Son defends father’s treatment

A man told his elderly father’s social worker he would put him in a wetsuit at night to keep him warm and to stop him taking his nappy off, a court has heard.

Both the man’s son and his partner are on trial in the Christchurch District Court before Judge Mark Callaghan. The couple are appealing the judge’s decision not to give them name suppression to the High Court. The elderly man has since died.

They face two charges of neglect of a vulnerable adult. The first relates to living conditions and the second relates to allegedly failing to fill a prescription for the man’s antibiotics in a timely manner, and then failing to provide him with the correct amount of medication.

The son also faces 32 charges of theft by a person in a special relationship, with police alleging he took about $275,000 from the elderly man’s bank account. He also faces a fraud charge and an assault charge.

The court heard yesterday from the elderly man’s social worker, employed by the Canterbury District Health Board.

The social worker, who has name suppression, told the court about a visit to the couple’s home in June 2018 after the elderly man had been in hospital.

Before the visit, she was told the daughter, who had power of attorney over her father’s welfare, was sending him to a rest home for several days before sending him to another one.

The woman went inside the man’s bedroom and was told by the son there was no door handle on the inside of the room, to stop him getting out, for his own safety.

He said there was a mat in the room that when the elderly man stood on it an alarm would go off on his phone. The alarm would not stop going until he went and checked him.

A large sheet on the outside of the window was to keep the sunlight out so when he got up early it would not unsettle him. He said he was able to control the light and heat from outside the room.

The social worker said the room smelled like faeces. The son showed her videos of the man urinating on the floor, with faeces on the bed. He said they put talcum powder on his body and put him in a wetsuit, so they could ensure he was warm, and could not take the nappies off. ‘‘He said it was a good way to manage him.’’ The camera in the room was there to see what his father was doing and ensure he was safe, he said.

Although she had ‘‘question marks’’ about everything she saw, she thought in the short term it would be best for him to stay there instead of having to move three times as proposed by his daughter.

She then told the son what his sister had planned, which was against practice as the sister was the power of attorney over the elderly man’s welfare. She said she felt ‘‘very uncomfortable’’ when she left, and although she trusted the son ‘‘more than I should have’’, she told the on-duty psychiatrist what happened.

The following morning there was a meeting with her colleagues. She was immediately taken off the case as they believed she had taken the son’s side and was no longer impartial having told the son of the sister’s plans. It was also advised she should contact the CDHB’s corporate lawyer. She had no further involvement with the case.

In cross-examination by the man’s lawyer, Clayton Williams, she said she thought the measures the couple took were ‘‘unusual’’ and not ‘‘best practice’’, but was worried he would die if he was moved as the daughter requested.

In cross-examination by the partner’s lawyer, Nicola Hansen, the social worker said there was an independent file review and an employment process into the elderly man’s care. She was criticised in the review for telling the son of his sister’s wishes to move their father into a rest home.

Hansen asked her if she felt the CDHB was making her a ‘‘scapegoat’’. She agreed.

Judge Callaghan asked the social worker her views on someone being locked in a room for up to 16 hours at a time. She said it was ‘‘totally unacceptable’’.

The elderly man and his wife were referred to the social worker in December 2017 as it was felt their health was ‘‘compromised’’ due to a conflict between their children.

During her first home visit, the man’s wife told her she found it a ‘‘very difficult situation’’. She felt dependent on her son, because he said he would leave if the parents allowed their daughter to come back to the house, and he would not look after them any more.

She also told the social worker her son had offered to do EQC repairs and wanted about $25,000 a year for being the project manager.

On May 4, 2018, the social worker put an entry into her notes that she did not trust the man’s son with the finances. ‘‘I put on the record that there might be emotional and financial abuse from the son’’.

After the elderly man’s wife died, the daughter wanted her father to go to a rest home as it also meant she could see him as often as she wanted. However, the son wanted to keep him in the house in his ‘‘own environment’’.

A new arrangement was agreed, and the son took his father to see his daughter once a fortnight.

Around the same time, the daughter raised concerns about ‘‘neglect’’ from her brother towards their father. The social worker said she would look into it but none of the agencies reported concerns.

In the months that followed, the son sent the social worker photos of him and his father going away on trips and other outings. The social worker said she then started to ‘‘warm’’ to the son.

Earlier yesterday during crossexamination of Detective Brent Menzies, Hansen said the 18 hours of footage police had analysed was a ‘‘tiny snapshot’’.

She said the conditions of the room had been ‘‘muddled’’. She said footage showed the man’s curtains open, another clip showed the man turning the light on.

Hansen asked Menzies if he would accept police had a ‘‘wilful blindness’’ in describing the room. He said no.

Police’s claim about natural light related to the main window in the bedroom, he said. It was earlier revealed while police initially said the heater was off when officers searched the home, they had not actually checked it.

‘‘Seems like there’s been a lot of assumptions in this case,’’ Hansen said to Menzies.

In re-examination by police prosecutor Penny Brown, Menzies said there was a ‘‘noticeable change’’ in conditions in the room. The couple’s behaviour towards the man was ‘‘varied throughout’’. At times they were treating him well and putting him to bed. However, there were also times they were ‘‘not so nice’’.

The trial continues today.

He said they put talcum powder on his body and put him in a wetsuit, so they could ensure he was warm, and could not take the nappies off.