Challenging the norm!

Discuss all things health and safety.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
kngc
Jnr Member
Jnr Member
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:29 pm
Industry Sector: Health & Social Care
Location: East Sussex

Challenging the norm!

Post by kngc » Mon Sep 24, 2018 3:05 pm

Right, I want to get opinions on this scenario from a legal perspective (as people understand it), from a moral perspective and from a personal feeling on the subject perspective!

Scenario:
A smoker is at risk from fire, burns etc. due to physical inability to hold the cigarette or wears emollient creams affecting their 'recreational' activity.
The smoker is in a care home but is not permitted to smoke within the property, only outside.
In order to ensure the safety of the smoker a smoking bib needs to be provided and in extreme cases a member of staff to monitor the smoker or even a portable misting system due to the level of risk of fire.

The question is, who pays for the safety equipment (assuming that the smoker has the financial means)? Is it the care home or the smoker and why?

Sorry but this jumped in my head a while back and I want to know others thoughts on this as it is similar for other activities that people chose to partake in, even contrary to advice given by carers!

TIA K
Legislation should not drive Health & Safety, we should!
If common sense was common, I would be out of a job!

Health & Safety begins between the ears!

User avatar
Waterbaby
HSfB Moderator
HSfB Moderator
Posts: 3260
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 10:53 am
Industry Sector: Medical
Location: Ireland

Re: Challenging the norm!

Post by Waterbaby » Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:30 am

Bump ./thumbsup..

WB
"It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change"
Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

LittleNell83
Student
Student
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:33 am

Re: Challenging the norm!

Post by LittleNell83 » Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:14 pm

I believe that it would be up to the care home, as they hold the duty of care to the resident, but also to other residents. This is backed up by

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/f ... a-10368861
https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey ... r-13583473
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/man-die ... e-1.547815

Nell

User avatar
kngc
Jnr Member
Jnr Member
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:29 pm
Industry Sector: Health & Social Care
Location: East Sussex

Re: Challenging the norm!

Post by kngc » Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:08 am

The duty of care in not disputed but the question is more around the cost of the control measures! Does the resident bear the cost or the organisation.

To clarify, our organisation pays for these but it does beg the question around recreation and alike when it comes to paying for protection. If a resident chose to cycle, they would be required to purchase their own protective equipment as a general rule, why is smoking any different? or better still should it be / is it any different?

Just seeking peoples opinions!!

Thx

K
Legislation should not drive Health & Safety, we should!
If common sense was common, I would be out of a job!

Health & Safety begins between the ears!

User avatar
witsd
Anorak Extraordinaire
Anorak Extraordinaire
Posts: 623
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:37 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: Challenging the norm!

Post by witsd » Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:58 am

It's different because of the threat to other residents and the property. If your cyclist fell off their bike and caved their head in, no-one else would be affected, and unless they went through a window, neither would the building!

Ultimately, I would imagine that it comes down to the tenancy agreement. If it's not specified (which it probably won't be), then I suspect that there would be no means of forcing the tenant to pay, and the only other option would be to look at eviction, which would probably be a long, arduous and unpleasant process.

Probably simpler (and ultimately cheaper) to pay for it themselves.
We often think that when we have completed our study of one we know all about two, because 'two' is 'one and one.' We forget that we still have to make a study of 'and.'


User avatar
kngc
Jnr Member
Jnr Member
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:29 pm
Industry Sector: Health & Social Care
Location: East Sussex

Re: Challenging the norm!

Post by kngc » Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:53 pm

Thanks both .... still an interesting one from my view but all in all I guess we will never know unless it was challenged following a conviction.

Looks like we will continue to foot the bill then :lol:
Legislation should not drive Health & Safety, we should!
If common sense was common, I would be out of a job!

Health & Safety begins between the ears!

Post Reply

 

Follow us on Twitter Find us on Facebook Find us on on LinkedIn

Terms of Use Privacy Policy