Have Your Say In Health And Social Care: Fill & Download for Free

You are a magnet for sociopaths. You are a young, attractive female who has gone to all the trouble to major in health and social care and make it a point to be approachable. You are wide open with empathy to spare and are passionate about helping others, especially the homeless and dispossessed.You are a hopeless romantic, a trigger in and of itself that will have a sociopath or narcissist running to find you from miles around. You have a hopeful belief in humanity that everyone matters and your body language says, I’m available, what have you got? You aren’t prompted by sexuality but it oozes from your pores.A characteristic that attracts all manner of personality disorders is your dissatisfaction with the mundane. You want some excitement in your life and it isn’t to be found among the normal population you find to be boring. You might have come from a youthful, disruptive environment and may be looking for excitement and the profane.You asked the writer to answer your question about why sociopaths are attracted to you and there it is. Be more selective and watch out for yourself. Don’t be eager to allow everyone into your life because you want to help. Many people have hidden and dark motives and you must watch out for them. Some of those you help should never be allowed to enter your private life.Thank you for allowing this frank analysis. You’re welcome to push back if this writer missed the mark and who took the liberty of reading your profile to paint your picture which, most assuredly is a beautiful portrait. Take good care, and good luck miss.

Why won’t the UK government allow Charlie Gard or Alfie Evans to seek treatment in other countries?Okay - time for a lesson in how the medical and legal systems in the UK work.A child gets ill. Or is born ill.They are admitted to hospital, where they are placed under the care of the doctors. These are people who have A LOT of medical knowledge. Far more than the average woman on the street. Or man on the street. In short - they are experts in their field.They treat the child, until they realise that they cannot provide any more treatment because the child will no longer respond. At which point they tell the parents of the child that the child should be allowed to die with dignity and depart this life with as much care as possible.The parents can challenge this view in the courts.The courts are NOT PART of the UK government. They are ENTIRELY independent.Theresa May (our Prime Minister) has NO SAY in this decision. Jeremy Corbyn (the Leader of The Opposition) has NO SAY in this decision. The Queen (our Head of State) has NO SAY in this decision.They generally do not even voice an opinion, because a) none of them is a doctor, and b) they know full well that having a political opinion raised during an on going court case is entering into very dangerous territory. They would be alienating a boat load of voters and risking getting punished at the ballot boxes in the next election.The courts take advice from medical sources - people who are ALSO medical experts in the field. They do not consult whacked out nutjobs of religious cults, pro-life lunatics or political leaders from other countries because they are courts of law, not courts of public opinion.The court then renders their opinion - and that opinion is what is in the best interest of the child. NOT the parents, NOT the doctors, NOT the protesters, NOT the public but THE CHILD.Because the child is what is most important in all of this. The health and well being of the child. And if allowing the child to die with dignity instead of prolonging its suffering when no treatment is going to work is in the best interests of the child, then that is what should be done.It comes down to three things - the opinion of the doctors, the opinion of the parents and the judgement of the courts. In a perfect world, the first two should be the same, but when it isn’t then the third is the deciding factor.But make no mistake - the courts are entirely independent and are not political and are not the government.If the court decided that seeking treatment in another country was not suitable in either case they had a damn good reason for doing so, and I don’t think it is is my place - or your place, or anyone else’s place - to question them.The fact that they have been made public is a travesty and a nightmare for all involved, and now that both children have passed away will, hopefully, bring some measure of peace to all involved.

I would focus my messaging to them on a few key issues. These would be:NHS and social careHousing costsEconomic competence and provision of future opportunitiesOld people aren’t ogres. They’ve got ordinary policy concerns like everybody else. I pick out the 3 above because the first two are areas where Labour already has an advantage that can be built on, and it doesn’t require a rupture in the Labour coalition. The third one should just be bread and butter for any aspiring government. Governments need to make people’s lives better.I would be honest with voters and say that world class health and social care services are extremely expensive, and that I would be paying for them through increased general taxation on middle incomes (not just the wealthy. There aren’t enough wealthy people). To address claims of generational unfairness, I would:Amend law so that pensioners who hit an income threshold must pay national insuranceCap social care costs, but include housing wealth (to be assessed posthumously) in the assessment of ability to payI would couch the argument for this is the language of solidarity and all being in it together. Yes, that argument would be hard (May had a go at the second prong and it blew up in her face) but part of good politics is being honest with the electorate. I cannot see a solution to social care that doesn’t have significant scope for private contributions. Working age taxpayers will not bear it.The third bullet point is hard because frankly lots of Labour top brass don’t know what they’re doing. You aren’t going to rehabilitate John McDonnell in the eyes of people who don’t find his economic views plausible (and that’s a pretty broad spectrum of people). But you can focus on the “making people’s lives better” part, and tie this to Conservative policy. Point to local services being cut. Sometimes, you can be harder. Corbyn did this after the last set of terror attacks. You can’t do policing and anti-terror on the cheap, and the Tories aren’t willing to spend to keep your family safe. So goes the attack line, anyway.With all that said, I don’t see a viable Labour-under-Corbyn electoral coalition that wins in the over 50s. You just need to peel enough of them away. Hoping for a majority there is a fools’ errand.