Improving Quality of Life for Older People in Long-Stay Care ...

9.5 PrivacyThe degree of privacy enjoyed by resident respondents largely depended onwhether they had a room of their own or not (Table 9.6). Respondents who livedin large open-plan wards in public facilities experienced the greatest lack of privacy.Many reported that it was a struggle to have any kind of private life. The curtainsaround their bed were the only means they had of shutting out the rest of the ward.However, curtains provided visual privacy only and many commented that evenwhen they were closed, ‘everybody knows what’s going on’. Staff respondentsworking in these facilities also reported that they found it difficult to maintainresidents’ privacy. For example, the cramped space made it difficult to keep thecurtains closed when using bulky equipment. The lack of a day room in somefacilities exacerbated the problem. Reality for residents living in these facilitiesis that their world shrinks to the space around their bed. All activities – eating,sleeping and socialising, are carried out in or beside their bed against the backdropof a large, noisy ward. Residents who were fit and active had the option of takinga walk outdoors or going ‘down town’. Those who were physically dependent hadlittle option but to ‘put up with it’. Many respondents longed for a private room butbelieved that there was little hope of getting one. Residents who lived in two orthree bedded rooms had fewer issues. They tended to be positive about sharingand liked the company. Many of the private study sites had a few two or threebedded wards. In these facilities, resident respondents who shared usually hadopted to share rather than have a room of their own; it was their choice, unlikeresident respondents in large open plan wards who had no other option.177Respondents who had a room of their own had a degree of privacy and controlnot open to residents living in multiple occupancy rooms. Having a room gave themchoices. They could choose to join other residents or had the option of retreatingto their room if they wanted to be alone. Having a door literally meant that theycould shut out the rest of the world if that was what they chose. A room of theirown also freed them from the worry of disturbing others. They could choose towatch television or turn up their radio if they wished.There were some differences between staff and resident respondents’ perceptionsof privacy and what was important. Staff respondents focused on physical privacymore so than resident respondents. They tended to highlight the importance ofensuring that curtains and doors were closed when providing intimate care. Relativesraised similar concerns. However, resident respondents rarely raised this as anissue. The issue for them was that staff rarely knocked and tended to ‘barge’ in.In contrast to staff, resident respondents prioritised social and psychological privacyrather than physical privacy. More problematic for them was the lack of ‘peace