Abusing the vulnerable

is apparently seen as the price we need to pay in order to have some people living in their own homes or "in the community". 
It is now policy to keep the elderly in their own homes if at all possible. It is certainly where we want to keep the Senior Cat if at all possible even though it is becoming increasingly more demanding. 
The Senior Cat is intellectually alert. He can still make a phone call. He has an "alert" button.  I try not to leave the house for too long these days. If I do need to be out for any length of time I let Middle Cat know and she will check on him. If she is not available then I will tell neighbours that I will be away for several hours and one of them will usually "wander  in" to check.
I went and bought two new flannelette shirts for  him yesterday - because he needs them. (He said he didn't but he has no idea about clothes.) We want him to be as warm as possible in winter.
This morning I know what will happen. He will read a story in the paper and say how "lucky" he is.
It is the story of a severely disabled woman who died in horrific circumstances. She was supposed to be living in her own home in the community. According to the article she was confined to one chair in the living room. She ate there. She slept there. It was also a commode. She died with bed sores and multiple other problems.
At the same time she was supposed to be receiving six hours of care a day from people coming in to the house.
The case is now being "investigated".  One person is likely to be prosecuted. Perhaps someone else will also be prosecuted as a result. More likely it will be put down to a "failure of the system" and people will be reprimanded. There will be "changes" put in place. They may work in the favour of those being cared for - at least for a short while. What is more likely is that there will be more paper work in an attempt to cover up the shortcomings of a system which simply does not work.
You cannot really care for people cheaply. I know what the likely situation was with that woman. Someone would have been supposed to come in and get her out of bed in the morning. They would have been responsible for bathing her, dressing her and giving her breakfast.  Then they would leave her -  probably with the television set on. At lunchtime  the same person or someone else would have been expected  to return and  help her toilet and have something to eat before disappearing  again until the late afternoon.  They would then have been supposed to help her  toilet again, provide her with more to eat, change her  into her night wear and put her to bed. She would remain there, almost certainly alone, until someone came in next morning.  That is the reality of "care in the community". 
Several years back a friend phoned me and asked, "Cat,  can I come and see you? I need to talk to you about a problem. I can meet you in the shopping centre for a coffee."
P.... uses a wheelchair so I asked if his wife was bringing him.
No. R... was doing something for someone else. He'd get an access cab. 
I suggested it might be easier for me to come to him but he told me he had it "sorted" and he and R... both thought I needed to know something. Whatever it was he was anxious about it. I was not worried about his relationship with R...  It is strong and stable and they do a lot to help others. I knew it would not be a general issue. He would talk to me on the phone about anything like that.
We met and he told me that M...., a mutual friend, was being abused by his carers. I was shocked, certain he had to be wrong but he had the evidence. 
M..., who is now deceased, was a very intelligent and articulate man. He was one of those people I believed could take care of himself. He lived alone "in the community" with the help of his "carers".  He was not being physically abused but, unable to get to the bank alone and before the advent of internet banking, he had to rely on carers to do it. They were stealing from him. It would have been all too easy to do, especially with the way the system worked. M... was suspicious but it was not until R... saw one of his carers doing the shopping that she became aware of what was going on. The carer in question was being very clever indeed and buying what M... wanted or needed. Then there would be a second visit and another docket for "just a couple of things". It worked well until R... caught the carer buying something M... could not have used.
P... asked me how they could deal with the situation. 
It was not a simple matter of going to the police. M.... would still need physical help. 
The situation was sorted out in the end but M...'s confidence and trust in others he had thought were caring was shattered. He phoned me.
    "Cat, how could they? What did I ever do to them?"
They did it simply because they could. He did not need to "do" anything. It was simply enough for him to be himself - a very vulnerable person. "Living in the community" makes such abuse all too easy.
People said he was "unlucky" but that is not the case. He was abused because it was all too easy to abuse him. It is still happening. It will go on happening because people like M... are merely being "cared for", not "cared about".  
Middle Cat and I will tell the Senior Cat he is not "lucky". He is simply "loved".