To feel that the way we look after the elderly in this country is downright disgusting

[Besswess88]

My NDN are 90 and 93. They have no children and they own their own home.

She is my friend really despite the age difference and we have good, deep chats. She has never been in love, never been aboard and was born in 1935 and was illegitimate (as were both my parents).

I go in regularly, obviously did their shopping throughout the pandemic, help them out now they don’t have a car, go in for a chat etc etc, just neighbourly stuff.

I got age concern involved who put them in touch with amazing service from Sainsburys who allow vulnerable people with no internet to phone through their order for free delivery and persuaded her to get some help 5 days a week (but they are just doing lunch and cleaning the kitchen floor as far as I can see for bloody £25 an hour - and I keep trying to persuade her to let them help with his personal care).

He is blind and deaf and doubly incontinent and wearing pads. They share a bed and he will go into the bathroom and take the pad off flinging it everywhere, stepping in it etc and not realising. Adult social care have told her she should sell up and buy a bungalow. He is/was a huge hoarder and most of the house cannot be used because of this and I will not go in and try to “take over” and make her try to do this. She is an intelligent women who is capable of making her own decisions.

Adult social care banged on about the risk of a fire. They have lived there like that for 50 years with no fucking fire.

If they didn’t own their own home they would get so much more support and not have to face the prospect of selling up aged 90 to fund their own care?! m

She is lifting him about and cleaning up after him, he feels awful, she is exhausted. I do what I can without taking over.

Surely we are better than this?

You're arguing with yourself.

If it's truly for (non-medical) palliative care, and assuming no dependent children under 18, why not?

Or are you all about protecting assets so they can be inherited whilst the taxpayer picks up the bills?

You say she is an intelligent woman capable of taking decisions. Why not suggest a equity release scheme that would allow them to stay in their house but provide funds for care. That would solve the immediate issues and if she's in her 90s, probably for as long as they need it.

To those suggesting selling the home and then renting, once the assets of the home are used up the state will then have to provide housing benefit for the rent. The threshold for housing benefit is £16K (care costs I think around £26K).

I'd also argue that it's quite inhumane to ask someone to move out of their home or go through equity release when elderly. Their home will be a 'safe haven' for them where they have facilities and support around them that is familiar and the security of knowing that it is theirs.

I do agree that we should all be considering whether our current homes will see us through into our very old age in our 60s and 70s and moving at that stage if not.

We are early 60s. By our mid 70s we will have downsized significantly and hopefully will have passed on as much equity to our children as possible. We will be able to fund care significantly from our occupational pensions and at the time one of us is left and requires a nursing home the occupational funds and rental from a small dwelling around cover it without assets having to be sold. I think people forget that outright owned properties can be put to work rather than sold.

Unfortunately, it does sound as if they might be refusing some of the services offered to them.

My Dad (85) lives in a fairly tidy bungalow ( abit of junk but not too bad) and has a cleaner. Since my step-Mum died, however, he’s decided that sheltered housing is the best and safest option for him- no pressure from anyone, he’s being practical as he has several health conditions. As he says, what if he had a heart attack or breathing difficulties when he’s alone on the house? Adult social care is currently organizing an alarm pendant for him, but he realizes that ultimately, he’d be safer in a sheltered flat. Plus he’ll enjoy the social side.

So we’re helping him sort everything. It’s a pain and not enjoyable at times, but he’s being sensible. It’s a fact of life that we have to prepare for our old age and if your neighbors wish to live in a dangerous hoard and recuse care, there’s no much anyone can do. ☹️

There's no suggestion in OP that they can't afford care though. And even if they can't, that's what social care is there for.

I disagree. There is nothing wrong with the system here. If she has the money she could pay for someone to sort the hoarding, pay for personal care. She chooses not to, for complex reasons.

You can't force people to have carers even though they appear to be having major problems.
I arranged for social services to come and assess "D"M to have carers in. She refused - told the assessor that her daughter (me) would be moving in to help. At the time I had two primary age school children and a job (and a DH) plus "D"M had been pretty horrible to me once I stopped obeying her every word.
Not always easy to get carers especially if double teams needed

Yes, their assets should be used to pay for their care. People should plan for it when they are younger. The government help should be for the ones who simply can't afford it.

£25 an hour for care/cleaning kitchen floor/cooking lunch is the going rate. Not sure why you think it's extortionate.

A couple of questions for you

1. If your NDN won't sell up and move what do you think SS can do to make them do this
2. Why do you think people with assets shouldn't pay for their care?

Oh, and it doesn't matter that they haven't had a fire in 50 years. They only have to have one fire, once.

Plus over the years they have become older and slower and accumulated more possessions.

Have they got a fire alarm at least?

I do agree that we should all be considering whether our current homes will see us through into our very old age in our 60s and 70s and moving at that stage if not.

That may be easier said than done! There is imo, a shortage of suitable properties for elderly people? The problem is, where we live, developers buy up bungalows, take the roof off and turn it into a 4 bedroom family house! So, the stock of bungalows is getting smaller, because few developers ever seem to build new bungalows, as their footprint is comparatively large and executive houses are more profitable. I have been looking for a bungalow for 2 years, and apart from two, backing onto a pub; none have been within walking distance of shops and/or a GP practice. We can’t assume we will be able to drive everywhere in old age! (We have to live in this county)

I can understand see this point of view every one is struggling right now. Also young people in terms of housing have it so difficult, rents are sky high and buying is out of reach for many unless they have savings or family help.

Why? And even though in their case they have no children to inherit the house?

DH pays the carers £30 for 45 minutes. They do a daily check and make sure MIL has lunch. Microwave stuff with some fresh veg. She had early parkinsons and some related dementia. It's so far keeping her at home. DH goes up once a month for a long weekend. Nobody else to help.

MIL has been told that they are being provided by SS who feel she needs the care. If she thought it was private and the NHS didn't deem it necessary she would refuse the care and frankly go apeshit.

@SofiaSoFar
If it's truly for (non-medical) palliative care, and assuming no dependent children under 18, why not?

What palliative care for someone dying from cancer wouldn't be "non medical" ?

The trouble with your argument is where does it stop? Head injury, in a coma... Charge put on house or pay up front.

Once we go down the route of charging for life limiting illness/accident, the Govt wont stop, hence we see the run down of the NHS, basically a socialist model, which the Tories hate and always have.

Why should dependent children alter anything? just sell the house upon them leaving state education..... thats what you want isn't it?

Or are you all about protecting assets so they can be inherited whilst the taxpayer picks up the bills?

I d close loopholes so the wealthy cannot use complex trust arrangements to avoid tax, i'd also charge CGT on the difference between price paid and value upon death, rather than a flat % and TH.

Unfortunately, with ever rising house prices, the only way many will be able to buy a house and hence contribute to the tax system upon death, is via inheritance.

The Taxpayer is of course the person who dies and the person/s who inherit.

@RosesAndHellebores I’ve experienced similar with my Dad, he seems to think that he shouldn’t have to pay for some types of help that simply aren’t available free of charge. He’s certainly entitled to support, but realistically, there’s limits to what can be provided free of charge. I’m covering a couple of things that he thinks are free, because they really help him out.

@Cameleongirl