Another Project

I have been working on another project to protect seniors rights, in connection with my long standing battle with the authotities. Anyone reading this site, is most likely already very aware of this part of my life which first came into play during the time I was a caregiver for my mom. She has been gone now for 2.5 years, but the fight has not slowed.  Would I like to be able to walk away from it?  Yes.  Can I walk away from it?  No.  I can't pretend I haven't seen, what I have seen and there are too many people trapped in hellish nightmares of facilities, who have no one to speak for them.  It is exhausting when you consider the "size of the lie" ( to borrow a phrase from another article regarding government bull-dozing of regular citizens.).  Everytime you think you have brought something into focus, they hit you from another side.
I just read, from the IHA web site, their process on reporting elder abuse or neglect.  In reality, IHA is listed as the first responder for allegations of elder abuse.  The web page says you can report to the RCMP.  Technically, I imagine that you can, but the reality, at least in this region we live in, is that the RCMP turn it over to IHA. as soon as they realize seniors are involved. In fact, the RCMP have called local networks for seniors to ask them what they were supposed to do, when a call has come in.  I would imagine that if some evil family member had actually beaten the hell of out of someone the police might act on that, but for anything slightly less obvious, it seems like they will not intervene.  This is not a slam against the RCMP.  Far from it. I believe they work within the parameters of their authority. That is where the problem comes in. It doesn't seem to be clear exactly what those parameters really are.
Most of the rules are written with the assumption that the abuse is alleged to be happening at the hands of a family member.  The RCMP might become involved at that point, but would definitley bring in IHA as well.  I am asking, why it is that if someone was beating up you, or me, or Joe Goofy on the street, the cops would be the first responder. No one would even consider calling a health authority to investigate possible criminal activitiy.  (That is the common knowledge from people who have never even seen the absolute absurdity of what passes for an IHA investigation...but that's another whole story in  itself.). 
If seniors are involved, why do things take such a drastically different turn?  Could it be that senior citizens are not afforded the same rights as any other citizen in this country?  I don't know...what's your guess?
What about when, as has frequently been the case from my own experience, IHA (or one of it's minions), is the abuser?
I just read an article outlining the direction things take when an allegation is made. IHA investigates.  If you have never been privy to how IHA conducts an 'investigation' you would probably be interested to know that they never actually speak to the person who has made the complaint. Not in my expereince anyway, or in the experiences of anyone else who has told me their story.
They send out someone with no investigative experience who, in a case of their own impending life or death, could not investigate their way out of a cardboard box. That person chats it up with all their friends who work for IHA or one of their minion companies, finds out their version of the story, does absolutely no collateral checking at all with residents, family or, God forbid the person making the complaint.  They come back with the results of their 'investigation' and lo and behold....you, the person making the complaint, has simply been mistaken, or if the truth be known to us peasants, the investigator no doubt believes that you made the whole thing up and are being grossly unfair to the poor system.
So, alright..if you are not brain dead and are therefore not happy with the results of the 'investigation', you can take it to the next step and file with the "Patient Care Quaility Office".  At one time this office was called the patient advocate, but this government has  systematically purged that nasty word, 'advocate' from it's vocabulary. I suspect they have a fine jar on every desk for anyone who dares to use that foul word.
The Patient Care Quality Officer works for IHA, is paid by IHA and is friends with the people they are investigating. I am not accusing anyone of improper behavior, I am simply saying this is how it is has gone for each person I have spoken to, as well as for myself.
The Patient Care Quality Officer does his/her investigation, carefully explains to you how things work in the real world, a place he's pretty sure you could not possibly understand, and speaks to you as though he considers you may spring from your chair and go for his throat. There is a reason for that line of thought...but again, that's another story.
Once that investigation process has passed without solution, you are free to take your concerns to the "Patient Care Quality Review Board", which is apparently independent of the Health Authority.  So...who signs their paycheck I wonder?  Could it be the same government which controls everything else involved to this point?
In reality, and in fairness, the Patient Care Review Board, may even come up with some good recommendations. Bottom line though, is that all they can do is make recommendations and nobody, absolutely nobody, has to follow those recommendations. In my view, that sets a dangerously false sense of security for people who think, they have gone to the top and now things will happen.  Not so.
There is of course, the ultimate top of the heap, which is the Provincial Ombudsman.  If anyone has followed the Ombudsmans report of seniors care recently, you would see that they have came up with some really solid recommendations. Once again, however, nobody has to follow any of them. The health authorities have agreed to comply with three or four very simple surface moves, some of which they have always been required to do but have chosen not to to this point.  I am asking, why waste all the time and money creating departments that have no teeth?  Why not just save the money and tell the person straight up that they are hooped? 
So is there any recourse?  I have looked and looked and looked and from every angle I have searched so far, the answer to that would be...no.