■ It was so sad to read the Beacon story on Friday about frighteningly bad rest home care. Now that I am of “a certain age” I find myself spending time in rest homes, visiting friends, writes Ruth Gerzon

I have my own rest home avoidance strategy but, even with that in place, I realise I might live in one at the end of my life.

Given that, I have begun to consider whether rest homes provide a good quality of life for their residents and how whānau and visitors can advocate when they have concerns before things deteriorate to the extent conveyed in last week’s article.

Some rest homes are excellent and do alleviate loneliness for many residents who were once living alone.

A friend of mine was fiercely independent before entering a rest home. On visiting her I expected to find all sorts of constraints getting in the way of her enjoying a good life.

Yet, she insisted she was very happy there. On my second visit I asked what she found so good.

She replied, “I don’t have to make any decisions.” That made sense, as living alone in a big house requiring upkeep must have been difficult at times.

Not everyone finds the transition so positive, and not all rest homes provide the excellent care our elders deserve.

One way to check this out is to consider whether they meet residents’ rights under the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights. That is a good standard and reminder of what we can expect from any health or disability service.

The Code of Rights is far-reaching. It says we all have the right to respect and to have our cultural needs, beliefs and values taken into account in our care.

We must be treated with dignity, have effective communication and the right to services of a good standard.

I managed an advocacy service at the end of last century when the Code was first issued. Many complaints were about doctors and hospitals but there were occasional ones about pharmacies, rest homes and home care providers. Some medical professionals at the time were not very welcoming of these new rights and bristled when a complaint was laid against them.

I remember two cases where a form of intimidation was used against complainants in residential settings but those was quickly squashed using an additional complaint under Right Two: the right to be free of harassment. In the intervening 25 years there has been considerable improvement in the responsiveness of many health and disability services, although clearly there is still work to be done.

The Code of Rights affirms people’s rights to their culture. There are now many Māori in rest homes in our district, and I hope that a rest home run by iwi is on the horizon. Moving to a rest home often means a loss of choice and familiar settings. Our pakeke should not also have to move to a different cultural context as well.

On the whole I am more impressed by rest homes run by churches or non-profits than by some run for profit where cost cutting may be a priority. The quality of care can also be capricious, as they may be sold to another owner, resulting in a reduction in the number of staff and deterioration in the quality of care.

The standard of care in a residential disability home or rest home is especially crucial as it affects your whole life, sometimes for many years. It is vital for those of us who visit whānau and friends to keep our eyes open to ensure they are supported to have lives of value and dignity. And we have a duty to speak up when things are clearly not right.

I would be interested in hearing from readers who share my concerns. We could invite an advocate from the National Advocacy Service to come to our town to discuss rights and options that might improve the lives of our whānau who are often vulnerable.

My phone number is 027 430 8149 and my email is [email protected]. Do get in touch if you have any concerns.