For some time now I have been visiting an old lady in a residential care home. The home is clean and tidy, is very homely and comfortably furnished. The bedrooms are all a bit small. In her room there is no room for any personal items of furniture, but she has a full wardrobe of her own clothes and bedding. A full 5 drawer unit full of her own clothes and underneath and in the sink cupboard this has been filled with her own choice of hygiene products. Her room also has a television which if she wanted to she could watch in private.

The staff are all friendly and helpful even though they regularly take long breaks and no-one is in the large and luxurious lounge, watching out that all is well during these stress breaks.

The dining room when it is not being used to serve the three main meals a day, I might add from a choice menu that changes daily - is an activities room three days a week. The staff do make an effort to occupy the residents for fixed spells of time and certainly the photograph album at the entrance is evidence of these enjoyable times residents and visitors can have.

However, I have just learned the fees have gone up by £25.00 a week. When this lady went into the home the fees were already extortinately high for the region £560.00 per week, the recent increase takes it to £585.00 per week. My God, I can't believe it. Even with the proportion coming from the Government towards these fees that is only about 15%. It still disgustingly high.

I know that these homes have to be paid for but this Government and NHS are not just happy,Screwing every penny from the sale of private homes, owned by these unfortunate elderly people, who in there twilight years can not manage any more on there own, with whatever care should be available in the community. The NHS and the Government want the money even quicker by increasing the f . . . ing extortionate fees.

:pooh: :pooh: :pooh: :pooh: :pooh: I am very annoyed so annoyed I want to scream. It's so ........... unreal.

How is it possible to reach fees of this amount? Think of a figure between 500 and a 1,000 and that's it.? It sucks. A quarter of these residents need nursing and medical care and the most profoundly frail must cost about £15.00 a week to feed. It's crazy isn't it?

Maureen
Northern angel.
Apologies for cyber shouting, I've gone mad.

Isn't this just an excuse for one of your rants about the government?

In Asia, the children support their parents. There is no government support at all. Being no goverment support, there is no support to complain about.

The Chinese invest heavily in the education of their young, and the young repay by looking after their parents. I know - depends on the kids being able to work, economy, lots of things.

I found the UK astonishing in everyone's belief that they had a right to be taken care of by someone, with no appreciation of who and what it took to take care of them. I grew up in a system where there was zero security and you had to work to eat - no other option. Its still that way.

I'm going a bit hard core here, but it did amaze me some times in England how some of these people (I refer mainly the young on the dole, not the elderly), would survive in Indonesia. You work, you eat. Don't work, get hungry. Simple. Its not the best system at all, but the English system where there is a culture of dependence is no better. Its the ones that go to the pub getting drunk every night complaining about the Polish who work for peanuts so they cant work that got me. Errr, where does the money come from so they can get drunk every night? Why do the employers want to employ Polish rather than them? Why do they have a choice not to work for peanuts? All amazing.

Maybe the public funds used to keep the unemployed intoxicated are indeed better spent on the elderly. Who am I to know, but the system in England didn't feel right to me at all.

Maureen instead of getting cross shouldn't you check what other care homes are around offering the level of care your friend needs. If this £585 is a ripoff then she should move elsewhere.

In Asia, the children support their parents. There is no government support at all. Being no goverment support, there is no support to complain about.

The Chinese invest heavily in the education of their young, and the young repay by looking after their parents. I know - depends on the kids being able to work, economy, lots of things.
Gat what you describe sounds a lot like Taiwan too. The thing is, it largely depends on the old folks being looked after by their daughter-in-law (as the son will be out earning). Nowadays in Taiwan people are very gradually moving more to a western type model with women having careers, and thus less time for the old folks.

Yup, its changing at lightening speed in Asia Mik, and the old ways are going to become unstuck real fast.

Not sure what next, but the globalisation word comes to mind and the world will start to synchronise. The pain comes in the move from the past, and seems impossible to avoid, wherever you are. To a better future? Doesn't seem to be a choice as to whether it is or isn't. I believe it is a better future. All the cultural mechanisms to control certain parts of society (which to me define many "cultures") will be under pressure. Culture can be maintained by choice, when it is imposed by force, there is usually an agenda behind it (usually male).

Change makes for interesting times (Chinese curse: May your life be interesting).

Isn't this just an excuse for one of your rants about the government?

Hello survivorfan,

Yes. Absolutely. It has sent me raving mad. Even more maddening is that this turns out to be the average for my county. No point in my family trying to move her.

I did suggest some time ago that the family should be prepared to look after her without having her in a home, and I'm afraid the idea was poo pooed, as someone would have to give up work. Although had she been my mother, I would have had her at home.

Maureen
Northern angel.

Is she a close relative of yours? And do you contribute to the fees?

Is she a close relative of yours? And do you contribute to the fees?

Hello fee,

Yes, the old lady is the mother of my cousins wife. I don't contribute to her fees although I tried for as long as possible to keep her out of a care home. I did this at the same time as looking after my dad. Meanwhile, those closest to her were really interested in maintaining a distance so that they did not have to give up there jobs.

I feel they have both been selfish for this lovely, friendly, well spoken old lady gave her time without counting cost to looking after the children, so they could go out to work, in return when the going gets tough; they put her in a care home.

This just seems so very wrong, and equally wrong, is the extortionate nature of care home costs. I would like to see them reveiwed, after all becoming frail and old will happen to all of us one day, and whatever fees are charged then is very much dependent upon what happens today.

Maureen
Northern angel.

Yes, the old lady is the mother of my cousins wife.

Isn't it then their business how they choose to deal with the situation. particularly as you don't contribute to the cost? I'd have been livid if any rellies had told me what to do with my mother when she was ill.

It's different in Scotland - here care for the elderly is free!

Not totally, surely? My aunt and uncle forked out a small fortune after they moved to sheltered accommodation. :mellow:

It's different in Scotland - here care for the elderly is free!

Hello Rob,

I've heard this somewhere before, and found it unbelievable.

On the subject of care for the elderly, if they don't own a property to sell to pay for care fees. Then the state funds it with a percentage taken from the persons pension. Relatives however are not normally expected to fund any part unless they received money from the estate of the elderly person in question, in excess of gifts over and above there tax allowance threshold in any given year for 7 years prior to a care need being eastablished.

Financial gifts in the form of trusts to children below the age of 16 are not taken into consideration. However, should payments have been made into a trust within the 7 year run up to a care need being established access to the interest earned may have to be granted against the capital.

Likewise if in the 7 year run up to a care need being established that the value of a private property owned by the elderly person is liquidised as income and as such is disposed of without good reason, relatives in receipt of excesses can be held responsible for the repayment of monies in leu of care home fees.

I don't personally believe care home fees should be entirely free, but they should not exceed the state pension which is given up, upon going into care.
Last wills and testaments should be allowed to stand and where none is existent resident family members should be considered as main beneficiaries unless proven otherwise.

Maureen
Northern angel.

Mo apparently there's Panorama programme tonight on the subject of paying for care homes.

Hello Mikado,

I'm afraid I missed it. I went to the caravan to cut the grass, kill off some weeds and set up a watering system for the plants, as I am going away soon.

I did see a newsnight special report sometime ago about care home fees, and the report showed a discrepancy. The description and definition of medical need is the deciding factor. Unfortunately nursing needs are not classed as having a medical need, to a lay person we would think, that nursing needs were medical. For the purposes of who is entitled to free care, it can only be available as a temporary solution to a maximum of three months. By such stage it is assumed the individual would have recovered enough to manage at home with a minimal care package in place, should one be needed.

If not, old people who need nursing care beyond a three month spell in hospital or care, will be forced to sell there homes.

Maureen
Northern angel.