The plight of older Australians seeking aged care support is a pressing issue, one that has left many families feeling helpless and frustrated.
Take the story of Peter O'Shannessy, a 74-year-old man who, after a grueling battle with throat cancer, found himself in dire need of specialized care. Despite being approved for a level-three home care package, which promised much-needed assistance, Peter and his family faced an agonizing wait of seven to nine months before any help could arrive.
But here's where it gets controversial: the Australian government, in a move that has sparked debate, partially privatized the aged care assessment system last year. This decision has resulted in a backlog of over 116,000 people waiting for assessments across the country.
Eloise Randall, Peter's daughter, describes the harrowing experience of trying to navigate this complex system. She spent countless hours on the phone, pleading for support, only to be met with reassessment dates that were weeks away.
"I warned them, I knew he wouldn't make it," Eloise said, her voice heavy with emotion. And indeed, Peter passed away four weeks before his urgent reassessment, leaving his family devastated and questioning the system's effectiveness.
The government, however, maintains that wait times are not as long as perceived, with a spokesperson stating that the median wait time for assessments is 23 days. But families and industry experts paint a different picture, highlighting the desperate situations many older Australians find themselves in.
Coral Wilkinson, a former ACAT assessor, now helps families navigate the aged care maze. She believes that the Department of Health and some of the newly contracted companies were not adequately prepared for the task at hand.
"The workforce wasn't ready," she said. "Some of the newer organizations didn't grasp the level of expertise required to assess older people with complex needs."
And this is the part most people miss: the aged care royal commission, in its 2021 report, recommended a single assessment scheme but did not advocate for privatization. In fact, it emphasized the importance of assessors being independent from approved providers to avoid conflicts of interest.
Yet, despite this recommendation, more than half of the companies contracted to provide assessments are also service providers or related entities.
The government, in response, asserts that it has robust arrangements to prevent conflicts and can take strict actions, including terminating contracts, if conflicts are identified.
As we delve deeper into this issue, it becomes clear that the aged care assessment system is in dire need of reform. The stories of Peter and countless others highlight the human cost of a system that is failing to meet the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.
So, what do you think? Is privatization the answer, or is there a better way to ensure older Australians receive the care they deserve? We'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments below.
