Cameron’s Solution to our Ageing Population: Let Them Die

[ttosca]

Figures released yesterday reveal a sharp rise in deaths across Britain last year, predominantly of women over 85 in the poorest areas. Sheffield University?s Professor Danny Dorling, who studied the numbers suggests the data may portend the first fall in British life expectancy since the Second World War. Cameron and his government are solving the problem of our ageing population by withdrawing the life support of properly funded, qualified and committed care services for old people.

The figures for England and Wales were taken from the Office of National Statistics, and for Scotland, the General Register for Scotland. They showed a 5% rise in deaths above ordinary numbers, and it was poor, elderly women that accounted for the majority of the rise.

But this should come as no surprise. It was exactly what researchers predicted in 2008, after extensive research revealed that the health inequality gap (the difference in life expectancy between rich and poor) in Britain was already bigger than it was during the Great Depression during the 1930?s. Their review of deaths between 1921 and 2007 revealed that poor people were dying more often and younger than richer people, and at an ever accelerating rate. Although life expectancy was rising overall, persistent socio-economic inequalities meant that the life expectancies of the poorest failed to keep pace with the average. Writing in the British Medical Journal at the time, the University of Bristol and Sheffield researchers stated:

?By 2007, for every 100 people under 65 dying in the best-off areas, 199 were dying in the poorest. This is the highest relative inequality recorded since at least 1921.? They added ?The economic crash of 2008 might precede even greater inequalities in mortality between areas in Britain,?

Therefore it should come as no surprise that if poor people were dying at twice the rate of rich people six years ago, that this final stage of the neoliberal apocalypse of our public services would have exacerbated the situation ? exactly as we were warned it would, back in 2008.

cont'd...

scriptonitedaily.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/camerons-solution-to-our-ageing-population-let-them-

'Poor people are dying more often'.... ?

did Cameron actually say that though? where?

But the rise in deaths was evident in 2008, before the current government.

It is surely too soon to tell if the rise in deaths in 2012 (when we suffered a very long, very cold winter) denotes a sharp upturn in the existing trend of increasing numbers of deaths among the ageing poor.

I actually don't disagree with your argument but I don't think the statistics quoted back it up.

I am caring for 3 elderly relatives.
I work and have a school age child and one at university.
1 elderly person is in a care home costing £900 per week.

The work involved in being a carer is the equivalent of a full time job. The stress is huge. Dealing with hospital appointments, assessments, prescriptions, cooking meals and ferrying them about is extremely time consuming. It takes a forest of trees and hours of time to get a care package, a blue badge, an eye test, an OT assessment etc.

The relative in the care home is demented, incontinent, has virtually no quality of life, but in all probability will live another 5 to10 years.
I think we have some difficult decisions to face, as a society.

I know that if I become demented and incontinent, do not recognise my family, I do not want to be here. I want my time on this earth to be quality time and I want my children to enjoy my company, then I want to go, with dignity intact.

I don't know what David Cameron actually said, but I think quality of life is much more important than length of life.

My parents never had the responsibility of looking after elderly, sick parents. People simply didn't live so long, with the conditions that they do now.

I am sorry if people are offended by this, but it is honestly how I feel.

Much as this pains me to say this but Cameron has no influence on the NHS in Scotland so maybe something other than political policy was to blame?

If you look through extensive sociological statistical data in complex environments where it is difficult or impossible to separate out correlations and causal links, then to some extent you can find what you set out wanting to find. I suspect this is the case with the work of Professor Dorling, who was described by Simon Jenkins as "geographer royal by appointment to the left".

I suspect that hypothermia is becoming an important factor in death rates among the elderly and this is being exacerbated by rising gas and electricity prices as a result of the absurd and misguided green subsidies for windmills and other such white elephants.

3littlefrogs, my mum has similar feelings. She is caring for her elderly parents (she's a pensioner herself!) and I think is genuinely concerned about how she avoids putting her children through the situation she nows finds herself in - both for her sake and ours.

Equally no-one (obv including 3littlefrogs) is suggesting that this means an increase in the death rate among the elderly is actually a good thing, or that health inequalities between rich and poor are desirable.

Agree with 3littlefrogs, it's time for some adult conversations.

I am very sorry for 3littlefrogs, and absolutely agree with her 4th paragraph. So let's have an adult conversation, Lazyjaney.

Presumably no-one would argue that we should ration health care or refuse to look after elderly people, would they? Maybe voluntary euthanasia and living wills deserve another airing, but things are not going to get better for elderly people until the government raises taxes and pays more for the NHS, community care and care homes.

So that people like 3littlefrogs get more support and are not ground down by insupportable burdens of caring for elderly people.

The really infuriating thing is it will cost MORE if people like 3littlefrogs are so ground down by caring for elderly/disabled relatives that they break down themselves. Stupid short-sighted cuts in social care and the NHS not only cause misery and suffering, and premature deaths, they cost the state more in the long run.

Premature, avoidable deaths caused by poverty are clearly a bad thing and outrageous in the fifth or sixth richest country in the world. (Think we may have just slipped down the rankings.)

That's a different issue from the morality and practicality of euthanasia when people make an individual choice that they don't want to go on living. Which IMO should clearly be available.

Avoidable, early deaths = inhumane.
Forcing people to suffer because we are too cowardly to allow euthanasia = also inhumane.

I'm afraid to say after watching and caring for two elderly people who have lost their dignity, have no quality of life, not overly aware of surroundings with no real improvements to look forward to, I am saddened that they cannot be allowed to slip away peacefully. It has shocked me to the core that with each infection they are pumped full of drugs to keep them alive, for what?

I've had long chats with dd and Dh over this and do not want to ever be in their position, it's awful. I hope by the time I'm there we have a little more compassion. Keeping people alive is not always right.

I never thought I would write that tbh, but after seeing my MIL and Uncle in this position made me realise that doctors have sometimes become too good at keeping people alive.

In some countries they have 'villages' where elderly people live and are cared for by teams of qualified staff who are available 24/7. It sounds a bit like a combination of warden flats and residential care homes, but with people living in their own homes on the same street. Not sure how it works in practice - does anyone know?

That is true, onestep, but there are plenty of elderly/disabled people who are living in misery because services that should be available are not. It is shocking and disgusting that some care visits are being restricted to 15 minutes, for instance.

My mother has dementia and no quality of life whatsoever. She could live for another twenty years. Luckily she is fairly happy at the moment but there are women in her home who are in utter anguish every day. Screaming. Frightened. Personal care is a big problem because they don't understand what the carers are doing and why. It must feel like being raped every time. I have to prepare for this happening to her.

The problem is that by the time dementia is diagnosed, the person does not have mental capacity to make decisions. I know in my heart that my mother would not want to have the life she has now, let alone what is in store for her as the condition progresses but it's too late for her. Can a living will provide for this eventuality?

The 15-minute visits are horrendous - both for the carer and the cared-for. Just impossible!

Providing care isn't just about money. I am a nurse and net many people who say "oh I could never do your j

Stupid iPhone. My point was many many people would not even consider nursing or caring as a career. Someone has to staff these type of services. Also OP I'd be interested on how long you really expect humans to live for? Obviously not to say we should all be killed off after a certain age, but this sort of comment plus the media storm about the care of the dying pathway makes me think that this country has completely lost sight if the fact that we will all die. Every single one of us. Peol

I work as a Community Carer, most of my clients are elderly and have been referred by Social Services (so do not have the money to pay for private care).

Our call times are being cut wherever humanly possible - and even sometimes when not! Can you help an elderly, frail lady to shower, dry & get dressed then make her some breakfast, wash up afterwards, assist her to take medication & complete all the necessary paperwork in 15 minutes? No, neither can I. Then remember this is a person who needs help, so is very likely to have mobility issues & be unable to do these basic jobs for themselves. It is hard enough to fit everything into a 30 minute call, but to do so in 15 minutes is impossible. I am regularly staying in calls for 45 minutes, when I am only being paid for 15 minutes! I don't have the heart to say "well that's it, your time's up" and leave (nor would it be safe for me to do so). Not all Carers feel the same though, and many many calls are being rushed or jobs missed (for example, no shower being offered as no time).

That's appalling, lazymonkey, but sadly not uncommon.

Hang on a minute, myself and 5 friends are caring for 14 people with learning disability youngest of us is 66 eldest 75. I am 70 and am caring for 5 aged 8-32. If we fall ill and are neglected there will be 14 people requiring care. BTW none of us have dementia and could run rings mentally around much younger people.

I take your point, 2old2beamum!

What the OP is also pointing out is the difference in life expectancy between rich and poor areas. I think what this might mean is that in poor areas, the pressures on the NHS and care homes will be much higher and consequently the care received will be worse. Or maybe there will be fewer old people, as they will all be dead?

Either way, can't see the private companies queuing up to look after the elderly in these places, but at least the NHS will do it. Until it no longer exists, that is. When our lives will be nasty, brutish and short and a pauper's grave will be our lot.

Those who "benefited" from the healthy diet of the heavily rationed years are now mainly over 80.

The warnings that the changes to diet will lead to a shortening of lifespan have been appearing on and off for years, and are the result of slower acting health-related choices over decades. Blaming a current government for a slow-moving issues such as the interplay between public health and longevity is usually misplaced.

Though if you think it is not misplaced, that 2008 report of the situation in the Blair years showed widening social inequality up to 2007, which is doubly shocking given that those were economic boom years.

What direct link is there between these statistics and David Cameron other than you wanted to have an eye catching title OP.

The statistics you quote largely reflect a pre-coalition period. There have also been other factors, increased utility costs, poor winters etc that will have affected mortality too.

It probably doesn't matter to most of us who did what. What to do next is the important thing.