Thread by @DrVivianS

So I had time to reflect on the new guidelines too and here are my thoughts:

The Good:
1. Throwing out the testing requirement for outdoor visits. That was anti-evidence and operated to prohibit visitation. Bravo 👏🏻
2. Allowing indoor access❗️

The Bad:
1. Although essential caregivers are called “essential”, it does not uphold their rights during even 1 declared case in any home (i.e., outbreak).

There are significant reasons WHY EFCs are needed during outbreaks more than ever.

We also know staffing collapses during outbreaks as self isolation forces workers to stay home. It would make MORE sense in these cases to absorb the crucial unpaid care labour EFCs provide and to have the point of contacts with potentially sick staff reduced as much as possible.

This is precisely crucial where untenable pre-🦠 staffing ratios meant 1 staffer was often responsible for up to 30 vulnerable residents. Reduce these interactions and isolate healthy residents with their EFCs and we minimize the risk of transmission. THIS is good IPAC.

What will these indoor visits look like❓Are there limits❓
Is this unfettered access❓
Will EFCs be provided the required ‘surgical masks’ or have to source their own❓If LTC homes have PPE shortages, will this then to limit crucial indoor access OR can EFCs bring their own❓

Will these homes be provided 💰 to assist homes with this process❓

BC committed 160 million to all 680 LTC/RH homes to hire up to 3FTE staff to ensure proper IPAC training and risk screening. EFCs want this done safely too and we know these facilities are already overstretched.

This provides too much discretion to each home to manage this, especially regarding “dealing with non-adherence to home policies”. What if homes have unfair policies❓What if they unfairly ban EFCs who raise concerns as to what they see❓Who will protect them if this happens❓

@fordnation @DrFullertonMPP should have provided clear rules for what non-compliance is AS WELL AS institute an INDEPENDENT rapid appeals process (as @NathanStall and myself and 50 other experts suggested) to address any such conflicts.

Finally, there still does not seem to be a basic appreciation of how important EFCs are to this system. With such ambiguity and unanswered questions (and the assumption this can work w/ no extra funds to already overstretched homes) is naieve at best, designed to fail at worst.

@IacovosMichael @GERONursing @dementiarehab @nilikm @thewaywardrose @SEIUHealthCan @RNAO @JillianHortonMD @jillsmahoney @nlynnbogart @cristina_CP24 @Cinamongrrl @SharleenStewart @kimzarzour @PetroliaIndie @TrudoLemmens