Fed up of reading threads asking how they can get out of paying care home fees.

My mum is in the same and it’s fine

My problem is that those of us that pay in the most don’t get the same as those who pay in less. I’m not asking for more. I’m just asking for the same.

Itll be the same with the nhs soon.. those who can pay will have to

There's a big misunderstanding on here about State provision. It's not a pot you have paid into for your personal use. It isn't unfair for the state to provide for those who can't, it's what it is there for. Galling though it might be, and I agree with PPS suggesting we all pay into a fund as we do with NI, state support isn't there for people who have the money not to need it.

At the moment, we don't have a system of state elderly care available to all. We have a system whereby those who don't have the money have the support. It's not a question of the poor being more deserving, it's a question of need. What's the immediate alternative? Leave people without care because they haven't saved, so you don't have to feel you are paying for them? Chuck people out of care homes when their money runs out? Ask the state to pay so your children can inherit?

I'm not sure that's true.

When the NHS was first started, the idea of health care was much more limited than it is now. Not because they tried to limit it, but regular people's attitudes were really different. It wasn't quite acute care only, but it was a lot closer than we are now, when "health" is seen as being about a broad sense of well'being.

There was also a lot more expectations of families caring for the elderly and infirm at home. There were some situations for people like veterans, but that was because they worked for the state and received a rather low wage, so in a sense it was part of the renumeration package if they managed not to die. (And also many places like that received donations to run.)

I think the sense of complete entitlement to a very broad idea of what health care is, with no contribution even from the wealthy, has grown over the decades. People don't seem to stop and think - gosh, if all of these older people are entitled to have their complete care financed by the state, the money will have to come from somewhere. If those with funds and assets are not paying for themselves, then we will have to up taxes (like inheritance taxes?) significantly to pay for them that way. It's still not going to cost less.

It’s a mindset change - people used to the idea that they should be looked after from cradle to grave but we can no longer afford that.
I will happily see my parents home sold to provide for their care if they needed it and will contribute extra too to make sure they’re comfortable and happy.

Nor should we be lining the pockets of family members and expecting the state to pick up the tab.

YANBU. It’s fraud. It’s what your house, savings and pension are there to pay for.

The state cannot bear this cost for the number of pensioners who need care. We all need to accept less or no inheritance and pay for what care we/our parents need.

As I said before, very odd that you would think that way.

The building was tired and the outside needed a lick of paint but the care MIL received was amazing, there was a low turnover of staff and they did whatever they could to keep her happy. She was only supposed to go into the home as respite care but didn't want to leave.

It was only the second home that DH visited, the first wouldn't let him in without an appointment (now that would make me suspicious) so he went to this one and they showed him round immediately. It was very sad when the home closed and MIL had to move.

How would it make it more attractive? It wouldn’t even reach the list of criteria.

To make the home seem attractive - to sell it to you.

I’m surprised you had to ask.

What? Why on earth would they lie to me? Very odd 🙄

What reason would there be to lie?

Yes it is !

Tell me about it!! It all came down to money - neither NHS or social care wanted it coming out of their budget so they just pushed it back and forth

I just wanted my client to have a bath & I didn’t care who was doing it

Arguing over a bath being a medial need or social need is ridiculous.

If an adult needs help in a bath that in my head is a medical need. Either by mental incapacitate or other physical need.

I burst my appendix at 28 got green puke in my hair but couldn't get my hands up to wash it. I wasn't charged for the student nurse that washed it. (She was young, from the Philippines, who made the comment "lve never washed anyone's hair before" someone who's never been forgotten)

But if someone is crossing roads without looking, cutting cable flexs, leaving gas on, becoming violent, they don't just become a danger to themselves they become a danger to other people.
That shouldn't just be their cost that is a society cost.

Needing to be kept safe would be classed as a care need not a medical need. You don’t need clinical staff to do it.

i can remember when I was an advice worker arguing with ppl over whether a Bath was a medical Bath (free) or a social care Bath (charged for). It really is that bonkers

Is double incontinence or needing to be kept safe from your own mental decline 'social care'?

MIL is self funding in a nursing home for now til the money runs out.

She is bedbound so has a room. If she was LA funded, she'd also have a room.
Doesn't matter if a home has numerous bells and whistles if you are in bed.

The staff are nice, the place is secure and warm, clean and bright and serves fresh food - that was what made us accept the home. I say accept because that was what happened. No choice (even though self funding).

Nursing home places are not plentiful. Super duper all singing, all dancing care homes, with craft rooms and zoo trips give an unrealistic face to the reality of dementia care. (Those with advanced dementia will live in a room, not a whole home)

My mum wasn’t in a fancy home. We looked at the ones with coffee shops, cinemas and loads of activities but in reality she wouldn’t have been interested/able to use them

she was in a middle of the road home which had exceptionally caring staff and very low staff turnover. Far more important than the shiny things

it was mostly LA-funded residents

I agree. My mum is state funded but in the same home there are people paying for their own care. They all get treated exactly the same. They have their own rooms with their own furniture and all get the same food and activities as each other. There’s no difference.

I used to work for a company as a live in carer usually doing 2 weeks on, two weeks off. So another carer would be doing the opposite 2 weeks. We were well trained and responsible for everything from personal care, medication, housework and meals. We got 2 hours off a day. Of course this is a private company so fairly expensive. As someone who has been dedicated to caring for the elderly for many years I actually really enjoyed it most of the time.

Have you ever thought you were lied to?

You don't get free social care if you have cancer or any other physical illness.

Exactly the same place as the UK gets money to treat cancer patients.
Everyone pays into the system Everyone should expect the same level of care regardless of illness.

We shouldn't be operating a system where you pay depending on what your illness is.

Nor we shouldn't be lining the pockets of private care home owners. Care homes should be council or NHS owned.

My friend from the Philippines always says if you have no money you die in the gutter !