General Discussion
As there are a lot of us baby boomers (born circa 1944-1964) in, or coming up to, retirement and old age I thought I would post this
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-33552279
(btw - it might be an article that should be shown to our children as well just to make sure that they realise the money that they thought they might be inheriting from us (via our houses etc) when we all eventually shuffle off this mortal coil, may not be coming their way after all as it will have all been spent on our care needs.)
PUT THE EDERLY IN PRISON
We should place the elderly in prison they will get a shower every day, video surveillance in case of problems, three meals a day, access to a library a computer, tv, gym, doctor on site and free medication if needed.
Then put criminals in nursing homes and they will get cold meals lights of at 7pm two showers a week live in a small room and pay £2000 a month rent.
It's pretty sad when we treat prisoners better than the elderly
Support costs for older people were ring fenced in the Supporting People budget given by Central Govt to County Councils. Unfortunately, in 2007 (I think) this ring fencing was overlooked. County Councils jumped on this, withdrew all accommodation based support and bunged the cash into the Soc Svcs pot.
You are absolutely right Lynne, until health and social services work as one then nothing will improve. Having an 88 year old mother I see bonkers examples of the lack of joined up thinking on a regular basis.
Back in April when the Tories were touting their Right to Buy for housing association tenants policy there was an interview on the tv with an HA tenant who was asked what he thought of this policy.
He said he thought it was a fantastic opportunity to buy his own home and on top of that it would be something to leave his kids.
I remember thinking to myself at the time "You silly man. Whether or not you have anything to leave your kids may well be determined by just how much care you will have needed to pay for before you die which, amongst other things, will be determined by the value of your house".
Fortunately most housing association properties for older people (i.e. those with any adaptions) will be excluded from Right to Buy.
I've thought the same about RTB for other tenants and reckon that it's a similar reason as compulsory work place pensions - both will result in a massive reduction in benefits for older people in not too many years time.
Instead of increasing the inheritance tax threshold, maybe they should have reduced it to zero. Old folk could then have guilt free way of providing for their care - spend it while you're alive otherwise it goes to the state, not your kids. Isn't that the purest form of re-distribution of wealth ;)
There was an article in yesterday's Observer about the NHS finances and the £30bn hole expected to appear in them by 2020.
A quote from that article:
"the NHS's financial black hole will become even bigger than £30bn if local council social care budgets are cut again, as that would put even more pressure on hospitals and GP surgeries.
The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services has warned that social care budgets in England, which were cut under the coalition, will be cut by another £1bn this year".
Same as what happens now, except allocate the increased tax revenues to provide better care for those with no assets. But no, that pot is getting smaller because £325000 tax free wasn't deemed enough of a windfall for some.
The cap on elderly care costs. Postponed or cancelled?
Have a read. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/25/jeremy-hunt-backlash-axing-elderly-care-cap-policy
SOCIAL CARE U-TURN: In July the government announced it was delaying until 2020 plans to limit bills for residential care to £72,000 – a key measure to protect people from huge bills. The Department of Health said it was still “firmly committed” to the cap, but questions are now being raised about whether the policy needs rethinking. Impact: Currently those with assets above £23,250 do not get any help from councils towards their costs. That was to have risen to £118,000 under the changes. It means that many people will still be left with catastrophic care costs in old age. Logic: The move came after councils wrote to ministers asking for a delay because of the “enormous financial pressures” they faced and that more cash from central government was essential. It was never felt that the Treasury was happy with the expensive reform and it was driven in large part by the Lib Dems. Quietly dispensing with it now is politically advantageous.
An individual case study which, unfortunately, is no doubt being replicated throughout the country.
Elderly person ready to leave rehab unit and go home but cannot do so because Social Services not in a position to provide necessary reablement and care package that has to be in place and up and running from the day that elderly person goes home.
So........elderly person has to stay in rehab centre. And other elderlies also have to stay on as well because of this same demand exceeding supply issue. Remember, Social Services budgets are constantly being cut back at the same time as there is an ever increasing demand for Social Services provision due to to increasingly elderly population.
Knock on effect is that patients in hospitals waiting to go to rehab centres cannot do so because there are not enough beds available in the rehab centres because the residents there who could go home, can't, because Social Services cannot provide the rehab equipment and care provision required.
There's a hole in my bucket
Dear Liza, dear Liza,
There's a hole in my bucket
Dear Liza, a hole.
Woodcock, it's pointless arguing with him. His 'humour' on here also involves taking the piss out of a poor lady who was killed in an RTA outside Smugglers last year. "Hate-filled" was an adjective used by some random woman on here yesterday to describe my posts - sorry but I'm only filled with a hatred of heartless bastards like Elvis.
And breathe...
This post has been reported by others. Please report the post if you also feel it requires moderation.
Let's have it right rsoul, the webmaster pointed out to you that the remark I made at the time was prior to anyone knowing the severity of the accident.
I take exception at your description of me , I see you are reverting back to Judith Chalmers, Mrs C ,etc.
I did wonder how long the facade of respectibility would last.
Take exception as much as you like. It doesn't alter the fact that you wrote what you did then (and utterly failed to apologise then or since) and that you've written what you did this morning.
There is no facade Elvis - I am me and I'll stand up to bullies like you.
and I wondered just how long it would be before this thread went the way of so many others that I've lost count.
Grown up children need to take more responsibility for their aging parents. I care for my parents as father has mobility issues and mother has dementia. I gave up my job and drive a 200 mile round trip each week to spend time with my husband and 14 year old son. Yes it is a struggle both financially and emotionally, but if I wouldn't have it any other way.
I don't think I'm some kind of hero, I'm just a daughter doing the right thing.
As for the bun fight above, yes I am some 'random' woman. I like to specialise in random acts of kindness.
Anyone who couldn't see that Elvis was joking and is over 65 himself needs a sense of humour injection post haste.
I have no time for people who cry 'bullying' when they themselves are guilty of it.
I also have contempt for those who sit behind a keyboard and insult others. I won't say anything on here that I wouldn't be prepared to say to your face.
Grow up people.
Grown up children are not necessarily in a position to take on more responsibility for their ageing parents. Grown up children don't necessarily get on with their ageing parents. Where is it writ that families should get on with each other?
And if grown up children live some distance from the ageing parent(s) those children may also not have the financial wherewithall to make visits to the parent(s) let alone be able to offer day to day care.
Grown up children may also have jobs of their own which they cannot, literally, afford to give up in order to look after ageing parents full time.
There are all sorts of reasons why grown up children cannot look after their ageing parent(s).
Certainly dont want my kids being responsible for my old age care, they couldnt organise a pee up in a brewery. All there good at is bickering on Facebook and playing stupid xbox games.
Why should grown up children take responsibility for their parents? I couldn't, their health is a darn sight better than mine, some days I struggle to walk around the house yet my supposedly elderly parents have been off walking for miles!
My sibling has chosen to have nothing to do with his family so who would ensure that our parents' care is shared equally?
As for funding care when we reach old age - well sorry but if I have to sell my home to pay for my care then fair enough, why shouldn't I? An inheritance is a bonus not a right, hopefully by the time that happens my children will be middle-aged themselves and totally independent.
I don't have the luxury of siblings. Why care for them? Because they gave you everything, worked hard to provide for you and have been a source of love and support all your life.
Maybe not every grown up child is not in a position to help but many more chose not to.
We are becoming a very selfish society and if we can't show compassion and care to those who gave us life then it's a sad state of affairs.
I don't give a monkeys about inheritance. It's about loyalty, respect and love.
I do not, not for one moment, expect my child to look after me in my old age. I would think it very selfish of me to do so.
I have too much loyalty, respect and love for her to expect that.
Hear hear Lynne, mine's be told to just pick a decent home and get on with life.
I mean it too. An occasional visit will be nice but you don't have children just so they can put their life on hold when you get old.
“Adult social care budgets have been cut by £4.6bn since 2010 - a 31% overall reduction - according to the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services. The association estimated in June that councils were facing a £1.1bn shortfall this year.”
From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33839878
and if you click on this link you will find three letters on this subject published in today's Observer http://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2015/aug/16/the-big-issue-social-care-elderly
Elderly relative discharged from rehab today. Care package in place.
First carer due to arrive 5.40pm. No show.
Care package in place is a novelty itself, for it to work would be a miracle.
I hope you get it sorted Lynne.
Thanks Flo - have just been writing (well, I would wouldn't I) a letter to this person's MP (well, I would wouldn't I) about all of this. Grrrrrrr.
Have just been informed by a relative that a care worker turned up at 8.00pm and said that according to them that was the scheduled first visit. (which was not what Social Services told us!).
Believe me everyone, you don't know the half of what has been going on over the past 10 weeks or so with this particular relative of mine.
My way of trying to cope with it all? I write about it of course.
Please bear with me - cos I am mightily hacked off with it all at the moment and the way I get things out of me is to write about 'em. (So I am likely to go on and on and on about this even more than I can usually go on and on and on about things).
and if you are elderly and live in rural areas it is even worse.
Have a read of this letter in today's Gazette http://www.dawlishnewspapers.co.uk/article.cfm?id=1240&headline=Emotional%20stress%20of%20bed%20closures%20cause%20for%20concern&year=2015
It's reasonably easy to put a care package in place.
Top Tip: Write a letter to Soc Svcs stating that you believe that without one the person needing assistance will be in danger. Therefore you are making the referral to make Soc Svcs aware of the situation and understand that they have a statutory responsibility to safeguard that person.
I use a proforma letter that I devised at work and it hasn't failed yet.
This post brings to mind a case of an old boy who had a comfortable and enjoyable life. As he got older and infirmed he cleared out his house and sold it and gave the money away. As his medical condition required an expensive drug therapy that he could no longer afford He had decided that the State could and would look after him and it did until he died off old age. This did not cost the old boy one penny/cent.
If you commit a capital offence the State is duty bound not only to pay for a very expensive court case, but on being sentenced to many years in jail has a duty of care as well. This duty of care is also monitored by external independant bodies. Which is more than can be said for many care homes that charge large sums of money and fail to give quality of life to those who are under their care.
A point to bear in mind about care homes and Dawlish is this:
There are presently two planning applications that have been submitted that include building a care home for the elderly of some description in the DA2 area (DA2 = Secmaton/Gatehouse/Langdon hospital area).
I have seen before outline planning permission be granted for this or for that and in some cases specifically for sheltered/care homes only for the developer to come back some time later and say "Sorry, planners, this elderly sheltered care home is no longer financially viable for us to build, but as you've already granted outline planning permission can we build homes on that site instead?"
Just saying...........
I worked with some of the largest house builders across the country and around the world, when outline planning is granted they have to make provisions for around 10% to be built as social/affordable homes. However in alot of cases they site that it is not financially viable to build and continue with the suply of homes for the private sector, I have seen on one site that they where then fined just £2000 per property for doing this which is easily paid considering the price difference of social/affordable to normal market price. In other instances they sell the peice of land onto smaller builders releasing them from their original obligation. These companies have for a long time known how to get around planning regs and will continue to do so untill what ever powers that be finally say enough is enough and force them build these properties first before continuing with the rest of the site.
Two cases in point.
I am right in saying, am I not, that the Sandpiper housing estate down at the Warren actually started off
life back in 2008(ish) as outline planning consent for a retiree care home of some kind.
And then there's Peppermint Park, again at the Warren. Originally outline planning for a retirement home
of some kind was granted (based on the fact that the one planned for the Sandpiper site had not materialised) and now there's a planning app for this to be altered to residential dwellings.
http://www.carehome.co.uk/for-sale/profile.cfm/id/97007654881
So, Dawlish has an ageing population whose housing needs should be met. Single storey accommodation (bungalows rather than apartments?) for those whose health enables them to live independently as well as sheltered and care homes of various kinds for those who need varying degrees of support.
This is what the Teignbridge Local Plan says about Dawlish:
“The allocation of land for a 50 bed extra care housing scheme recognises that Dawlish
is forecast to have an ageing population and there will be a need for specialist forms of
accommodation. There may be other forms of elderly provision suitable for the site. “
I do wonder however, if, ultimately, the housing needs of the elderly will be met anymore than the housing needs of those who are much younger.
The location of the extra care home in that quote above is due to be in DA2 (that’s planning speak for the Gatehouse, Secmaton, Langdon area of town ).
Time will tell if it ever materialises.
I have cited in other posts( see above) examples of where planning permission has been given for an elderly care home of some kind only for that care home not to materialise and it seems we have yet another example of this on the Redrow site up by Sainsbury’s. On a different thread to this, one of our town councillors has written:
" A Redrow representative addressed those present to advise that its plans for an on-site care home (part of the outline planning application won on appeal in 2013) have been dropped.”
There is a letter in this week's Dawlish Gazette about care homes and Dawlish.
For a view of the wider problem see info on this link http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/nov/21/half-uk-care-homes-close-funding-gap-nhs-george-osborne
So, we could have a hike in council tax to pay for social care. (see below for what George Osborne said about this in his Autumn Statement).
" the health service cannot function effectively without good social care.
The truth we need to confront is this: many local authorities are not going to be able to meet growing social care needs unless they have new sources of funding.
That, in the end, comes from the taxpayer.
So in future those local authorities who are responsible for social care will be able to levy a new social care precept of up to 2% on council tax.
The money raised will have to be spent exclusively on adult social care – and if all authorities make full use of it, it will bring almost £2 billion more into the care system.
It’s part of the major reform we’re undertaking to integrate health and social care by the end of this decade."