came before the most recent Policy and Resources Committee Meeting in which he asked if there are specific areas of concerns in Human Rights compliance, and which Articles this involves.

He stressed: “It is important to note the [Western] Trust is not being obstructive in not providing further information at this stage; however, Human Rights is a wide issue, with many aspects ranging from Absolute to Limited.”

Councillor McAleer remarked: “I have to express surprise that Mr. Guckian has had to ask as he should be fully across and indeed implementing all Human Rights articles, which are enshrined in law, and incumbent on every public authority to uphold.”

He proposed writing back, setting out: “Articles 3 and 8 need to be focused on.”

Seconding, Councillor Donal O’Cofaigh, CCLA, alleged: “When you get a response like this, you’ve asked a good question and clearly one [Mr. Guckian] does not necessarily want to put down in black and white.

“Frankly, it’s obvious what the Human Rights implications are, and I would have thought these would have been a priority consideration for the [Western] Trust in every regard to care.”

He continued: “It’s actually a disgrace to receive this correspondence. Article 8 for example is the right to private and family life, to make choices for yourself, and to have your body and mind respected. These are not difficult concepts.

“The fact the Chief Executive of our local Trust has come back asking us to clarify which Human Rights are we concerned are not being delivered upon, tells its own story.

“I’m hoping we will get further development, whether or not it is something [Mr. Guckian] would like in the public sphere.”

The proposal passed unanimously.

Start your digital subscription in our Easter sale. Enjoy your first month for just £1 and stand a chance of winning egg-citing prizes. Click here to subscribe.