Her frail frame shakes as sobs burst forth and tears roll down her cheeks. “They will operate the next day if I get the signature. Tell them to visit me; if I die, they will never be able to see me again.” Kumari*, 74, a diabetic, has been waiting for days for a signature from her nephew or niece for a toe surgery.
Unmarried, she had been living with her now deceased sister and her two children. After a surgical procedure on a toe, her nephew dropped her off at the Social Justice Department’s Care Home at Pulayanarkotta a few months ago claiming she was a distant relative. With the infection spreading to two other toes, Kumari was admitted to General Hospital by the care home, but her nephew and niece whom she cared for all these years have been ignoring her.
The care home has now given consent for the surgery as further delay could result in amputation of the limb.
This is not just Kumari’s story. Sukumaran, 97, a freedom fighter, has two sons and a daughter, but has been living at the home since 2016 after transferring his property to his children. His wife, 78, lives with the second son. “My older son sends me ₹2,000 every month. My second son is willing to take care of only one parent.” Sukumaran wants them to provide him maintenance under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. He goes to meet his children and grandchildren, but they do not visit him at the home.
Some of the elderly at he home have been brought here from the street; others from ward 9 for the destitute in General Hospital. Still others have been left at the home by children.
Of the 97 residents, 34 have children or relatives. Pushkaran, 74, a resident since 2004, is receiving palliative care after cancer treatment. His three children have not visited him or paid for the treatment cost. An ex-serviceman paralytic on one side gets an occasional visit from his brother. In six years, no one has come to visit 75-year-old Manikandan even once.
Attempts by the home officials to contact the families of the elderly usually fail. The family of a stroke victim is not willing to take him back, while the grandson of a 83-year-old man had promised to take him home a year ago, but did not turn up. One man has been left behind by his son who has taken control of his property and given it out on rent.
A ‘burden’?
Some parents do not want to ‘burden’ their families and knock at the doors of government homes.
Officials say the senior citizens Act should be strengthened and provisions such as imprisonment or fine imposed strictly to act as a deterrent. Speedy remedy should be provided on the maintenance front. Children should be evicted from the property transferred to them when required.
Home Superintendent Shinymol M. says a few elderly have been sent back with their families, but there is no guarantee that they will be looked after well despite the legal provision for jail term or fine.
She cites the case of an NRI whose wife took control of his property and neglected him. He was brought to the home by local people and following legal intervention, he was sent along with his children. But there, he was locked up in a room and denied food. He fell ill and becoming mentally unsound. The man is back at the home. One woman who went home with her daughter returned on International Day of Older Persons threatening to commit suicide if she were not put up at the government facility.
The home, though meant for senior citizens, also houses six residents who are below the age of 60 years. Of the six, four have relatives. A 56-year-old resident had to have a heart valve replacement, and the expenses had to be borne by the institution.
The Act says thus
The Kerala Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules stipulate that applications be invited at least once a year from indigent senior citizens who want to live in the home. They also state that older senior citizens will be given preference over the less older, and female applicants over male. However, these are not being observed.
Social Justice Department Director Jafar Malik says sittings have been held in some homes in the wake of directions to the maintenance tribunals set up under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. They have been asked to take cases suo motu if parents are denied maintenance or abandoned by children. As property dispute cases tend to clog the petition line-up, the home superintendents have been asked to draw up a list of genuine cases which the tribunals can take up.
The ‘fine’ threat
Mr. Malik is optimistic that children who can look after their parents but still abandon them at homes will take them back when forced to pay a monthly allowance of ₹10,000 under the maintenance Act. The home is only for the indigent, he stresses, adding that once space is freed up, other needy can be accommodated there.
The District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) has also initiated measures to send back home residents who have families or ensure that they are given maintenance allowance.
Says DLSA panel lawyer Sreeja Sreedharan, “We have filed a case with the maintenance tribunal on behalf of six residents for financial help from children. Another batch of petitions will be filed soon.”
Real beneficiaries
The DLSA also stresses the need to ensure that only senior citizens are accommodated at the government home. It has written to the home superintendent that accommodating people under 60 years of age in an establishment that is meant to house senior citizens will deprive the needy of a chance to stay there.
(*All names have been changed)