:
I call this meeting to order.
Welcome to meeting number 43 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.
Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. The webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, February 2, 2021, the committee will resume its study of the impact of COVID-19 on seniors.
I would like to welcome our witnesses to begin our discussion. Each will have five minutes of opening remarks, followed by questions.
We have with us today Mary Oko, the chair of the Family Council of Copernicus Lodge, and from the Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse we have Kathy Majowski, board chair and registered nurse.
For the benefit of our witnesses, I'd like to make a couple of additional comments.
Interpretation is available in this video conference. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of either “floor”, “English” or “French”. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you're not speaking, your mike should be on mute.
You may notice that in each round of questions, when the MPs start to get close to the end of their turn, I'll hold up one finger to indicate one minute left. Don't panic. You'll have a chance to finish your thought. A minute is actually quite a long time.
With that, we're going to start with Ms. Oko for five minutes.
Welcome to the committee. You have the floor.
Distinguished members of HUMA, thank you for allowing me to participate in the valuable work that this committee has been tasked to undertake.
As you know, I'm Mary Oko. I'm appearing before you today as a family member whose mom is currently at Copernicus Lodge, a long-term care home located in Toronto, Ontario. I'm also the chair of the Family Council, representing the families who have loved ones living in the home. My mom, Wanda Oko, is 95 years old, and has advanced dementia. I come before you to share how my mom and I were impacted by COVID and how I think we can make things better for our seniors moving forward.
I'll start by giving you some background.
During wave 1, my mom's home was fortunate not to have any COVID outbreaks.
During wave 2, my mom's home was hit pretty hard. Twenty-two residents died of COVID, and 100 of 200 residents and 85 of 300 staff were infected. Many residents are still suffering. Their health has declined; many who were once walking and independent now need walkers or wheelchairs or are bedridden. My mom is one such casualty. Before the lockdowns, she was walking; now she is bedridden, and during the lockdown she developed a stage 4 bedsore on her tailbone the size of a golf ball that will likely never heal. She didn't get COVID; however, she suffered due to the lockdown and other restrictions implemented under the guise of keeping residents safe.
Today I will share three concerns that have deeply affected me and my mom.
The first one is insufficient staff support for my mom. My mom has lived in long-term care for nine years. Because of poor supports provided, I felt compelled to hire, at my own expense, a care assistant who helped her with mental stimulation, exercise, feeding, and some outdoor excursions. In addition, I visited her twice per week to help with these and other activities, such as dressing and hygiene. Without this added support, my mom would not have continued walking or maintained mental engagement.
When COVID hit, my mom's care assistant and I were locked out of the home. When I was allowed back into the home in September 2020, my mom had declined because our extra care had not been available. She had stopped talking and she was less engaged. During the wave 2 lockdown, she received no access to exercise and was not able to leave her room. My mom is now bedridden and needs the assistance of a lift to move her from bed to wheelchair.
Assistance with feeding has always been an area where staff shortages are most obvious. Prior to COVID, my care assistant and I helped with my mom's feeding. During the wave 2 lockout, staff shortages and a lack of family support resulted in my mom eating poorly and a decline in her overall well-being.
As my second point, my role as a caregiver for my mom was not considered. Given there is a lack of staff to provide the level of care tailored for each resident, the staff always welcomed my help when I came to see my mom. They also valued that I could quickly identify issues that needed the attention of staff, or in some cases needed to be escalated to the doctor.
When COVID hit, I, like many families across Canada, was shut out. I was reduced to video meetings. At these meetings, my mom didn't acknowledge my presence, as she is better when I'm holding her hand and talking to her.
During wave 2, when families were once again locked out in the midst of our outbreak, as I mentioned earlier, my mom developed a serious bedsore. In pre-COVID lockdowns and restrictions, I could have had access to my mom and worked with the staff in addressing any issues she had. Families were not allowed to help when the home badly needed our support.
Lastly, my mom and I, as her power of attorney, were not properly consulted in decisions that impact my mom. We consider Copernicus my mom's home and not just an institution. Since my mom has advanced dementia, I have always been involved in the discussions and decisions relating to the level of care provided to her. COVID changed this situation. Especially, during wave 2 my mom and I as her power of attorney were not included in some of the decisions that were being made that impacted her level of care.
As an example, on December 14, two residents tested positive for COVID on my mom's floor, and then nine, again mostly on my mom's floor. This led to a decision to confine over 200 residents to their rooms 24-7, many in areas where no active cases existed. This decision was made based on meetings held between Toronto Public Health, the Ministry of Long-Term Care, Unity Health—which is the hospital that's partnered with our home—and the Copernicus management team. Residents and families of residents being impacted by such decisions were not given a voice at these meetings.
Any other patient in our health care system is given the benefit of consultation in decisions that impact their health. During COVID, as it relates to COVID, no such consideration is given to seniors living in long-term care or to their power of attorney. Why is this considered acceptable?
How do we fix this? Here are my four suggestions.
First is national standards for long-term care. Comparing what was happening in my mom's home with other long-term care homes in Toronto or in other provinces, I note there is a lack of consistency in how our seniors are cared for in many areas, including staffing levels, COVID testing, and IPAC controls.
No senior should ever feel that they are discriminated against based on the city or town they live in, the province or territory or the type of home they choose to live in. We are all Canadians, and our seniors should be treated fairly and equitably from coast to coast to coast.
Second, never lock out families. Families serve an integral role in the level of care provided to our seniors. We know our loved ones, and we can and do work with the homes to provide the quality of care our loved ones need. Until adequate staffing levels are addressed and funded, it is essential that families not be denied the right to improve the quality of care and indeed the quality of palliative care for our loved ones who live in long-term care. My mom and our seniors will always need their family for love and support.
Third, raise the profile of family council. During COVID, the Family Council at Copernicus Lodge was a strong voice speaking for their residents. The Family Council pushed for the resumption of regular bathing and showering, demanded increases in mental stimulation and activities and so much more, but family council members are unpaid volunteers, and it is a real challenge to attract and retain members, especially when we are not listened to by well-paid management and health care agencies.
Lastly, a resident voice at the table is needed. In any discussions that impact the health and well-being of the residents, their voice and/or the voice of the power of attorney who represents the resident needs to be included.
I beg you to never silence my mom's voice.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to Ms. Oko for sharing her experiences.
Good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to acknowledge that I'm speaking to you from Treaty No. 1 territory, the traditional territory of the Anishinabe, Inninewak, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene peoples, and from the heart of the Métis nation.
The Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse is a national non-profit organization made up of individuals and organizations that care about older adults and the prevention of harm in later life.
Elder abuse has long been nicknamed “the silent pandemic”. It was rampant in our communities long before COVID. Like gender-based violence, it has flared under COVID and emerged as a shadow pandemic in 2020.
We all experienced the stress and impact of the pandemic. What helped many of us rise to the challenge every day was a supportive family or social group. For many older Canadians, these crucial bonds were obliterated by the pandemic. The necessity to stay home and socially distance whittled away opportunities for social interactions and access to core services.
During the first few months of the pandemic, we ran a survey to evaluate the immediate impact of COVID-19 on our members. We asked elder abuse prevention folks and senior service providers what they were experiencing and observing. When asked about the impact on the seniors they served, respondents listed “increase in elder abuse and domestic violence” as the number one issue, followed closely by “decreased access to services and supports” and “increase in social isolation”.
Social isolation is a serious public health risk, with life-threatening consequences. It can be as damaging to health as smoking 15 cigarettes a day. It incurs negative health behaviours and decreased mental health, and it's also a risk factor for elder abuse, neglect and self-neglect. An isolated older adult may lack access to necessities, be more vulnerable to scammers and be trapped at home with their abuser, with no access to supports.
Almost 65% of our survey respondents reported the impact of COVID-19 on their programs and operations as “high”, with 83% reporting a disruption of services to clients and 46% reporting an increased demand for services. This was the perfect storm: increasingly isolated older adults in greater need of support services that were highly disrupted by the pandemic. Social distancing became a double-edged sword.
We all know what followed. Older adults living at home reported higher rates of isolation and mental health struggles. The Seniors Safety Line in Ontario reported a 250% increase in calls about elder abuse, and meanwhile, in some long-term care homes, residents endured appalling abuse and neglect.
The past year was a stress test that exposed the weaknesses in our system. Older Canadians have borne the brunt of this pandemic through deaths, isolation and decreased safety and quality of life, and they're not willing to be sacrificed and ignored anymore.
Around 90% of older Canadians live at home, and most of us hope to age in place. For this to happen safely, we need to be addressing abuse and neglect in our communities.
Our recommendations include improved training and education programs across sectors by providing adequate care for older adults in their homes and communities. We need to be focused not only on making sure that there are enough human resources to complete the assigned tasks; but older adults should also have a network of supports and community services that work well together and are trained and educated in recognizing and preventing ageism and elder abuse and are familiar with the local, regional and national resources available. The training needs to be trauma- and violence-informed, with an equity orientation to act as a bridge across sectors and mandates for a more inclusive and collaborative approach to prevention and response.
We also recommend encouraging the development of age-friendly communities and ensuring that this effort has an elder abuse prevention lens.
We know that personal support workers, also known as health care aides, have the most consistent and frequent contact with older adults receiving support in their homes and have inconsistent levels of education, training and oversight. Regulation of this role would increase protection for the public by stipulating professional responsibilities and would implement at least minimum standards for entry to the practice, as well as put processes in place for responding to complaints. Regulation would also increase safety by verifying qualifications and competencies for safe practice via a public registry and by providing information on complaints, similar to other regulatory bodies.
A key element would be minimum educational requirements and standardization of educational programs, including for trauma-informed care; dementia care; and elder abuse awareness, prevention and response, including information about the reporting process if there is suspicion of elder abuse. This would also foster safety and stability for these professionals, who are often women from racialized communities who are themselves more vulnerable.
We recommend providing sustained and appropriate funding for the elder abuse and neglect response sector on a par with domestic violence funding. In particular, we recommend providing dedicated support and funding to the CNPEA to ensure that there is a national organization dedicated to elder abuse prevention and awareness that will foster the exchange of reliable information among stakeholders and service providers across Canada.
Finally, we would recommend establishing a federal office of seniors advocate. It should provide systemic oversight and leadership on issues related to the current needs of Canadian seniors, as well as provide insight, analysis and direction to the government on the future needs of our aging population. Elder abuse and neglect awareness and response should be a key and ongoing mandate of this office.
Thank you.
:
Thank you so much, Chair.
I would like to thank both of our witnesses for their contributions to our study today as we look to better support Canada's seniors as we navigate beyond this pandemic.
We know that the COVID-19 pandemic has underscored and exacerbated shortcomings in our long-term care homes. Unfortunately, it is our seniors who have paid the highest price for these shortcomings. Regardless of where they live, every senior has the right to age in dignity. Every level of government has a responsibility to take action.
Ms. Mary Oko, I want to thank you for your vulnerability and your willingness to advocate on behalf of your mother and, ultimately, all seniors.
I don't want to see an “Ottawa knows best” approach when it comes to national standards. Ms. Oko, I'm wondering how important you would think or believe it would be to not only have the provinces and territories at the table when it comes to discussion of national standards, but also to have frontline workers, seniors advocates and caregiving organizations.
:
Thank you very much for the question.
Reporting is a very tricky conversation. We do want to keep in mind that, first of all, 91% of our older adults live in the community, so they are being supported in the community. In the abuse that they experience, in many cases we know that the perpetrators are people who are close to them, whether it be a neighbour, a friend, a family member who's providing some sort of caregiving role, or is even [Technical difficulty—Editor] the person, so reporting is a very delicate conversation. I would say it's on par with domestic violence reporting.
Sometimes when health workers, social services workers or community services workers take on the responsibility of mandatory reporting, we're actually going against what the older adult would want. There are many reasons that they don't want to report. It may be that they don't want their family member to get in trouble, to experience legal ramifications for the behaviour. Sometimes it's because they do feel some guilt. We look at it as a bit of a harm reduction scenario where putting additional supports into place can take off some of the strain or reduce their need to depend on the abuser. In many cases, that can improve the situation.
It is important to consider [Technical difficulty—Editor] talk about reporting. Older adults are just as capable as younger adults to decide what's best for their lives, and they may have different ideas of what kind of behaviour is acceptable. We need to meet them where they're at and understand that we might have really wonderful ideas on how we can significantly improve the situation for them, but if it's not something that the person wants, then it's really going to contradict quality of life and happiness, safety and security. Elder abuse prevention is a very convoluted and nuanced conversation, particularly when we're talking about people who are living in the community.
For long-term care, for example, the conversation is much different. It is a much more structured environment. There definitely are ways that the reporting can be made a little bit more standardized. It's different across the country, unfortunately. Provinces and territories all have different models, so families and staff should be aware what resources are available for their facility, but in the community it's a much more complicated conversation.
I thank the witnesses.
The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities is conducting this study on the realities experienced by seniors during the worst of the pandemic. However, some of the issues were already there, long before we began our work. We can discuss the living conditions of our seniors in a comprehensive way, from a financial, social or health perspective.
Ms. Oko, unfortunately, many seniors in residences are experiencing a situation like yours and your mother's. The same thing happened in some Quebec facilities. I would not lump all public seniors' care facilities together, because we also saw some good examples and good practices during the pandemic. However, the pandemic snuck up on us, and every province took steps to deal with it, to the best of their abilities. At times, it was painful for seniors, their loved ones and their families.
They had to take action to protect seniors, including preventing their loved ones from visiting them, and you're absolutely right that isolation had a variety of effects. Thank you for your testimony, even though it was difficult. I feel it reflects the glaring testimonies of people across Canada, depending on the network.
On the other hand, I have to say with all due respect that I'm skeptical of one solution that you seem to be putting forward, which is national standards that would come from Ottawa to regulate what's done in each province. I could tell you about the countless standards that we have in Quebec for our institutions and the organization of health care. These are choices we have made, particularly with respect to the number of attendants per patient. I don't believe that can be governed by a national policy that would apply uniformly. I have a very hard time believing that it will fix the situation.
However, you mentioned something that we believe is important. You talked about underfunding with respect to personnel. So it's the underfunding [Technical difficulty] of the provinces, which have the skills to organize health care, because it's a provincial jurisdiction. So Ottawa has to contribute. The Ontario and Quebec governments had one request for the federal government: significantly increase health transfers so that the federal share of funding for expenditures meets the needs of the provinces so they can deliver services.
How do you feel about the position of the Ontario and Quebec governments and others? Does Ottawa need to make a bigger contribution?
:
When I made the suggestion about national standards for long-term care, my point was not that Ottawa would be dictating the quality of standards that would be imposed for each of the provinces. What I feel is that, yes, the federal government has an obligation to provide funding to each of the provinces, but they should also be working with each of the provinces, and why not use the best of what has worked in each of the provinces for the benefit of all Canadians who are living across Canada?
To your point, it is very different. As an example, right now I can go to see my mom, but I need to take a PCR test weekly, and I've had to do this since August. I'm fully vaccinated; my mom is fully vaccinated. In addition to the PCR test, I also have to do a rapid test, and then, once I'm in the home, I have to wear a surgical mask and a face shield. In Quebec, based on friends I've spoken to, there is no need to do a PCR test and there's no need to do a rapid test. All they have to do is wear full PPE. In B.C., they don't have to do a rapid test or a PCR test, and the only thing they have to wear is a surgical mask. Why is there a difference?
I'm at a point where, throughout this pandemic, if I could, I would have moved my mom from province to province depending on what was going on and working best for those seniors at that time. Why should I be in that situation? Why should families be put in that situation? We care, we love our loved one, we want them to have the best quality of care, and I feel that the provinces cannot expect to have a blank cheque providing funding to them without any kind of strings attached.
Each of you represent our various provinces, and I feel that each of you working as leaders can work with our provinces to try to find a solution that will be equitable and fair for all of our seniors across the country.
:
Thank you so much, Chair.
I'd like to start out by commending Madame Oko for her strength and sharing the story about caring about her parents. I also looked after my parents when they were both sick many years ago and I know the toll it takes in trying to make sure that your parents have care that allows them to live in dignity. Thank you so much for sharing your story.
Madame Majowski, thank you as well for your tremendous knowledge and work. My first question is to you.
For years, advocates in the disability community, including seniors, have advocated for better supports for disabled persons so that they can live with dignity. Unfortunately, in my opinion, I don't think the rights of disabled persons were a priority for this government or previous governments before the pandemic or during the pandemic.
Today, the day before the House rises and we're adjourning for summer—we have a potential election in the fall—finally this government introduced legislation to create a Canada disability benefit, known as Bill , something that I hope sees the light of day, but I'm not very hopeful. To me, this piece of legislation should have been a top priority if we look at some of the statistics that we've witnessed during the pandemic.
I'm wondering if you can speak about how both persons with disabilities and disabled seniors in particular have been disproportionately impacted during the pandemic.
I'm going to speak a little bit from my day job role.
I am a registered nurse and I work in the core area of Winnipeg. We see on a daily basis how underserved our older adults are. Those are my clients. Those are the people I support. We know that people fare better in our system with supports from family, friends and others advocating for them, but there's a large swath of individuals, both those who are disabled and older adults, who don't have those folks advocating for them, and they're really left to their own devices, so they're missing out on core services and finances and sometimes funding being available to them because they're not able to navigate the system and they don't have the community supports they need to be able to do that.
That's where our program actually comes in and tries to fill in the gaps, but it's not enough and it hasn't been enough for years. For people with disabilities who also live in poverty or for people with disabilities who are over 55 or 65, the communities are not set up to support them. There are actually more barriers than supports in place. They're regularly hearing “no”. A lifetime of hearing “no” or “you don't qualify” or “you're not eligible” gets to be very disheartening.
In the last year, with the pandemic, many of the services that had been in place consistently for these folks disappeared. Now we have individuals who are still living in poverty, who still have disabilities, who are still older adults at higher risk if they do contract COVID, but they are without access to technology and without access to phones. Some of the services are available only with technology. Our province has a wonderful counselling program that it launched and funded really early on in the pandemic, having recognized that mental health concerns are very real concerns. Many of our clients have no ability to access it. Either they don't have the skills to use technology or they don't have the funding to do it. We see that those gaps are significant, and they've widened with the decrease in services.
Thank you, witnesses, for your testimony. I found it very heartfelt, and we could tell that pursuing better and dignified care that is compassionate and considerate for those in long-term care is very personal to you and a passion of yours.
Obviously this year we've seen that there is an incredible need. It really feels as though it's lifted the veil for Canadians to see how [Technical difficulty—Editor] with home care, as you, Ms. Majowski, had touched on, as had Ms. Oko with regard to long-term care.
I have a question for each of you.
First, Ms. Oko, in some of the answers to other questions today you talked about isolation and the impact on your mother's health. We heard something similar in previous testimony as well. One witness told us that there is a measurable decline in physical and mental ability for seniors in long-term care after prolonged isolation.
Also, I really appreciate how you laid out your remarks. There were the three problems and the four solutions. That was excellent. For the purposes of my question, could you outline a little bit further how you saw grave impacts from that isolation and potential solutions to that?
:
Thank you for sharing that. I certainly took quite a few notes on your remarks and I will further reflect on the recommendations. I thought you made some very strong ones.
I'm sorry that you're dealing with this in your family. I can appreciate the polka music; my grandparents greatly liked polka music as well. Again, thank you for what you're doing for your mom. I wish everyone had advocates like you are for your mother.
Ms. Majowski, you touched on home care. I want to ask for your perspective on something I read recently by a man named André Picard, who has written extensively about long-term care. He is proposing that the Dutch model may be a solution to some of the issues that we're facing with home care.
Recently my grandfather passed away. We tried really hard to keep him at home, as was his request, so he wasn't isolated at a hospital or in long-term care. However, we saw so many different home care workers who would come in for 50 minutes and often engage in very intimate activity with cleaning or changing. It was very difficult for an individual who thus far, until this point, had been completely autonomous. I just think that the Dutch model, whereby they come in, sit down, have coffee with the resident, spend a couple of hours there, and get to know the community and the other residents, was an interesting idea. Seeing it first-hand, I would love your perspective on that.
:
It's definitely an ageism issue, and I would add that it's a gender issue, because the majority of residents who are in long-term care are women and the majority of health care providers who work in a long-term care system are predominantly women, and also racialized women or newcomers.
In terms of ageism, just [Technical difficulty—Editor] raising or escalating issues. Unfortunately, I had many discussions with the Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care and the media and many people, and it just felt like people just didn't care. I would be giving them detailed accounts of what was going on in the homes. It always felt that my mom and the residents were being punished because they were living too long.
Even after the outbreak, with her having the bedsore, in some of the discussions I had I would hear that my mom was frail, that she has advanced dementia, that this was to be expected. Yes, it's to be expected that she has advanced dementia and that she will decline, but not to have a stage 4 bedsore and not to have declined in five months' time.
These are the kinds of conversations that I've had with many families within my home and in other homes as well: The resident has declined to the point where now they're not eating well and they're struggling and they need to be assisted with eating. The conversation is always, “Well, they're at that age,” or “It's dementia.” There's always some kind of an excuse. What I feel is that each person should be treated with dignity and have a quality of life and a quality of death. Each day should be a day of joy until that point when they are no longer living. We shouldn't be discriminating based on their age.
I've had a conversation with a doctor who said that in some cases, age discrimination goes to somebody in their sixties. I'm sorry, but I feel that somebody in their sixties is still a young person with a lot of value.
Who gets to decide? I think no one should be making that decision or making a judgment in terms of the quality of care that the person is getting.
:
Thank you very much, Ms. Oko. Thank you, Ms. Gazan.
That concludes the questions for this panel of witnesses.
Ms. Oko, your testimony touched and moved every one of us. I completely agree with Ms. Dancho that we should all be so fortunate to have an advocate like you. Your telling of your deeply personal story of your mom certainly has impacted us and has undoubtedly helped many other families in a similar situation.
Ms. Majowski, you're probably aware that another parliamentary committee has recently completed a study with respect to elder abuse. It is something that has the attention of parliamentarians, due in no small part to your advocacy and that of others in that sphere.
Thank you for the work that you're doing. Please know that it's making a difference. We very much appreciate your being with us today.
Colleagues, we're going to suspend while we bid adieu to these witnesses and do a sound check for the next witnesses to come.
We'll suspend for a couple of minutes.
:
I call the meeting back to order.
Today the committee is meeting on its study on the impact of COVID-19 on seniors.
I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of witnesses.
When you are ready to speak, you can click on the microphone icon to activate your microphone. Interpretation is available in this video conference. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of either “floor”, “English” or “French”.
[Translation]
Please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, your mic should be on mute.
[English]
I would like now to welcome our witnesses to continue our discussion, with five minutes of opening remarks followed by questions.
We have with us today, from the Canadian Men's Shed Association, Doug Mackie, chair.
[Translation]
We also have Violaine Guerin, coordinator of the Conseil régional de développement social des Laurentides.
[English]
We will start with Mr. Mackie for five minutes. I'm really looking forward to this.
Mr. Mackie, you have the floor.
:
Do I have to start off with a joke, or is that okay?
Thank you for the opportunity to be a witness today.
Men's Sheds is a volunteer-based organization that currently has 39 sheds, or groups of men, in Canada. It's part of a worldwide movement of over 2,200 sheds located in Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., Ireland, the U.S.A., Kenya, Iceland and other countries, as well as Canada. Men's Sheds opened in North America in 2010 here in Winnipeg.
Men's Sheds is a unique volunteer grassroots organization run by men for men. The activities and projects are determined by the men themselves within their sheds, not from a central office. The main goal of a men's shed is to offer a safe, convenient place for men to gather, socialize, enjoy camaraderie and participate in individual projects or group projects while working shoulder to shoulder.
When a man retires, he loses structure in his life, may leave his most important social contacts at work and loses meaning in his life. Senior centres do not fill the gap. The membership of most senior centres is made up of 80% women and 20% men. Men can be hesitant to seek help. There are no other programs in Canada just for men and run by men.
Men's sheds combat loneliness, isolation, anxiety and depression in men. The Men's Sheds Association is not a self-help group. The Canadian Men's Sheds Association receives no federal funding, or even provincial funding, unless it's on a sporadic basis. This is very much unlike the Men's Sheds programs in the U.K., Ireland and Australia. The benefit of a men's shed is the improved emotional well-being or mental health of the men involved, thus improving the lives of the men, their families and the communities in which they live.
This is respectfully submitted.
Thank you.
The mission of the Conseil régional de développement social des Laurentides is to increase and support the capacity for community action in social development in the Laurentides region. Its members come from different sectors working with vulnerable people, including seniors.
The measures adopted during the pandemic have had a profound impact on the mental health of seniors, and we have seen an increase in the incidence of psychological disorders, including depression, anxiety, sleep disorders and post-traumatic stress.
The physical and psychological effects on older adults will likely continue after the pandemic and beyond the time when physical distancing measures remain in place. To minimize the negative impacts, it is appropriate to ensure that visiting policies in residential facilities, hospitals and hospices balance the need to protect others with the need of the residents or patients to see family and to socialize.
It would also be appropriate to study and review how and when we involve older adults across the country, to have them participate more in making decisions and developing policies that affect them. Social participation helps to protect the health of older adults. Those who participate have better cognitive abilities. While physical distancing measures are intended to protect the health of vulnerable people, the same measures also lead to social isolation, which in turn leads to the deterioration of mental health, physical health and cognitive abilities.
Elderly people who have felt they were isolated during the pandemic have tended to engage in behaviours that are detrimental to their health. In addition, the disruption of many community services and home visits due to the pandemic has had a significant impact on the health of older adults who rely on the services.
The pandemic has also given rise to more ageist messages and discrimination against older adults. These messages reaffirm a preconceived perception that older adults are vulnerable people whose lives are less valuable than those of younger people. [Technical difficulty], perceiving older adults as a homogenous group undermines their social identity, which makes them more susceptible to discrimination and exclusion, and fails to adequately portray their contribution to society or their resilience in the face of crisis. These messages may lead to a number of social consequences, such as discrimination against older workers and retirees looking to return to the workforce after the pandemic.
Internalizing ageist messages could also have significant consequences on older adults, such as a loss of self-esteem and a loss of a sense of purpose in society.
It is therefore important to use non-stigmatizing language to describe older people, to avoid stereotypes, and to avoid labelling all older people as frail and vulnerable. We should also refrain from referring to older people in words that have negative connotations and that convey prejudice. Intergenerational exchanges should be encouraged to increase solidarity between the generations and to fight prejudice. Awareness campaigns should also be developed to combat ageism.
Fraud and abuse in all their forms have increased during the pandemic. Seniors have been targeted at a time when they are more vulnerable and anxious. They need the right tools to be as informed as possible about the various scams and frauds to which they could fall victim. It is therefore appropriate to strengthen prevention and protection services for seniors against all forms of violence, abuse and fraud. Seniors should also be informed, educated, made aware and equipped so that they know that those problems exist.
The pandemic has come with its own set of challenges and has forced us to adapt very quickly to new technologies. However, the shift to virtual platforms socially excludes the elderly and places them at a lower level. Many older adults share a similar level of digital literacy, and few have been attending virtual gatherings during the pandemic. We are seeing deep inequalities in this group's social participation virtually, because it further excludes low-income seniors with lower levels of education, as well as those with underlying medical conditions.
The situation has widened the digital divide, especially for seniors living in rural areas where Internet access is still lacking, and for the most vulnerable seniors who cannot afford to buy the technology.
Seniors and their caregivers must therefore be helped to have access to digital communication tools or other ways of keeping in touch with family and social networks when actual travel is limited. We should also make it possible for older adults to participate in lifelong learning programs and improve their access to information and communication technologies.
This is not new: seniors want to remain in their homes as long as possible. Given what we have experienced during the pandemic, with many deaths in various types of housing for seniors, seniors are even more resolved to remain in their private homes. Governments will have to look at concrete solutions to help seniors stay in their homes. Home-based services will need to be more readily available, so that they can remain in those homes under the best possible conditions.
The shortage of affordable, adaptable and accessible housing is also a growing problem. This sometimes leads seniors to relocate and move closer to larger urban centres so they have access to housing that is more affordable and closer to amenities. It would therefore be advisable to increase mobile services to ensure access to more isolated seniors, or those with limited mobility, so their needs can be assessed and support provided.
It would also be advisable to ensure that appropriate care services are always available for older adults. These include mental health services and palliative and geriatric care. They also include support for unpaid caregivers who provide care in the home and community, as well as paid social workers who provide home care and institutional care.
We also need to ensure that community services and assistance to older adults, including social and legal services, are maintained despite physical distancing restrictions.
We must recognize the critical role of family caregivers and enable them to play that role with the necessary tools.
We suggest that programs be put in place to foster and support home care.
In addition, more affordable and accessible community housing for seniors is needed so that they can continue to live in a safe environment.
According to the market basket measure, in the Laurentides region, 6.3% of seniors aged 65 and over fall below the low income threshold, meaning that 5,930 individuals are in precarious situations. It's important that we gain expertise and be more vigilant with respect to the living and employment conditions of people aged 55 and over by ensuring that basic needs are covered and that they do not fall into the poverty level after they retire.
We need to make it a priority to ensure the right to a basic quality of life for everyone, in retirement as in an entire lifespan.
The social participation of seniors is no longer in question. The aging population certainly brings its own set of challenges—
:
Yes, Marty, thanks very much.
Men communicate differently from women and men communicate differently when they are virtually alone instead of within a group of mixed people. Quite often, a man starts his communication with his arms across his chest, protecting himself.
What Men's Sheds offers is an open area where people can come and get to learn and to know each other. Why would they be doing this?
Well, these are comfort birds, by the way, and they're given to palliative care patients. They fit beautifully in your hand. One of our men made 150 of them and donated them to a person working with people in palliative care.
If you give a man something to do, whether it's a bigger project or a small project, he'll sit there and do his work and start looking at the man beside him or on the other side and watching what they're doing. Then, believe it or not, they open up. Who are you? What did you do? What is your family? How are you feeling? What are you doing?
I can relate very personal stories about how doing things together shoulder to shoulder—and not in a plan, project or program that is dedicated to them but in an open-ended kind of thing—gives men an opportunity to sit back, relax and start to communicate.
That's one of the questions or problems. People say, “Men don't communicate.” Yes, they do, under the proper circumstances.
I thank our guests very much for their testimony.
Mrs. Guerin, I salute you. Thank you for your testimony and for everything you do as coordinator of the Conseil régional de développement social des Laurentides. We can see how important these agencies are in Quebec. I congratulate you.
Your testimony is so broad. You addressed social factors, economic factors, work factors, but, above all, you succeeded in brilliantly describing the contribution that seniors make in our society. I don't know how I'm going to approach my questions. As the labour critic, I was struck by one topic in particular in your testimony: when you were talking about job losses among seniors and their return to work.
Your brief indicates that, in 2008, people aged 62 and older were the least likely to find new jobs after becoming unemployed and that they may experience negative age stereotypes in attempting to return to work.
Do you believe this problem will continue? We know that people 60 and older sometimes work to meet certain needs. Can specific efforts be made to avoid that kind of discrimination?
:
That question could be answered from several perspectives.
Yes, seniors don't always return to the workforce by choice. Sometimes, they do so out of necessity, because they can't support themselves on their retirement pensions. This is already a problem.
On the other hand, I believe seniors will continue to be stigmatized in the labour market. If anything, the pandemic has made it worse. Because seniors are considered to be more vulnerable, employers have been hesitant to hire experienced workers, even though we have programs with financial incentives to do so. The incentives have not been enough to convince employers, who feel that hiring experienced people costs more and is more risky.
For all these reasons, I don't believe this problem is going to go away in the next few months, or even years. I think it's something that needs to be seriously addressed, because, with life expectancy on the rise, there will be more older workers. So it's an issue that we are really going to have to deal with.
I'd like to make one comment on the last speech. I have a homeless son here in Winnipeg, living in a shelter. If you want to get really personal, I can tell you some stories.
Anyway, I'll get back to it. What Men's Sheds does is offer a place for what we call “health by stealth”. Health by stealth is not an arranged total program on whatever; instead, we bring in speakers. We may bring in someone on Alzheimer's, on stroke recovery or whatever. We ask someone to speak about it to the men.
It's interesting, because if a man and his spouse or partner go to a public meeting, quite often the man sits there with his arms across his chest and doesn't ask any questions and doesn't want to reveal, but if you get a group of men working together, trying to learn something together, then they will come to listen to a speaker on nutrition, on Ducks Unlimited, on stroke recovery and all of these kinds of things.
The second part of it is that we go back to those organizations—it can be mental health, it can be occupational therapists—and ask them to socially prescribe to Men's Sheds. If you're not familiar with social prescribing, please look it up. They refer men. Medical people refer men to us.