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

[Nextdoortomeis]

As per the title.
I'm sure lots of people would like the state to pay care home fees.
But we don't live in a fair world.
Both mum and mil paid nearly £70k in fees
yes I didn't want to pay but I also wanted them to get the best care in their later years.

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

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.

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

Yes it is !

What reason would there be to lie?

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

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

I’m surprised you had to ask.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

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

My mum is in the same and it’s fine

Unfortunately it doesn’t work like that! It’s all a total muddle and distressing

Doing away with cottage hospitals was a big mistake. It has led to bed blocking in hospitals, and councils paying for people (without means) to go to private care homes.

For the millionth time, a “nice” care home is not an option if someone’s needs exceed what they can provide, or they just don’t fancy the bother. A truly “demented” person has few options. They’re not going in the liveried van to Waitrose or the garden centre, or doing chair yoga.

Agree
Care homes don’t publish the stats of how they are funded.

Or treat everyone equally.

A system where everyone has an allowance to spend
Currently the average including state pension plus LA money is approx £22,000

So give everyone £22,000 and allow them to spend it on care.
Those that have money top it up with their own

That way everyone gets the same from LAs but those with assets still top it up and so the homes can still survive. There are many Govn reports showing homes rely on self founders as LAs don’t pay enough.

But in terms of finance, you don't NEED the same. That's my point. That's what social security is for. Those who need it, regardless of why they need it.

I don't need benefit payments. Should I have them simply because I have paid more in? I don't need education or nursery hours because I don't have children? Should I have a monthly rebate because it's not fair I don't get something I don't need? Be nice if I did, but a bit of a pointless waste of state money, don't you think?

Here we go again!

In MNet land, no one in the later stages of dementia ever enjoys telling long rambling stories in which their own grandparents are still around, or chats to other residents, or enjoys listening to live Christmas carols, or jokes about Dove shower gel being made of Doves, or laughs uproariously while balancing cushions on their head.

Everyone is always distressed, anxious or aggressive.

Yes, agreed, but right now we don't have that system, we have a system based on need. So my question is, until the brave new dawn where a system which won't bankrupt the country or mean upping everyone's taxes is introduced, what do we do with those who don't have the money?

But that makes no sense. I don’t object to paying for the common good. I don’t use schools or nurseries, I don’t need benefits. But if you or I had a child we would. Or needed the nhs. Or suddenly became disabled or homeless we would.
Bit we get old and need care? We can pay. Why?

But it's quite possible they'd tell you like MIL's care home did