To think we have to accept that we need to use savings to fund care in old age

[LastDuchessFerrara]

My parents died before reaching old age but I'm now watching family and friends caring - in one form or another - for older relatives.

Many seem to be in denial about the fact that savings, pensions and, in some cases equity in their home, needs to be used to enable their relatives to continue to stay in their homes or go into care.

"But they've worked all their lives!" they cry in protest. Well, yes - and now that money needs to be used in their old age.

It's really focussed my mind on how any money I accumulate might not be spent on amazing holidays but paying for cleaners and carers.

I'd be interested in views but please can this not be a "boomer" bashing thread. I know plenty of impoverished old people and plenty of entitled non-boomers.

If I get a stage where I don’t have a clue what planet I’m on, id rather someone put a pillow over my face than pay thousands on a grotty nursing home.

@AlwaysCheddar

If I get a stage where I don’t have a clue what planet I’m on, id rather someone put a pillow over my face than pay thousands on a grotty nursing home.

My grandmother was the same. She wanted what her and my grandad worked for to go to their children.

She took her own life after being diagnosed with dementia, when she thought she was getting bad enough. She didn't want to live a life where people cared for her.

I'm glad she did. I work in care. It's no life.

I'm just talking about my grandmother there and my own opinion on what I'd do (I would do the same if it was becoming clear that my days of independent living were numbered).

It depends whether you would define needing care as being in the medical sphere.

I do think it's odd that if you have cancer (for example) all of your treatment, and care in hospices, can be net from the NHS. But if you have Alzheimer's, although the costs of medical treatment will be met, you have to pay for your own care in homes.

It's a difficult line to walk. Personally I'd like to see hugely increased govt funding to care homes so that any fees are heavily subsidised if you do have to pay for care. But I fear that's a pipe dream.

We are facing a time bomb with an ageing population both increasing demands on care and leading to a smaller economically active population, generations of people where both parties in a couple need to work, thereby resulting in no-one at home to care for elderly parents, increased longevity leading to increased medical needs where care IS needed, meaning that care can no longer be provided by untrained relatives at home, and generations of people who currently rely on inheritance to buy housing (if the equity in houses is eaten up by care fees, then obviously they won't be able to).

If I were the govt I'd be trying to sort this out now before it all goes tits up in 20 years time. But what do I know.

YANBU. My in-laws have a real bee in their bonnet about inheritance tax and I just think... I wouldn't worry too much about calculating it now; odds are at least one of your BTLs is going to have to fund care for one or both of you!

My parents both had to pay for their care and they had the savings to do so. Because they had the funds they had more choices about what care to have as time went by.

My father thought it very unfair that people who haven't saved got everything for free and felt there should be a compulsory savings scheme for those in work. He had no problem with the genuinely hard up getting free care but very annoyed with those who "pissed it up the wall" then demanded the same care that he was paying for.

I often think this when I see threads about inheritance and posters saying “I’m due an inheritance” or “my step-kids will be getting an inheritance” when the reality is people have no idea how much of that inheritance they are expecting will be take up by care costs.

The average weekly cost for a residential care home in the U.K. is £700. A week.

I completely agree that I wouldn't want to end up in a care home but I think your view changes as you get older ... it is very easy to say "I'll go to Dignitas" or "put a pillow over my head" etc until it is you, or your loved one, in that situation. My DGM always said the same but, sadly, she did end up in a care home (not a horrendous one). Neither my DM or I would have been able to "let her die".

But to answer your original question, yes, I do think about my old age and accept that I may have to use savings etc - my DPs are the same, they are elderly (90 & 88), still able to live in their own home but they accept that there may come a time when their assets/capital are needed to pay for care and I feel the same about my future.

I know people who argue that " they have worked all their life", why should they have to pay when Mrs X next door never worked in her life and now gets her care home fees paid etc etc" but that's life - we all try to do what's best for ourselves at the time.

Hopefully by paying your own fees you, or your family, will be able to have some choice over the care home - although I know that's not always guaranteed.

I'm also watching family and friends caring for elderly relatives, reluctant to spend money on cleaners and carers, but not taking into account that the half day's annual leave they've taken for caring duties costs them more than it would for their parent to buy in a cleaner for a few hours, but one of them in particular has been very open about "protecting their inheritance."

DM was very much of the view that she should pay for her own care, and good on her. It cost £900 a week for her care home, she was there for a couple of years until she died. What is gives you is freedom of choice. She also had live in careers for a year, and if she didn't like them, changed them. She also spent several thousand pounds on dental treatment, and kept her health cover which also cost about £1k a month. She was obviously a wealthy woman, so had these choices, and there isn't much left now. But I think she did the right thing. Why should the state pay for someone like her. And why would she want to be limited to a state provided package when she could choose for herself how to live her last years.

I think if you have means it is not right that you take from the state in order to pass inheritance on. You work to live, and that includes covering provision for old age.

@AlwaysCheddar

If I get a stage where I don’t have a clue what planet I’m on, id rather someone put a pillow over my face than pay thousands on a grotty nursing home.

Exactly my view.

@AlwaysCheddar

If I get a stage where I don’t have a clue what planet I’m on, id rather someone put a pillow over my face than pay thousands on a grotty nursing home.

My mum has told me the same.

I think like everything - eventually it will be accepted, but for now it's rubbish for people who had the goalposts moved. People for whom previous generations did things a certain way and they lived their lives assuming they could do the same - saving for massive retirement funds and investments on houses etc on the assumption they could pass it on to their kids and then find at the last minute they can't. The next generation will be in a completely different position (the real ticking time bomb is that the current batch of 20-30 year old won't have any property to sell to fund care when their time comes).

Plenty of people already do. We’ve had 2 close relatives in care homes because of dementia that could no longer be coped with 24/7 at home.

Both were entirely self funded and TBH I considered it something of a ‘luxury’ to be able to choose the time and place, rather than being at the tender mercies of social services, who will typically (understandably, because of the cost) wait until relatives trying to care are already on their knees with exhaustion, before sanctioning a care home placement.

IMO people who go to all sorts of lengths (or try to) to ensure that the local authority rather than the person’s own assets, will pay the fees, often have no idea that it’s not a simple case of, ‘Mum/Dad now needs a care home, social services will see to it.’

Because of the enormous cost, and people living longer and longer (and too often IMO being kept alive when it might be kinder to let them go) I can’t see free care for all, regardless of income/assets, ever being the norm in the U.K.

My family always saved up fir old age and has never had enough money to leave “an inheritance” I find it very odd that people who aren’t landed gentry or maybe farmers would expect to leave an inheritance. Maybe it’s my working class roots but I am 100% in the camp of save and invest what you can then liquidise your assets to pay for your old age and end of life care. If dh and I have any money left when the last of us dies it’ll be only because we died sooner than expected.

@BigWoollyJumpers

I think if you have means it is not right that you take from the state in order to pass inheritance on. You work to live, and that includes covering provision for old age.

Ok, but by that logic why should those with "means" (which also needs defining) be able to access state education, or the NHS, for example? Will we also start asking those with houses worth over X amount to free up equity in them so they can contribute to the primary their child is attending?

The state is there to help everyone - rich or poor. We don't refuse to treat someone through the NHS because they have a good job or own a big house.

We intend to spend as much of our savings as possible on ourselves and families before we get old. We've both worked, saved and planned. We're retiring early and will spend quite a lot of our savings in the first 10-15 years while we are hopefully still fit.
We've got lots of holidays planned. Our dc have already received inheritances from other family members, all got on the property ladder young and one has a rental so not too fussed about how much is left for them. We would rather treat them while we are still here to make sure that money is used as we intended.

I'm 31 and am expecting that when the time comes I will be reliant on my private pension and any savings I have with no government support available. I expect the same if I need any additional care. It does seem a shame that I could end up burning through money I'd hope to pass on as inheritance but having said that if you live a long life then inheritance often arrives long people 'needed' it and loads of it gets lost to tax anyway.

My Dad was in a dementia home and self funded. He was a very proud man and would have hated to be dependent on the state when he had money of his own.

Having seen the homes where social services thought my Dad could go to, I am so pleased that we were able to have a choice. What better use could you put your own money to, other than to fund your own care.

It's an incentive for people to gift their money away to avoid inheritance tax. But on the other hand who knows what sort of home they will end up in if it isn't private. My stepmother and my husband's aunt are and were in very nice private care homes, carefully chosen. The quality of care and the surroundings are much nicer than others I've seen.

Fine if you actually have any savings.

We have a publicly funded national health service, question is are people willing to pay more tax to fund a national care service? Given how the right wing already whinge about the NHS, I suspect the answer is no.

If I get a stage where I don’t have a clue what planet I’m on, id rather someone put a pillow over my face than pay thousands on a grotty nursing home.

I understand the sentiment, I really do. In reality, it's very difficult being the child/relative in this situation.

@Bluesername

Fine if you actually have any savings.

But isn't that the whole point - those that can pay should, to make sure there are enough funds to care for those who do not have funds.

I think there's a big idea of, once you've stopped working you shouldn't have to pay for anything. Sick of PILs saying they've paid their bit, they must take more out of the system in year than they ever put in. I do think peoples own savings should be used to pay for their care. It's an insane idea that the younger generation of tax payers should pay for this while the older generation keep their own money, it would just widen the gap between the haves and have nots. You should spend your own money before spending anyone elses.