Exactly the same in the UK. Some have the foresight to pass the property into their children's names, that way it cannot be sold. However, it would need to be a great many years before they become frail.
Candy and Flag What i’ve been saying is that we could have different systems For example in the UK many believe the present system is unfair - https://www.parliament.uk/globalass...key_issues/key-issues-funding-social-care.pdf But as i understand it the thing is that many on the right don’t want to raise taxes to pay for social care and much of that care system is in 'for profit' private ownership that is closer to the US healthcare system than the UK NHS. (Adult social care in England – unlike health care – is not free at the point of use. Support from the state is reserved for those with both the highest level of need, and the lowest means. This means that many people have to fund their care needs themselves, sometimes facing costs of more than £100,000)
Here are a few key points from The Health Foundation Adult social care in England needs fixing – and has done for decades. Increasing numbers of people are unable to access social care and care providers are at risk of collapse. Yet successive governments continue to duck reform, and people and their families continue to suffer unnecessarily. Based on our assessment of the evidence and analysis of the costs of reform, five priorities for government are: stabilising and sustaining the current system improving access to care providing social protection against care costs seeing the capped cost model as a flexible approach to reform exploring a range of options for raising revenue. The immediate priority for government should be to stabilise and improve the current system, including by boosting staff pay and improving access to publicly funded care. Stabilising the current system by addressing demand pressures and increasing staff pay in line with the NHS would cost £1.0bn in 2020/21, £2.1bn in 2021/22 rising to £4.4bn in 2023/24, compared to the current baseline budget. Restoring access to 2010/11 levels of service would require around £8.1bn extra investment by 2023/24 on top of this (£12.5bn in total). (See our latest analysis on the 2019 Spending Round). But more fundamental reform is needed to make the funding system fairer and provide government protection against social care costs. Policymakers have choices on how to do this, based on their values, priorities, and public spending plans. A Dilnot-style capped cost model – which focuses extra state funding on those with the greatest lifetime care needs and protects them from bearing costs above a certain limit – could be used flexibly by any government, and already lies on the statute book. Any credible reform option requires government investment. The cost of implementing a Scottish-style model, for example, could add around £4.4bn to spending in 2019/20, rising to £5bn by 2023/24. The cost of a Dilnot-style model depends on where you set the cap to protect people against steep costs of care – ranging from around £1.7bn in 2019/20 rising to £2.1bn by 2023/24 under the least generous scenario (a £78,000 cap), to £6.8bn in 2019/20 rising to £7.8bn in 2023/24 under the most generous (a £0 cap – where the state covers all costs of a person's eligible needs). Public spending on services in England was £525bn in 2017/18 (in today's prices). Of that, we spent around £18bn on adult social care. Across the whole UK, we spent £22.7bn on social care – 1.1% of GDP. This compared to wider health spending in 2017/18 of £153bn, equivalent to 7.1% of GDP – and projected to grow to 7.9% in 2023/24. A range of options can be explored to raise revenue to fund social care reform. Increases in taxation would be an obvious route to paying for a more generous and fairer system. Reform is often thought to be unaffordable. But if it chooses, the government can afford to provide more generous care, support and security for vulnerable people in society. If it doesn't, it will be choosing to prolong one of the biggest public policy and political failures of our generation. More information here - What should be done to fix the crisis in social care? | The Health Foundation
My view would be for a kind of Social care NHS which would be funded in the same way as in Germany and Japan where 'everyone pays in, so that everyone can benefit and no one is faced with catastrophic costs'. Both the German and Japanese systems 'raise money now and in the long term; are mostly well understood by the public; and reflect what is considered fair in their social and cultural contexts'. That would be for running costs so I would also have an inheritance tax on the wealthiest in society that would be ring fenced for capital and infrastructure projects aimed at helping the more eldly in society.
They deserve better. In America, it's inadequate. There are rest homes, but the impression I have is they suck.
They do for the most part. I know this from personal experience. It seems that in the lower costs rest home the staff doesn’t care about the patients. In the better nursing homes, patients get better treatment, but you are looking at costs that would bankrupt most people.
Any decent place a typical American family could find for their elder's care will bankrupt them in no time. To get any aid, you have to be flat broke or in prison. Those that do qualify for Medicaid because of need, there are no beds. What places do open up you wouldn't keep a dog there. Now, add in the Alzheimer's epidemic, that's a train headed down that track straight at us. Typical memory care costs $10k/month, and that gets you a locked ward, food, a few lazy aids to maybe change diapers once or twice a day and garbage food. It's heart breaking. Just think how many places we could have funded with that fucking money pissed away on the wall.
Or tax cuts for the wealthy or on the overblown military budget As I’ve said a society can chose what it wishes to prioritise – after the war while many industrialised states pushed for welfare and healthcare reform (for example in the UK the NHS was set up in 1948) but the US struck out for global hegemony and from the 1980’s has been pushing domestically an increasingly aggressive neoliberal agenda. What those priorities are going to be followed in the future has to be decided.
I need to correct this. In the States, one can apply for Medical even if they own property. Property, or car ownership is exempted. However, one must keep less than $2,000 per month in any bank account.
Which is totally asinine. Mom lived in a very meager home, had to move since she couldn't handle it anymore. She couldn't qualify for anything until she had completely pissed away what little assets she had. But if she bought a Mercedes or sunk her money into another house, she could qualify.
I am unsure what if anything changed but I had to deal with hospice 20 years or so ago and it was relatively easy, first in home and then inpatient all total for about 6 months, medicare/medicaid took care of the lions share with no regards as to the assets involved
I think you are right. I was in a similar situation, with my dad, some twenty years ago. I don’t remember anything about assets.
What is wrong with someone who takes a job like that and then does not treat the patients with the dignity and respect they deserve, you go into a situation like that with eyes open, the question is WHY doesn't the staff care? Why did they get hired if they dont care? Crappy situation
Why doesn't staff care??? I've been dealing with this with a variety of continuing care communities and the are all the same. Nobody pays jack shit for care givers - so, they get the bottom of the barrel of people to work for them who don't give a shit about anything but working hard at not working just so they can have someone with a pulse for regulators to see. Those fine people that do care and do a nice job, get burnt out for doing all the work for the lazy people and those that continually believe it is an option to show up every day. You can't fire, punish or discipline the poor workers because they need staff coverage, nobody wants the job for that money and they will simply leave and go to the next place to hang out for a few months, then move on. Trust me, these people aren't particularly shining stars. Oh, and these are big price tag places too - you wouldn't keep a sick dog at a Medicare community....those people are simply being kept alive for the money since the communities are all owned by large profit driving corporations. God save us. You just can't pay people to care when they have zero empathy.
Twenty years ago my dad was diagnosed with dementia. After leaving the hospital he came home, but it was too much for my mom, and I to take care of. They sent him to a care(uncare) facility. Like you said, the staff didn't care. He got bed sores because the staff would not turn him over. The sores became infected which infected his blood system. Ultimately, that is what killed him.
It happens all the time, everywhere. Worse now that they've been locked down - out of sight out of mind, cash the checks. Dementia and end of life care is a travesty that nobody seems to care about until they are the one going broke for $10-12k/month. Death row in prisons get far better care than death row in a health care community. Save up your pills.
