To think that people living longer is making quality of life for everyone worse?

An EHCP can last up to the age of 25.

@YourPithyLilacSheep The role of the state should not be to do what each individual wishes - it should be to do the most amount of good for the most amount of people. I don’t believe that the state should act as a charity.

I don’t think I will change my mind aged 90 years old - I certainly hope I don’t. I hope I’m courageous enough to stick to my convictions.

Better to be Soylent Green; at 27, people killed. Bodiesd turned into nutrition tablets (called soylent green) for those remaning.
That'll keep nhs costs down

I don't think it's about playing off generations. But I do worry about my quality of life when I'm aged if we don't get a wriggle on with legislation for assisted dying. I don't want my last 5 years to be about being kept alive and cared for when my quality of life is shit. But aside from the lucky few who have a thing that kills them quickly this is the reality of people who make it the their late 70s and beyond. At some point (whether it's in yout 70's, 80's or 90:) the gardening, bridge, yoga, walking holidays phase of your retirement are long gone and you're in to the long term conditions, multiple hospital visits, needing care phase. At that point I want the option to call it a day thanks. It's bloody outrageous that some random consultant will have the right to stuff me full of antibiotics/steroids/insert life saving but unwanted medication and keep me going unless I'm able to vociferously and competently argue that I don't want it and I have retained capacity.

"But what if you asked that 90 year old? He or she may very well still be happy and enjoying being alive. I know my father is."

I'd imagine the average 90 year old, given the choice between themselves being saved, or a young child, would choose the child!

No it is not. Thank you very much. You just do not understand what I mean, and I am not going to bother explaining to you.

They have.

A civilised society should be able to care for their old and sick

would I rather it going to keep alive a 90 year old in a care home for a year - someone who can’t look after themselves and is only going to deteriorate? Well I think you can guess which I would choose.

But what if you asked that 90 year old? He or she may very well still be happy and enjoying being alive. I know my father is.

You might well be one day

Why would money for adult social care be used for children? If a child needs an EHCP they obviously have significant needs.

@SnoqualmieRiver But no one is suggesting euthanasia? And I’m quite sure no one here would.

If we all new we were tapping out by say 80 at the latest, it would make planning for retirement easier. You can always go sooner but 80 seems a good age to say byeee. Although my eldest grandparent lived to 88 and was great up to about 85. We all vary so much.

perhaos if we offered to go earlier our offspring could get a tax bonus or something….. or like if you choose to live longer than 80 you could have to fund it yourself… a long the lines of university funding for those choosing to take higher education.

Bitchy thing to say

@Sageyboots I think human like robots would be the best option for providing personal care, such as continence hygiene, washing, dressing perhaps. They would never get tired, ill, impatient or injured, and they wouldn't need payment. I think there could be a lot of equipment invented that could help as well. Human connection is important and humans would still be needed in care, of course. I think I would feel more empowered if I had my own robot that I could program to assist me with my personal care as an older person, than I would feel if I was cared for by a tired, low paid, overworked human.

The OP probably resents the support I'm getting from the local hospice.

Although my husband is a librarian. I'll ask him, shall I?

So I have a son with autism. We (well, his grandparents) funded therapy for him privately for years when he was a toddler, and it made the world of difference. It was probably about £60K worth of therapy in total. Always hard to say how he would have turned out if he didn’t have it but his initial diagnosis was that he was severely developmentally delayed, but now, if you met him, you’d probably never guess he had autism. He is doing well in a mainstream school with no support and will likely go on to be a reasonably productive member of society.

Most people could not afford this therapy - trying to get it paid for by the council is like getting blood out of a stone. I find the lack of state support for disabled children so distressing.

Now, would I rather my tax money went to helping another disabled child like mine, where that help could completely turn their life around, or would I rather it going to keep alive a 90 year old in a care home for a year - someone who can’t look after themselves and is only going to deteriorate? Well I think you can guess which I would choose.

I agree.

The level of need is now far beyond what is reasonably taxable

Dear God 🤦‍♀️

Maybe people should stop having children instead!

Love a bit of ageism on MN.

Wait till you’re 75 OP. you might think a bit differently then ….

How about this -

Logan's run -

It depicts a future society, on the surface a utopia, but soon revealed as a dystopia in which the population and the consumption of resources are maintained in equilibrium by killing everyone who reaches the age of 30.

This. Presumably OP would advocate that at birth we just put them in the sluice room and let them die? Why not? They are and will continue to take up huge amounts of resources to live a non-productive life.