civilcelebrant.net

Tuesday, November 6, 2007

The nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey as the next Attorney General of the United States, passed the Senate Judiciary Committee today and will move to a vote before the entire United States Senate. Two Democrats joined the nine Republicans to yield an 11-8 vote. Observers believe that Mukasey will easily succeed in the Senate vote.

The nomination of Mukasey by George W. Bush had originally drawn broad support. Nonetheless, Mukasey triggered a political row, during pre-confirmation questioning, when he refused to state that waterboarding amounted to illegal torture. In the end, he was able secure the votes of the two Democrats after assuring them that, if Congress passed legislation that made waterboarding illegal, he would in fact work to enforce such a law.

Patrick Leahy, Senator from Vermont, who opposed Mukasey said: “Some have sought to find comfort in Judge Mukasey’s personal assurance that he would enforce a future, a new law against waterboarding if this Congress were to pass one. Unsaid, of course, is the fact that any such prohibition would have to be enacted over the veto of the president.”

“Now, I wish I could support Judge Mukasey’s nomination,” Senator Leahy further said. “I like Michael Mukasey. We have many things in common in our past careers. I certainly don’t question his intellectual ability or his independence.”

The two Democrats that voted for Mukasey were Senator Chuck Schumer of New York and Senator Dianne Feinstein of California. Schumer has been reported as suggesting Mukasey as Attorney General to White House during the search for a nominee.

Schumer defended his vote, saying: “If six months from now … the same policies continued, the victory in defeating Mukasey would seem hollow. No one questions that Judge Mukasey would do much to remove the stench of politics from the Justice Department. I believe we should give him that chance.”

Feinstein said that her vote for Mukasey was because, otherwise, Bush could have an acting Attorney General, who would not need confirmation, until the end of his term. In explaing this, she said: “I don’t believe a leaderless department is in the best interests of the American people or of the department itself. [Bush] appointed this man because he believes he is mainstream.”

Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts did not agree with Mukasey’s view on waterboarding. “Waterboarding is already illegal under United States law. It’s illegal under the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit outrages upon personal dignity, including cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment,” he said.

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said of the committee vote: “Judge Mukasey has clearly demonstrated that he will be an exceptional attorney general at this critical time.”

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

A report published today by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) finds that, in many cases, England’s home care system breaches the human rights of the elderly it is supposed to serve. The Close to home: older people and human rights in home care report is the result of a twelve-month investigation into care generally provided by local authorities.

Approximately half of those receiving home care, plus friends and family, providing evidence to the inquiry were satisfied with the quality of care provided. However, the report stresses that there are “systemic problems” arising from “a failure to apply a human rights approach to home care provision”. The report asserts that it is generally not the fault of individuals providing care, but serious problems exist as local authorities seem unaware of their obligations under the Human Rights Act and fail to commission, procure, and monitor care accordingly.

The report says articles two, three and eight of the European Convention on Human Rights are frequently being breached. These, respectively, cover an individual’s right to life, protection from inhumane and degrading treatment, and respect for dignity and personal independence. Criticisms include that care is not provided in a common-sense manner, and funding of care for the elderly is at lower levels than for younger people with similar problems and needs.

The EHRC’s investigation highlights a range of recurring complaints and attempts to identify the underlying causes; cost is repeatedly mentioned, with use of the private-sector leading to some local authorities offering a “one size fits all” service leaving many elderly feeling they are “a task to be undertaken” and have “little or no choice” as to help received, or when care workers visit. A failure to invest in care workers is noted, with significant responsibility and the wide range of skills required being rewarded with low pay and status; this, the report states, adversely impacts staff retention and, a high turnover of care workers can put the security of care recipients at-risk.

Within the wider investigation, a commissioned independent social report by The Arndale Centre conducted in-depth interviews with a cross-section of 40 elderly individuals receiving home care. As-stressed in the report, those selected were not on the basis of good, or bad, experiences with their – mainly local authority-provided – care. It highlights a widespread feeling amongst those interviewed that they are treated “like a number”, and that aspects of the care provided lead to, or fail to resolve, feelings of social isolation.

The Manchester-based Arndale Centre report concludes that, “[t]he general picture is of a wider home care system in which older people are noteffectively involved: which they do not understand, and which does not often make the extra effort required to involve them in ways tailored to their state of health and other needs”.

A recurring theme in the responses of those interviewed is the social isolation that their home care is not adequately addressing. One male interviewee in his seventies who previously used a scooter to get about said in his interview, “I haven’t been out of the house now for about four weeks. I daren’t. The last time I went out on the scooter I hit the kerb and it frightened the living daylights out of me.” Another, an 85-year-old woman who lives alone, expressed sadness at her inability to do normal things, “I would love to go to town to do some shopping. I haven’t been to town for about two years… Wander round the town and have a cup of tea… I’d love that.”

The social isolation many elderly experience was summed up neatly by another woman in her eighties in her interview: “When you go now, I will maybe not talk to anybody till tomorrow; maybe the whole of tomorrow nobody to talk [to]… face to face. Nobody will knock on that door, that is it, a life of isolation.”

The EHRC, having commissioned this report in the face of funding changes and reform of the care system, intends to press for legislative changes to ensure those receiving care at home are given the same protections under the Human Rights Act as those in residential care. In the conclusions of their report they offer to work with, and support, local authorities in understanding and delivering care that respects peoples’ rights and dignity; and, recommend better guidance as to the choices available to the elderly, and their families, be made available.