Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

One million older people in need 'struggle alone' - BBC News
I pay for homecare visits for an hour every day - £12.17 per hour.

I am thankful that my extra income of low rate attendance allowance plus an 'industrial accident' addition to my 'works' pension covers the cost.

I never waste those homecare hours on daily washing and dressing - I never go out so a wet flannel and a change of nightwear I manage myself - I do have help with a weekly shower.

The homecare time is used -
preparing a cooked 'brunch' (usually boiled eggs)
plating up a cooked meat salad for my evening meal
emptying and filling dishwasher and washing machine
unpacking and storing weekly grocery delivery
changing bedlinen weekly
vacuuming and dusting everywhere weekly
taking domestic refuse out weekly
These duties are essential for my survival and dignity
I am aware that others who cannot afford them, don't get them.

A society is only civilised when it takes care of its most vulnerable members.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Many of the chores that you have to pay for, I do voluntarily for my Mum.
She thinks she is an imbuggerance, but I do them because I can.
I am not sure that I would trust strangers with the care of my mum.......this is not to say that there are some good carers out there doing a fantastic job for low wages.
I just WANT to do my bit. It is a privilege to do these jobs...a bit of payback for her sacrifices for us as we grew up.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

I also keep an eye on my elderly neighbour......he is a relatively fit 80+.
When I cook a family meal, I plate one up for him too....it is not much more in the great scheme of things to chuck a bit extra food on to cook......and I know he is getting a nutritious meal cooked from fresh.

I hope that if ever I was in need someone would do the same for me.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

It is just being good neighbourly.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

There's a lot of that in our little neighborhood ... after the snowstorms, we all help one another shovel out ... and the big guy with shovel and snowblower is my neighbor Don ... 83 years old and still shoveling.

And it's not only the elderly that benefit from "being good neighbourly." Here's what one community in Ontario did:


Christmas in October for terminally ill boy celebrated by Ontario town - CBC.ca | Metro Morning

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

I really like that.
In days gone by communities were made up of extended family....and they all looked out for the elderly and the children......and even people who were not family were 'honorary' aunties and uncles.....this seems largely to have gone by the board.
I know that people have busy lives....but it seems that there is little effort to get to know neighbours these days.
That is the sad part of all this.
We can all find ourselves in difficulties of one sort or another.
And money isn't always the answer. Sometimes the touch of human kindness is worth far more than gold.
A good turn is beneficial to both the giver and the recipient.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Camerons 'Big Society'.....the young look after the old..so the government doesn't need to!

Regardless of the fact that they have already paid into a government scheme that says they will look after you!

And it's great for those of you that live a mile or so away from your nearest and dearest, buying 'bogof' foods or cooking 3 for the price of 2 meals (be honest, does it actually cost you financially?)..

ain't too bad if you can drop in once a week from 30+miles away (at least they wont starve if you take them to the local 2 for 1 'pub').....

and once a month for 100+ miles away...they won't get too bloated in death to stink the house out before it's noticed!

Margaret was pointing out that she could afford a little help....many others cannot! She is fortunate (if you can call an hour a day for someone who has worked all their life and contributed to the country fortunate)..

This is nothing to do with community or kindness or neighbourliness!....it's an expectation of, after paying into a society for many years and increasing its wealth, being able to live in comfort without having to pay 'again'!!

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

I understand what Margaret was saying.....but way back when.....you know, those old days, people were proud. Often too proud to ask for help, whether they had paid for it or not.
There is no such thing as the 'Big Society'.....it is just one of those 'sound bites' that all politicians of all persuasions use to bamboozle the electorate.

It is an economic fact that you can only have what you can afford to pay for.....welfare has to be paid for.
The labour government encouraged those on welfare to stay there.....they did not encourage aspiration, they encouraged dependence(this ensures that those on welfare continue to vote for those who give them the money).
We have an ageing population and the pension system is a bit like a Ponzi scheme( I said a bit like) in that those currently working and paying in, are contributing to a system from which they may never actually benefit. By the time the workers of today are eligible for a pension there won't be anything left.

There are a lot of elderly people in our communities who have children who visit only every blue moon.
I do not want the big society to look after my mother. And I have said that there are very many good and capable carers, but there are also those who are slap dash, badly trained and those who are quite frankly a danger to our elderly.
I do not want my mother to be subjected to these. I prefer to take on her care needs myself...no one can look after my mother like I can, because no one knows her like me.
She too, has paid into this support system.....and as such would be eligible for help.

If those of us who can help do so, then there will be more help available for those who have no one.....and isn't that how it should be?
We cannot rely on the goverment for all of our needs. We have to be prepared to take some responsibility for our own lives.....and those we care about.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

I do not expect my only child (a son) to do for me what Margaret does for her mother,
because he has a 2 hour commute to work every day and has health problems of his own.
His wife also works, and she has parents older and sicker than me.

I agree that some homecare workers do not meet expectations, but when you pay peanuts (about £7 an hour), you get monkeys.
I find that the younger they are the less 'gumption' they have, eg. needing detailed instruction on how to boil an egg , how to 'damp dust' furniture.

As a private (not LCC funded) customer I have the advantage in that I can request (not demand) the carers I prefer.

For most of this year I have been fortunate to have the same two good carers for most of the time.

Staff turnover is high. Recently one of the two fell sick and the other left the job.
For two months my life has been more difficult because carers new to me have been allocated - as many as six different carers in a week. When I have to explain 'where, why and how' ( eg. bedding in that cupboard, nighties in that drawer, how to operate washer and dishwasher) daily to strangers in my home, I do get exasperated often.

So even as a 'private funder' the service falls short of what I need.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Margaret, I agree that it isn't always something that parents want their children to be doing for them...and I reckon it is more difficult for sons..especially if there is an element of personal care(as there is with my mum).

My Mum does not want me doing all this stuff for her but recognises that she needs it to be done...and that with my background and the fact that I like doing it(it gives me the opportunity to spend time with my mum, to chat while I am working) and that she won't be around forever(something which makes me shudder to think about) she has come to the understanding that it is what has to be.

When Ma came out of hospital after her heart attack, I was given plenty of opportunities to get help for her. Lots of agencies(Age Concern, Help the Aged, British Heart Foundation, Diabetes UK) contacted me with offers of help, but I am fit healthy and can do what needs to be done.
I reckon that by me doing this, it leaves people free to go and help those who have no-one....and isn't that a good thing?

Margaret, I feel for you. It must be very difficult to have your care needs dealt with by people who you do not know. I think continuity of care is very important. I also think that carers should have some personal attachment to those that they care for.
If you are caring for someone you like then you do it in a much more personal way...and invariably this means better, with more compassion and feeling.
My mum has a friend who is in her nineties.....she lives in Eastbourne, has no family members close by and her carers are foreign, often cannot speak English and from what she tells my mum, they do a poor job...just the basic minimum...and she pays a private agency for her care £16 per hour. The carers don't get this amount, they are paid at the basic wage......so yes....pay peanuts get monkeys.(maybe monkeys would do a better job of it too)

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Especially if it's those smart arse PG tips Chimps & you'd be guaranteed a decent brew. ;)

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

I think Margaret Pilkington has got her priorities right caring for her mother while she can and leaving carers free to help people who have no family to help. I think these days people can be so self centred not caring about anyone but themselves. I had two children and worked part time on evenings while they were young so I was at home if they were ill or during holidays. By the time they were older so were my mum and dad so I stayed on the evening shift so I could do things for them. They lived about 7 miles away from me and I could drive so not too far. They had both had heart attacks so could not do much so I did their cleaning once a week and their weekly shop and ferried them to appointments etc. I lost them both in 3 months several years ago now but I am glad I did what I could while they were here. At least I do not have any regrets as I know I did my best. Today some would rather work full time to get money for fancy cars and holidays instead of having a little less coming in so they could help out more. I might have worked part time for years but I always paid a full National Insurance stamp. Mind you knowing what I know now I would not have bothered but that's another story !!!!

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Rowlf, you are right about priorities and responsibilities.
We talk about rights, but with rights come responsibilities. none of us should expect the state to take over our lives...in fact many do not want the state meddling in their lives.

As you say when the inevitable happens I will be able to put my hand on my heart and know that I did what I could.
I don't make any sacrifices so that i can do stuff for my Mum, it is she who made the sacrifices for us when we were growing up......there was no help for her then...unless you wanted to go on the 'parish' or the Nash.

I think today people expect too much and do not want to, or expect to pay for it.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Would that be the good old days of rickets, polio and smallpox? Where children were sent up chimneys and a working week consisted of six days and you died from a minor illness because you couldn't afford a doctor?

I think you will find that it was a conservative government (under thatcher), that massaged the unemployment figures year after year by encouraging people to go long term sick and pushed early retirement.

Yes welfare has to be paid for...but economically speaking, if a government specifies a rate that I should pay so that I can be supported at the end of my working life and I do so...pray tell why I should have to rely on family or my personal savings to supplement my basic needs?

Oh and if this government stopped cutting funding to county councils and thus allowed them to pay decent wages to carers, the wheat could easily be separated from the chaff and MargaretR wouldn't be losing her carers to Aldi.

Kinda sucks that Camerons version of 'big society' values people more for sitting at a checkout than providing for a decent quality of life to those who paid their taxes and national insurance throughout their lives, expecting to be comfortable in their twilight years :(

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

No, I am talking about the days when I was growing up.
I do not remember anyone with Rickets.....we got free cod liver oil(yuk) and orange juice(yum).
Yes there was polio.....we got a vaccine on a sugar lump to prevent it.
None of my peers were shoved up chimneys....nor did we do half time in the mills from the age of twelve.
The NHS came into being the year I was born, so none of us were denied access to medical care.

I am quite well aware of governments massaging figures.....all of them still do it.
As for asking you to pay more for your retirement.....I can just imagine the howls of pain there would be at that suggestion.....and previous governments would have been hard pressed to predict the burgeoning welfare state, and get enough in their coffers to ensure that they could remain solvent. The position we are in was caused by governments spending money they did not have......not a sensible economic policy because someone has to pay it back

Perhaps if some previous government had had the cojones to plug the loopholes which allow companies and individuals to avoid paying their share of dues, there would be enough to fund all welfare needs....but none of them have....not one of them, of any persuasion.
Politicians do not have to worry about being old and infirm because the make sure they have enough money(courtesy of us) to ensure a comfortable life out of office.
None of them care about you and your needs, or me and mine...they look out for themselves.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

As for your comment about the Big Society, and how society values certain sectors of the work force.....well, Guinness I am sorry but that is quite plainly a ridiculous statement(and I mean that with respect).
Firstly the 'Big Society' was a sound bite. Probably dreamed up by some Public Relations company who thought it sounded like what the electorate would fall for......just because a politician mentions something does not make it happen. Why would young people do something for old folk for nothing?
As for the comment about the way society values people on the job they do.....well that is risible. If that were the case then firemen, the police, doctors, nurses, teachers would be on the salaries that footballers get and footballers would be on a heck of a lot less.

Old folk, disabled people are not a priority of society.....as we get older and as our health fails we become invisible.....disposable almost. But then if you remember the Dickensian times you call the old days you will already know that.
Why should a carer hoof from one old persons house to another's to cook clean and deal with personal needs for a pittance? Even if you liked what you were doing, the economics of doing such a job make impractical and uneconomic......gratitude from society goes nowhere when you are trying to pay the electricity bill with a cheque from the Bank of Thanks.
So if ALDI or some other supermarket pays more.....then pure economics will dictate that that is where you work.....especially if you are the sole provider.
How long will it be before the old and infirm are encouraged to shuffle off this mortal coil?
Just so the their house can be given over to some family to live in.
Society in general does not value the old and infirm.........so they are not going to pay much to keep them comfortable in their dotage........so if you really want to be comfortable in your old age then either save up now and be prepared to spend your savings on care, or suffer the consequences.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

The welfare state would not be burgeoning no where near as much, if people that hadn't contributed into it, were disqualified from taking out!!

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

You are spot on there Cashman. We are a soft touch for the ones who have not contributed but the folk who have paid in all their working lives cant get owt.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Yes, you are right, but we also have a group of claimants who won't work because they see no need.....they can get more for sitting at home than they can get from hauling their carcass out of bed at stupid o clock to go and earn a living......it is these people that I object to sustaining.
It cannot be sensible to make working for a living impractical and uneconomic.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Well to be perfectly honest, even though i always supported em, Labour have made it that way, more than anyone else.:(

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Yes, but there are some who cannot see this.
It was a cynical ploy to widen Labours voting base. They believed that those who were dependent could be guaranteed to vote for them....they stifled aspiration and ambition and made it too easy to live off the backs of others.
The welfare state was never meant to do this, it was meant to be a helping hand, a safety net, not a life plan.
My dad fought for this country, but when he was made redundant at 58 he was on the scrap heap. He was ineligible for benefits because Ma earned ten bob over the threhold......he was advised to move out of the family home so that he would be able to claim.
He did not claim...he got a part time casual job...no security, but he worked rather than claim.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

‘Big Society’ is far more than a sound bite…..this government is actively pursuing the tenets..I suggest you look at Camerons TED talk from 2010

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_cameron?language=en

Why is it ‘risible’ to suggest that people who care for the weak and vulnerable should be valued? And valued at least as much as someone who slides shopping past an electronic eye?

I argue that the government should ensure that people are cared for once they cannot contribute..and that should mean paying a fair and equitable wage to those carers.

This is the crux…….

ALDI can pay £8+ an hour because of their profit margin…in fact they could probably pay £12+ an hour and still make a considerable profit. This government could quite easily ensure care funding was adequate…however…

Care funding has been reduced every single year since the tories gained power…and they envisage further cuts until 2020…from next year companies who provide care are expected to pay the living wage despite the fact that they have less incoming funding, higher training costs, an insidious Care Quality Commission who look at ticking boxes and no longer care about the actual quality of care provided…

You are correct that anyone who can should save for their dotage….because this government do not give one fig!

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

after surviving 80s tories and trying to survive this lot its become clear to me that if you are not in poverty but not wealthy a tory government will do its damn best to tax you into poverty and if your are vulnerable , disabled or poor they will not only target you but make your life so miserable by stigmatizing you poverty is the least of your problems ..

this current lot in power isnt all the tories fault though its in their nature to be scum ..I blame labour for putting forward an un-eltectable leader and compounding that sin more so by putting their current joke of a leader in charge who is even more un-eltectable

the tories have no opposition their biggest fear from labour is that labours leader might ask a few awkward questions

the tories and the poor are united in one thing and that is that as long as labour have their current leader the poor and vulnerable are fecked

want to know why i keep saying labour leader ?

because i cant remember his name and he aint worth the effort of a google search

thats how effective he is

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Oh dear, this seems to be a circular argument(although, I prefer the term'discussion')

It is wrong to equate the care of the old and the disabled with groceries.
People who need care should not be seen like tins of beans, and have a business model applied to them.

As I said in an earlier post, the old and the vulnerable are seen as 'disposable'.
They do not matter.
Recently there has been mileage made of the fact(not sure it is actually a fact, as facts go) that the elderly are taking up care that should be apportioned to younger working members of society.....medicines, operations.....that kind of thing.
Then there was some woman who suggested that those old folk with their own property should move and let a family have somewhere to live.....I think the term she used was 'move somewhere more appropriate'.
Is that like the practice of the Inuits? They take their granny and leave her on an ice floe when she has lost her teeth and can no longer chew and soften the leather for clothes.....once she becomes unproductive she is cast out.

What we pay into National Insurance is for the health service, welfare benefits and a portion of it goes to make up our pension.
Now, how much do you think is needed for these services?
I cannot tell you, I have more important things going on in my life than to research such things just so that I can post it here....but what I do know is that it is nowhere near enough.
Especially so,since there are people coming to this country and claiming these benefits without having contributed anything.....and some who come and have no intention of contributing.

The NHS treats people from all over the world without seeking if they are entitled to treatment, without getting a penny.
Who pays for their care? We do. Those of us who have worked all our lives and contributed, and are still contributing.

Personally, I do not want the goverment to take responsibility for aspects of my life that I can deal with myself.
If they take responsibility, then I lose any control that I might have had.
And it is no good telling me that we are paying for something that we are not getting, because I don't buy it.
To pay for proper healthcare, social and welfare, then we would have to put in half of what we earned, we would have to make sure that only those who have paid in could draw benefits.

Re: Homecare "One million older people in need 'struggle alone' "
 

Oh and if you look again you will see that my comment about the value of caring for the old and the weak....the risible bit was that of comparison with other skills.

As I said previously if society were to put true values on the work of those essential members of the community.....footballers would come somewhere near the bottom, those who provide health and social care would be at the top of the scale.
Work isn't just about money(except we should not expect people to work for nothing).....work is about job satisfaction, self esteem, social worth.....but try paying the electric bill with a cheque from the Bank of Thanks...you won't get very far.
And that is why some people give up looking after the elderly to work in a supermarket.....because economic needs outweigh the job satisfaction needs.