To Think That The Press Have No Understanding About What They Are Reporting Today.

[LuluJakey1]

I am in despair and really angry about Johnson's announcements re: social care today and how badly it is being reported. They are misleading people currently in the card system and those likely to be in it in the next 10-20 years.
As I understand it from what he said, the BBC and The Guardian:
He said - 'no one will pay more than £86,000 for personal care in their lifetime'. This creates an impression that anyone in a home will only pay up to £86,000 towards that care.

Wrong! It actually only covers the nursing care aspect in a care home and what specific personal care a local authority decides you need at home.

Currently, if you require nursing care in a care home, that element is paid for by local authorities at the rate of about £550 a month. From 2023, you will be expected to pay up to £86,000 towards that. No one seems to have spotted it is currently paid for.

Most people do not require full nursing care - they might need dressings changed or particular medicines given or a medical procedure. Very few require a full-time nurse. Most care is carried out by general carers and comes under social care- help dressing, washing etc- that won't be included in this care amount cap- it will be paid for separately by the resident in the home. For example, my aunt (90) requires help to have a shower and her breakfast- that will not be covered- she will be expected to pay for that. My uncle (90) in a care home with dementia has no nursing care so will pay for everything- it is assessed as social care- see below.

According to the BBC, we will have to pay for our 'board and lodgings and other extras in care homes- for example food, renting your bedroom, social care, hair cuts or anything else you choose to have'. So we will still pay almost the whole of care home fees.

It will only apply to anyone who requires care from when the tax starts in 2023- this was said by Johnson, Sunak and Javid directly. If you are already in the system you are stuck on current rules. "This always happens. Someone always misses the start date when a new system is introduced' said Javid.

In effect, anyone with savings and a house to sell will be in the same position they are currently in- at some point it will all be used and sold to pay for care until you are down to your last £20,000. In fact people will be in a worse position- they now have to also pay up to £86,000 of nursing care fees- currently paid by local authorities.

The whole thing is a huge con. MIL rang to say she and FIL are planning to sell up when it looks like they are heading that way- put the £86,000 each aside to pay for their care and buy a small flat. She was convinced a cap had been put on care costs. It hasn't, not at all. It is no reassurance for the vulnerable and elderly.

You’re not wrong OP. The reporting on this is shockingly poor bar the odd journalist who’s spent years immersed in social care such Z Ian Birrell.

Firstly as all the money will go to the NHS first and only in 3 years will anything come too social care. Even being generous and saying the money will come over (it really won’t!) social care needs help now! They can’t provide care aS it is, their aren't enough paid carers, providers are handing back contracts. It’s in meltdown now not in 3 years time!

Secondly the government have said that LA & private clients must be changed the same rates for care. LA due to the huge financial pressures they are under pay a low rate for the care of people whose care they pay for. Providers survive by subsidising the low rates LA pay by charging people paying privately a higher rate. On paper of course it’s wrong ti have 2 rates but the practical reality is that LA simply cannot afford to uo what they pay by several hundred pounds a week per person. What will happen is that providers will simply go bust or refuse to accept LA clients and only work with people paying privately.

But I’m sure the government has entirely worked through all the implications of its proposals in great detail….

Why is it reasonable that someone who works their whole life, pays tax and NI, pays off a mortgage, saves some money- has to sell their home and use their savings down to £20,000 to be cared for? They are no different to the people you describe except that they have contributed and cared for themselves without being a burden on the state for most if their lives but now need care because they are ill, have developed a disability or become frail just as the people you describe are ill/vulnerable/disabled.

So people who don't own their own home haven't worked all of their life, paid tax and have all their stamps?

I don't understand why this is even considered a vaguely good idea. The working poor paying so that adult children of comfortable off people can have a massive windfall land in their lap. I'm one of those children, but I really do think my parents' assets should contribute to the cost of their care more than a single mum working two jobs should.

Plus wealthy pensioners and others with income from other sources than a job will pay nothing towards it. It's madness.

My friend has motor neurone disease she is 51 she had care at home which was an allocation paid for by her LA the care was substandard carers not turning up and not given enough time to put her on the loo hair wash feed her etc she ended up in hospital was moved three times it was awful the staff were lovely but very over worked and my friend is very distressed and scared plus she’s fully aware of everything going on. She moved into a private care home at £2.5k a week she was given 48hrs notice after 2 months her friends had to do her care that weekend as the home refused she’s now in a numerological home she can’t go to dignitas it’s illegal to help get it is a disgrace

Op I’m still confused by your opening post when you say the cap only applies to nursing care (when they already get £187 a week contribution for nursing care in a home with nurses), not to ‘social care’.

Personal care is what you are calling social care - help with washing, dressing etc. Residential care and dementia care (where not nursing element) in care homes. It is covered by the cap.

What is not covered is additional costs- potentially board and lodgings. The local authority fee rates barely cover the cost of care, on top of which there are costs of catering, activities, utilities, cleaning, the building etc. So you can bet everything that can be charged in top will be, and that’s not just about making a profit, that’s about there being care homes in existence.

OP care costs are covered www.bbc.com/news/health-58442991

But yes daily living is not plus as BBC makes clear, it still only applies to those eligible for help in the first place and councils can’t see that changing….

@Theeyeballsinthesky

OP care costs are covered www.bbc.com/news/health-58442991

But yes daily living is not plus as BBC makes clear, it still only applies to those eligible for help in the first place and councils can’t see that changing….

Yes that bbc news article explains the problem better than this thread!

Interesting thread thank you

OP you are misunderstanding the difference between nursing care and social care. Local Authorities do NOT pay the nursing element in nursing homes, nor do residents. The nursing care element is free to the Service Users/residents. That won't change.

So Joe Bloggs in a nursing home (as opposed to a residential home) where the total weekly charge is, for example, £1000 per week will pay £813 as the nursing care element is £187pw and paid for by the CCG /ICS usually direct to the Provider.

Under the proposed new system, the £813 will then be split into the "care" element and the "hotel" costs. So the care might be £500 and the hotel costs £313. Joe will always be liable for the £313pw until his funds run out, and will pay the £500pw care costs until he hits the cap.

Personally I have no issue with people selling their homes to fund their care - and I say that as someone who stands to inherit if my Mum dies without needing to go into a care home. I am beyond furious that money will be taken not to improve ASC but to protect the assets of the better off.

I need to re-read this thread and read more around the topic in general to understand. I'd like to think I'm relatively switched on, but this is pretty complex. All smoke and mirrors, as expected. And guaranteed this money will be swallowed up by the NHS and even if some of it is ringfenced, it won't be enough for social care.

Quite frankly, I think I'll choose to save up for a one way flight to Switzerland if I hit the stage of having to go into care. As sad as it is, it's a cheaper option and at least my DS will be left with assets at his disposal. Maybe this is the next change they'll introduce so we can legally choose to die in the UK.

Why shouldn't people who can afford it pay for the care they need? Why is it a given that people should be able to hold onto assets and cash to pass onto their children?

If everyone who could afford it paid fairly for their care then there would be more resources for those who can't afford it. Those people who have paid for a mortgage have had a secure home for all those years. What a bizarre attitude that you'd only be paying a mortgage in order to pass a house onto your kids. I pay my mortgage so I've got somewhere to live now.

This is why the country is in such a mess. Because those who have money and assets hold onto them and say "someone else pay for me".

No I was not aware of that, that’s very concerning. I don’t know if I’m being generous to BJ but I imagine he didn’t actually understand the announcement himself rather than deliberately trying to mislead. He’s just not over the detail at all.

He's the fucking prime minister. If he doesn't understand he should make it his mission to understand. Never mind poor Boris.

I'm glad posters have pointed out the difference between nursing care costs and personal care. Actually, although Nicola Sturgeon has just announced plans for a national care service, in Scotland they have made the distinction between hotel costs (laundry, meals, room etc) which are currently means tested and the costs of care (help washing, dressing, eating etc) which are not for almost 20 years now.

I don't agree with using NI to pay for the new proposals but they are much fairer than the current system which means some people unlucky enough to get a condition that affects their ability to care for themselves over a number of years can spend down all their assets down to the last £23k or so.

The plans don't take account of people with a lifetime disability who are never going to be in a position to fully fund their care. There are references on this thread to people who don't own their own homes. Actually most people needing publicly funded social care are under 65 and have very severe health problems or long term conditions that affect their ability to live independently. Over the lifetime, the cost of care for people with a very severe learning disability is far more than the value of an average house in the south east.

Andy Burnham suggested we had a national care service in 2010. However the media said he wanted a death tax. I agree with Theeyeballsinthesky that the media coverage over many years has been ill informed and damaging for any politician trying to create a fairer system.

Another Tory smokescreen. There's no detail on how this will fix the social care system, the money will be used to pay for Tory mismanagement of the pandemic. The lower earners will be disproportionatly impacted. The media don't misunderstand what's happening, they willfully misreport to protect the assets of their owners. The Guardian, the Indy and Ch 4 news are the only place you'll avoid a right wing bias and the Tories are trying to privatise Ch4

@MereDintofPandiculation

If you have assets, why shouldn’t you pay? What’s the problem with that? By the same token, if you have assets, why shouldn't you pay for any medical care you need?

Because it’s not the same token. Why wouldn’t you pay your own living expenses in a care home just like you do at home? The state doesn’t pay for your food, council tax and electricity bills if you have care at home, why should it if you move to a care home? Especially if you’ve got assets worth hundreds of thousands.

As a social worker this is going to cause us hell. The finance conversation is already awful.

I don't agree with using NI to pay for the new proposals but they are much fairer than the current system which means some people unlucky enough to get a condition that affects their ability to care for themselves over a number of years can spend down all their assets down to the last £23k or so.

This may be a stupid question, because I’m not aware of all the details currently. But, is that £23k bit being kept? I mean, say you have £100k, do you stop paying once you get down to £23k, or do you stop paying once you’ve paid £86k?

@Zotter, with dementia, the point is that although it’s an illness, the care needed is usually just social - washing, dressing, general supervision - someone being there 24/7. By the time a certain stage of dementia is reached, 24/7 care and supervision are usually very necessary - the person will often not be safe to be left alone at all.

Both my DM and my FiL had dementia and by the time 24/7 care and supervision were needed, both ended up in care homes, both self funded, from savings and proceeds of the sale of their houses.

Must say that we were glad to be able to choose the time and place, and not have to rely on the tender mercies of social services, who will often wait until family carers are on their knees with stress and exhaustion before residential care is offered.

Might add that the care homes we eventually chose were by no means the most expensive, but were extremely good.

@Zotter

Currently, if you require nursing care in a care home, that element is paid for by local authorities at the rate of about £550 a month. - I don’t think that is true if you have dementia?

It is if you have nursing needs, eg skin breakdown and pressure sores because of immobility. What most dementia patients don’t get is CHC, Continuing Health Care, which pays not just health costs but all living costs, meaning your £1000+ a week nursing home fees are paid for you.

I’m another social care user that don’t think make difference to me. I have no savings yet charged £6500 a year. You have DWP saying I need mim of £140 live on and run my home a week. Yet council decides i only need £90 and that is income they can take. Plus of course take all my care PIP.

If you have no savings but say have good pension of £400 a week there’s no way let you keep that for living expenses. I’m talking in own home not where everything is provided. The form will be no savings ok can’t take any. But we decided your income is higher than mim level we expect so we take £250 week that’s income not savings so different matter. Even if cap comes in for me on “savings” or “assets” of which I have none. My “income” only state benefits will still be fair game.

I end up much much less live on and I have Disability so it’s not 5y more like 50 years of my life than a neighbour on same benefits but have a partner who’s able to provide same care. Still doesn’t change why my life is poverty compared to her.

What most dementia patients don’t get is CHC, Continuing Health Care, which pays not just health costs but all living costs, meaning your £1000+ a week nursing home fees are paid for you

And why on earth would they get it? Why would someone with hundreds of thousands of £ in assets get their living costs paid by the state? It’s bonkers.

It is so difficult to sort, and we seem so adverse to letting the old die. Back in the day families looked after their old, infirm relatives, who, because they were old and infirm, had the decency to die reasonably quickly; pneumonia, the old man’s friend, or a heart attack etc. Now they would be whisked off to hospital for antibiotics, stents, bypasses etc, and continue existing for years. I once did a stint on the RVS ward trolley in the local hospital and was shocked by how many old, demented people were being treated. I know they are someone’s much loved relative, but surely there comes a time to say they could be saved, but with the dementia is there any point.

I’m on the fence regarding euthanasia, would hate to think of an elderly person feeling like a burden and wanting to opt for it.

How do other countries fund their elderly care? I know it’s a problem throughout the world but perhaps we could learn from elsewhere. I would be pretty sure though, that those with good care systems have higher rates of taxation.

I have savings. For a rainy day. I choose not to buy new cars, luxury holidays etc etc. If the rainy day never arrived (lose my job etc etc) The intention was to help my children get a house when they are older. I don’t have savings because I am rich. I have savings because I have been bloody careful over the years. Well that’s going to change from now on. To be honest I don’t want to live in a care home with no life. We wouldn’t treat a dog like this. We need a discussion as to when we chose to say we want to die.

@nettie434

I'm glad posters have pointed out the difference between nursing care costs and personal care. Actually, although Nicola Sturgeon has just announced plans for a national care service, in Scotland they have made the distinction between hotel costs (laundry, meals, room etc) which are currently means tested and the costs of care (help washing, dressing, eating etc) which are not for almost 20 years now.

I don't agree with using NI to pay for the new proposals but they are much fairer than the current system which means some people unlucky enough to get a condition that affects their ability to care for themselves over a number of years can spend down all their assets down to the last £23k or so.

The plans don't take account of people with a lifetime disability who are never going to be in a position to fully fund their care. There are references on this thread to people who don't own their own homes. Actually most people needing publicly funded social care are under 65 and have very severe health problems or long term conditions that affect their ability to live independently. Over the lifetime, the cost of care for people with a very severe learning disability is far more than the value of an average house in the south east.

Andy Burnham suggested we had a national care service in 2010. However the media said he wanted a death tax. I agree with Theeyeballsinthesky that the media coverage over many years has been ill informed and damaging for any politician trying to create a fairer system.

Andy Burnham’s proposal was very sensible, I think he said 10% of anyone who needed care’s assets would be set aside. The rest they could leave to inheritance etc. He was very against the working poor being asked to foot the bill for elderly care when the elderly sit on the biggest assets.

@MereDintofPandiculation

If you have assets, why shouldn’t you pay? What’s the problem with that? By the same token, if you have assets, why shouldn't you pay for any medical care you need?

My question too. Although I suspect this govt would love us all to pay for medical care, hence it's running down of the NHS