[Kerry Malone]

COMMUNITY DEBATE
SHOULD ELDERLY CARE BE PAID FOR PRIVATELY OR BY THE STATE?

Care for the elderly has always been a hot-topic for people, as it hits home. As our parents generation ages and enters retirement, the question about care becomes crucial. When someone reaches an advanced age, they reluctantly require more and more care to provide a good quality of life. Susceptible to illness and disease that makes them dependant on others for care - institutions like Care Homes exist to provide that level of care.

In the 80's and 90's in the UK, the government stopped supporting care homes more and more, forcing the private sector to move in and take over this role. Naturally, being the private sector, they would charge an annual fee for caring for the elderly. This would often increase as time went on, and if the person in question ran out of savings - they'd be kicked out of the home. A person's life savings would be exhausted in a few years living in an assisted living facility, and many forced to sell their homes could only afford care for about a decade.

In the last few years, local councils have looked at adding a cost to Council Tax for "Care for the Aged", where the council would maintain care homes for the elderly paying for it by rate-payers. However, state run facilities - particularly in the UK - tended to be horror stories in the making with poorly maintained buildings, indifferent staff, and residents left to fend for themselves in their own filth and starved to death through ineptitude and incompetence.

Many elderly people refuse to go into homes as they fear them, and do not wish to loose their independence and dignity. However, live in nurses are expensive and state funded nurses could only visit once a week for an hour or so, with a massive list of people on their register.

So, which is better - private care or public care?

[Avenger]

Public care should be a must for all people, the fact it isn't available to all is a disgrace in the first place and many are forced into private care as the only alternative. There is so many things that are prioritised that shouldn't be - I think the question should be should the care system be radically reviewed to greater support the elderly? And the answer would be yes!

[Gustav]

Honestly I only think state funding should be available to children and people who can contribute to society

[Supergrover]

Here in Canada we have both, If you have assets then you are charged a fee based on you care and assets. If you have no assets or those assets run out the care facility then takes a portion of your Canadian Pension/solical funded program to cover the cost of the home.
My wife has worked in care facility's for most of her life, TBH I dont ever wish to go to one.

[Dark]

Costs of this nature must be borne by the public sector.

I don't mean that in a "what should happen" sense, but in a "what will and does happen" sense, because if elderly care is insufficient - regardless of if it's private or public - then unless medical facilities and staff simply let people die, it simply transfers the cost over to health care. (This applies to the US as well - if patients are completely broke, the costs are absorbed by the system.)

[Stormy]

There is no easy answer to this question as the original post clearly points out.

While I cannot speak for the British government, for the most part, the American government has either corrupted or ruined everything it touches. Just answer me one question. Would you trust your government to take care of your mother?

On the other hand, many cannot afford the astronomical prices demanded by private care facilities in the U.S. In the state I live in (Georgia) the average annual cost for staying in a nursing facility (full care) is $47,538 - $67,890.

There is an often overlooked option, and I ask your indulgence in bringing this one up. While your beliefs may differ, all should be respected.

In Christianity, the Bible clearly lays the burden at the feet of the family. I Timothy tells believers to "provide for our relatives, and especially for members of our household."

Now, when this was written the average life expectancy was 30-35 years old.... so very few actually reached the "elderly" status.

All I can say is we took care of my mother until she died, but she never required around-the-clock nursing care, either.

So, after all this.... what is the answer? Heck if I know.

[Dark]

It's a slight tangent, but I'd argue that the government only ruins the things it touches when the politicians capitulate to the lowest common denominator. Education, for example.