According
to The Times, I am now a “financial time bomb” and unless defused will cause
the economy to flatline. Whether this
means that it should become policy to cause persons of my age profile to
flatline before that happens is not certain.
In the last
week or so there has been more attention paid to matters arising from dealing
with the elderly who need support.
Inevitably, much of this has centred on human interest stories.
Less
mention has been made of the Equality and Human Rights Commission recent report
called “Close To Home, An Enquiry Into Older People And Human Rights In Home
Care”.
The report
attempts to bring together the Commission’s view for its future policy and
guidance about Equality, Disability, Diversity, Care management and Human
Rights for the elderly in need and who are disabled.
Yes it is very
expensive with many and various implications that entail costs, duties and
obligations. The question of who pays
and how is left to others to worry about.
Necessarily
battle has been joined over whether the aged with assets should be given free
or limited cost care allowing their wealth to be passed on to family or others
or whether those assets should be used to fund the care requirements.
One of the
oddities that goes unremarked is that amongst the aged are many whose periods
in education were much shorter and who worked for much longer than those of
later generations are likely to. But to
discuss this would simply confuse the key issues.
Historically,
we have never been here before, which makes a change for this blog. In the past with the expectation of life
being much lower and few people being able to appreciate assets in the way we
have done the numbers of aged needing care were far smaller and the few who did
have assets were expected to use them.
From my
extensive scratching around Census Returns of the past looking for this and
that the common practise was for the aged to be with their families, normally
used on light household duties. Some of
the poorest did finish up in the Workhouse.
Some
continued in work, one of mine seemed to be still employed into his nineties,
perhaps urged on by his much younger third wife. Well it was Leith
which might explain it. There were a few
with assets often listed as “annuitants” which meant that the wealth lasted
only as long as they did.
But the
better off then could hire servants and the less they could do then the more
servants and nurses they employed. If
they were renting, as was common at the time then the notion of property as
assets was tempered. Also the property
market in those days was radically different.
At present
in the district where I live there is a stark contrast. There are hardly any aged who are Brit’s
living with their families. But amongst
recent migrants there has been a striking increase in the number of families
who have brought in their aged parents to be amongst their UK kin.
Which
raises an awkward and interesting question.
If all care for the aged is to be borne by the taxpayer then many
migrant communities will be paying for old Brit’s to be supported by their
taxes whilst they themselves take care of their own. Did anybody see that one coming?
Another
difficult question is who are the carers?
At present the care for most either in residential facilities or their
own homes appears to be done by part timers or agency workers earning very
modest incomes, having had limited training and given very tight schedules.
Moreover,
they are becoming in short supply relative to need. So not only may the money not be there to
fund all this, there isn’t the man (or rather woman) power there to do the job
effectively. The resources locked up in
all this are alleged to be so much as to damage the working economy.
As in so
many things, there are no “right answers” to any of it. All we have is a number of options all with
“downsides” that are both problematical and in some cases impossible to resolve
to the satisfaction of all parties.
This one is
going to get rough because the pre-conditions are in place for a social,
economic and political disaster. See you
in the Job Centre.
All very pertinent and very true.
ReplyDeleteIt will not happen for a long time I think, unfortunately, but we need to really treasure the family as a unit, as it used to be, amongst all sections of society. I still do know lots of people who care for family members themselves, but it is not the norm as it was once, and they do not get much help if they are just about coping with it. The Indian family at our local shop are a fine example to everyone. Also, it has to be emphasized I think, many people are very overweight. You do not have to be paid to go the gym in order to lose weight, or madly exercise, you only have to eat less, eat healthily (as most older people always used to), and just walk a bit more. I have noticed recently, people are talking to each other more often than they used to, and a lot of little kindnesses happening.
They should have seen this coming decades ago.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as abortion and contraception was promoted you had a sterile 'no children' society.
As a thought you could shut dow the military and start a geriatric support group on its place.