Question

Read the case study, then answer the questions that follow.

Amahl is the Meals on Wheels coordinator at a local council. One of his volunteer drivers reports to him that Violet, who is 86, says she no longer wants meals delivered. Amahl is aware that Violet doesn’t have any family living nearby and has severe arthritis in her hands, which greatly limits her ability to cook and care for herself. Violet also has very poor vision, making it difficult to shop on her own.

Amahl contacts Violet to discuss why she no longer wants meals delivered, Violet informs Amahl that her neighbour will cook her meals for her and bring them in each day. She says her neighbour is happy to do it and won’t charge her anything so that Violet can save the money to spend on other things.

Amahl informs the council of Home and Community Care (HACC) Coordinator, who makes an appointment to discuss Violet’s decision to stop meal deliveries. Violet says her neighbour will cook her meals for her and bring them in each day. She says her neighbour is happy to do it and won’t charge her anything so that Violet can save the money to spend on other things.

Amahl and the HACC coordinator also confer to discuss their concerns about Violet. They think it would be appropriate to contact the coordinator at Vision Australia who manages Violet’s community care package.

Question

1. Violet is advocating on her own behalf. What issue concerns her and how does she plan to solve the problem?

2. What are the duty-of-care issues in this case? What could the consequences have been if Amahl had stopped the meals to Violet and done nothing more about the matter?

3. Who should the HACC coordinator speak to, to assess Violet’s ability to self- advocate?

Answer 1

1. Issue concerns her and the plan to solve it

Violet, an 86 year old lady suffering with severe artritis of hands and poor vision, was getting daily meals from ' meals on wheels ' project by Home and Community Care Services ( HACC) works in the state. She had concerns over money that she spends for her meals as she may have financial problems . When a neighbour offered meals for free , Violet accepted the idea and found it as a solution for her money problem. If she gets the meals from neighbour, she doesn't want to pay for ' meals on wheels '. So that she can use that amount for other spendings.

2. Duty of care issues:

' Duty of care' refers to the responsibility of workers , under an organisation, to their clients to reduce the injury or harm to the clients under their care. Duty of care issues in the case are :

1. Amahl , the coordinator of the Meals on wheels programme, asked to stop the meals for Violet, the old lady , who is not able to cook for herself, based on the promise of her neighbour. Duty of care issue is to stop the meals on Violet's request or to continue the meals. Amahl has to take the decision according to her duty of care

Consequences: If Amahl was not reporting it to the coordinator, and stop the meals for Violet;   In case , there is an enquiry about the services recieved by Violet, there will be surely questions to ' Meals on wheels ' Coordinators, regarding the absence of reporting and documentation about the abrupt stopage of services to Violet. It may attract legal and ethical actions against Amahl.

3. HACC coordinator can speak to his senior coordinator about Violets decision and He has to document about the incidence and should get the signature from the Client and from the Meals on wheels coordinator, Amahl.

HACC coordinator can speak to the Coordinator Vision Australia, a non profit Organisation for the people with low vision and blindness, which is providing the Community package for Violet, regarding her decision. He can also discuss with Violet's doctor regarding her mental competency to take decision and for self advocacy.