Sir - At our monthly meeting of residents in this wonderfully caring and inclusive home, our head of home told us of the need not to accept applications from potential residents with only £436 per week of local government funding and of a feeling that this lower band was wider than of yore. The home's policy has been to accept all "who could not otherwise afford it".

The causes of this change are outside pressures and regulations about health and safety, staff training, building standards and fire precautions.

These have necessitated an 11 per cent rise in fees, while the last two years have seen only a one per cent rise in local government funding and I hear that the outlook for the next few years is even bleaker.

Who has asked the questions let alone researched the answers: 1. What do Joe and Joan Bloggs really need, rather than who is responsible for the funding etc?

2. What is really the most expensive provision of the various alternatives for old people as I understand them - a) own home and package of care - don't make me laugh!, b) sheltered accommodation, c) residential home, d) nursing home or hospital or hospice?

3. How is the housebound over-80-year-old, like me, to make her voice heard?

When I suggested that staff and the management committee, many of whom expressed strong agreement with the contents of this letter, should sign it, it was turned down on the grounds that they feared it would appear that they had been prompted.

What does that tell you about the attitudes of society toward this 84-year-old who has been housebound for more than 13 years? We also have ideas! And they are raining on our parade.

Jeanne Lindley plus 13 others, St John's Home, Oxford