DPAC threatened with legal action for supporting Anthony Kletzander: parents interview

Vox Political is glad to help publicise this campaign by Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) to help Anthony Kletzander live independently. The introductory paragraph of DPAC’s current article on the subject should explain why:

DPAC has removed our most recent piece on Anthony Kletzander from our website due to a ‘cease and desist’ letter from solicitors representing Nua Healthcare threatening legal action against us for raising awareness of the case.

DPAC have published pieces on Anthony and his situation since late 2013. We firmly believe that Anthony’s desire for independent living, instead of institutionalisation should be upheld, as per Article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We also believe that we have a duty to raise public awareness on Anthony’s experiences.

We will continue to campaign and to support Anthony, his parents: Linda and Sigi and his chosen advocate Joe Whittaker in any way we can. Anthony’s parents Linda and Sigi kindly agreed to an interview from their home in Ireland. We are grateful for their time and honesty.

You can read the interview on DPAC’s own site. Please share the link with your friends, to raise awareness of this campaign.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs!

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

4 thoughts on “DPAC threatened with legal action for supporting Anthony Kletzander: parents interview

  1. casalealex

    Nua Healthcare Services (UK) Limited
    Care Quality Commission
    Date of Inspection: 18 June 2014
    Date of Publication: 29 July 2014

    People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights (outcome 7)
    x Not met this standard
    We checked that people who use this service
    • Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld.

    How this check was done
    We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 18 June 2014, talked with people who use the service and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.
    Our judgement
    People who use the service were not protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had not appropriately reported concerns.
    Reasons for our judgement
    Staff confirmed that the service had policies and procedures they would follow in respect of the protection of vulnerable adults, known as safeguarding. West Sussex County Council (WSCC) is the lead agency in all matters relating to safeguarding. We saw that the service had the most up to date WSCC Multi Agency procedure available to guide staff. This meant that staff knew who to contact should they have a concern. Staff told us they knew how to access this policy and who they should report their concerns to.
    We were told that safeguarding vulnerable adults training was mandatory. We saw some of the training records which confirmed staff attendance at this training. The care workers we spoke to were aware of the various types of abuse and how they may present. They were aware of the whistle blowing policy, and had knowledge of how to report suspected abuse. The care workers we spoke with confirmed they had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults.
    A relative told us that they had raised concerns with the agency, but didn’t feel the concerns had been dealt with. The agency’s operations manager was unable to provide any details of an investigation into the concerns. They confirmed that this had not been reported to the local authority under safeguarding procedures. People were not protected from the risk of abuse and neglect because, despite staff being trained to identify and report concerns, concerns were not always reported. The provider had not responded appropriately to any allegation of abuse.
    Most people we spoke with told us that they had confidence in the staff. They told us they felt safe and that they would tell a member of staff if they had any concerns. Comments regarding the care workers included, “They are very good”, “Very kind”, “I’m very happy with them” and “It’s really excellent”.

    http://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-679471140/inspection-report/1-6794711402014-07-29/07#report-top

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      I bolded up the important parts of this report as otherwise they may have faded into the rest of what is quite a large comment.

Comments are closed.