Cost of social care. Aibu

[Onlyifyouknewthetruth2026]

My son gets overnight respite 2 nights a month. Not a great amount but still respite. I have attached a pic showing the annual cost which is alot. Just for reference.

Got me thinking about social care and money.
With a aging population and more calls for social care no wonder it's on its knees
Im curious what others think about the cost.

Sadly, Family Fund doesn’t provide driving lessons to parents any more. That stopped a long time ago. They have stopped the Family Fund mobility support programme for those with disabled DC with mobility difficulties below 3y/o, an even bigger loss IMO.

Oh indeed I was more thinking of the ones who don’t work so basically have no excuse to not drive their own child other than but he is entitled to school transport ones.

One school mum locally has one child at a sen school and other in mainstream. She is always moaning about the school transport but she doesn’t work and drives. Her husband is often available for the school run as well as he works 2 on 3 off. The Sen school is only 15 minutes further up the road than the school the other children go to.

We have never been eligible for family fund as we both work. Dh full time and me bank shifts.

Some families who have both parents working are still eligible for Family Fund.

Work isn’t the only reason for transport. For example, for some DC, school transport is crucial to their transition into school each morning.

I’m sorry but that’s to me is a really poor excuse for thousands to be paid for transport by the tax payer.

If the child can learn what the school taxi/bus is they can learn what the school gates are for a transition it just takes time as I’m sure them learning that the bus/taxi means school.

And its not just that aa i said earlier drop off and pick up time at my sons special school is like a militry operation its far easier and to get 200+ severly disbled students on and off transport
Then for parents turning up in Dribs and Drabs the latter would br chaotic.

How to show you haven’t got a clue.

No, for some DC, their parents taking them will never work no matter how long you persevere. And if it leads to the breakdown of the placement, costs could well increase to find another placement.

If we all lived hand to mouth in small prehistoric settlements, various types of people would not be fed or looked after enough, and would die as the community would not be able to afford to use resources on them. Not necessarily euthanasia so much as having to be last in the queue for resources. I would have been one of those people who would not have reached adulthood.

I think some people seem to think that that's where we are now, and this is where their instinctive feeling that some people are less deserving comes from and we just can't afford them. We aren't living like that, though, we are still a modern industrial society that's even now relatively wealthy, and our society can afford to spend resources on care for those who need it. We might be less wealthy than we were but we are not at the stage of having to leave people to die on hillsides, even if some types of care for all of us may end up looking different.

It's not that there's no limit to this - of course we couldn't do it if suddenly every second person was getting dementia aged 45 or every third child born needed huge amounts of specialist care. Then as a society we wouldn't be able to cope. But that just isn't where we are now, even if we are inefficient and are being ripped off by private equity firms and there are other things that urgently need to be improved.

Not the same as uc doesn't pay £££ on taxi transport. What would you like to happen?
Generally curious.
Like I said it's a observation and one i haven't or will ask for. It would save money. Would you rather my council pay 8k in the space of 8 yrs ( Will likely be more as My son will eventually go more often as he gets older) or
Pay 1 to 2 k on driving lessons
Would you rather the council pay more on principle? or a very real cost saving solution? that would make a massive difference to my son and his life. or
Scarp transport all together? Which would then mean he can longer attend respite

But that is where we are heading, unless things taper off.

If the country were to start spending within its means then presumably families would have to look after their old at home like they used to and get whatever 'budget' they were entitled to as financial help. If the family didn't want to care for the mum/dad whatever or if the old person had not put funds aside themselves then yes I guess they would be screwed. However our choice is the whole country is screwed (in debt) or the family/person spending it is screwed (takes out debt).

At least this way each person/family gets whatever help the govt can afford and then it is up to them to manage. I mean we are all suppose to be grown-up's so you would think that would be perfectly normal to manage your own finances. People would soon cut their cloth once they realised the govt was refusing to go into debt anymore.

The figures are not exactly the same as they obviously fluctuate depending on various factors (interest rates, what debt has been refinanced etc). However we borrow approx 130 billion per annum and the interest on our current debt is approx 110 billion per annum. So the vast majority of what we borrow each year is to fund our debt interest.

What has the IMF said? I watch lots of current affairs but things are obviously changing all the time.

Thank god somebody else understands.

The way I see it we have to cut 130 billion off our spending each year so that we can stop taking on anymore borrowing.

Then we have to cut another xx off our spending to start repaying the debt.

Obviously this can be made up of cuts to spending or increases in taxes/growth.

People keep saying 'we are not there yet, we don't need to leave people to die on hills'

If we actually lived within our means and budgeted to repay the debt at a sensible pace then yes we are indeed 'there yet'

It's all too horrible though so lets just stick our fingers in our ears and ignore it for a while longer and spend, baby, spend.

Because it provides context. The exorbitant cost is really only put into full perspective when we consider that a person might work full time for an entire year and just about have the money to fund a few sessions of care for one child. So how many people collectively work full time and pay tax for that tax to be amalgamated to cover care for a single child for a few hours over the course of a year? It’s shameful and excessive, as OP points out.

OP, it’s a similar shock to the one I have while exploring for care home costs for an elderly relative.

Children usually have parents but older adults often don't have anyone. Or you push (mainly women) in to poverty because they have to give up work - and the benefits bill goes up.

But what happens to those with no family? Or whose family have moved abroad? We used to have work houses to cater to those people, do you propose a return to those?

I can assure you most of that money does not go to the staff member doing the work. Part of the reason why staffing levels are so low.

I think this is a really tough dilemma but because we start to stray very heavily into areas of personal responsibility and ultimately fairness.

I have seen people argue that they are saving the state money through looking after their own child as the alternative is that the child will go into care. If every parent started to believe this and used this to blackmail the state then what would happen? 'Give me more money to look after my child otherwise I will abandon them and you will be forced to fund an astronomical bill for their care!'

As a country we have decided that individuals are responsible for funding their own driving lessons. This can be hugely difficult for lots of people and I remember really struggling when I was younger to afford to pay for the lessons and the test itself. Loads of my peers were the same and we had no help from our parents or the state. It would be very unfair in this context to ask me and other tax payers to fund your driving lessons as well. I know there is an element of cutting of your nose to spite your face but for the welfare state to work then people have to buy into it and feel that it is fair. If we erode this through offering huge benefits and advantages to specific groups at the cost of everyone else then this is going to be hugely divisive and unpopular. How can we say to a 17 year old teenager that they are personally responsible for funding their own lessons and test and say to a full grown adult that the state will fund it because you haven't got round to sorting it yourself yet despite having years to do it?

Hmm, comparing care and driving lessons is very much like comparing apples and pairs - you can in most cases find ways around the latter (and it's a finite cost, although people obviously vary on how many lessons they need), whereas the kind of care we're talking about here goes on for years - the person's whole lifetime in the case of severely handicapped children) - and the people needing the care are very much not able to provide for themselves or find other alternatives.

I'll be watching this and I think a few on this thread may be interested.

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/documentaries/channel-4-announces-experimental-documentary-announced-newsupdate/

I think that's a very fair point. I dont expect the state to pay for my lessons, just an observation. I could've in the past spent my money on lessons instead of a holiday etc but made a choice not to. Now I can work bank shifts we dont have much disposable cash so no longer able to pay for lessons often. So I do understand the whole personal responsibility element of it.

Thanks for flagging this, it's good that attention is being brought to this, hopefully while it's still not too late

I’ve added a pic of 2026/2027 budget breakdown for my local authority.
Adult Social Care is a LOT more than SEND.
OP the cost you’ve shown seemed mind boggling to me until other posters broke down how this cost might have been arrived at.
How are we not providing better care for our most vulnerable when there is so much wrong in our country ie - Water bosses and utility bosses getting huge bonuses whilst providing a poor service.
Parents of SEND children must be under so much stress. As an older person I do my utmost to stay as fit as possible and pray I never need care.
I don’t know what the answer is, funding is obviously an issue but how can costs be lessened without compromising care?

There is a vast difference between the normal role of a parent and that of a parent carer. They are not comparable. At all. Parent carers, and other unpaid carers, do save the state a fortune. Their role goes far beyond personal responsibility.

It depends on your definition of personal responsibility. If you choose to have children then arguably personal responsibility encompasses caring for those children. We all roll the dice when we have children with the knowledge that there is a chance that we will have children that require additional care. 10% of children receive DLA so the odds aren't tiny. When the child is born then does the responsibility for caring for the child shift automatically to the state because they are disabled? If this is the case then the whole system collapsed as there is absolutely no way the state can step in for all the care that parents carry out for their disabled children.