Should families help pay for the care of their elderly parents in nursing homes, as suggested by the Tanaiste?

# 57

Posted: 25/03/2008 11:32

Well said Gabriel. That's common sense. People pay taxes all their lives and I see so many families with young children burdened to breaking point to try to pay for the care of their parents in nursing homes when this is a states responsibility. Families should not have to suffer this.

# 56

Posted: 25/03/2008 02:02

So Gabriel,
You think the State should pick up the tab while the family sell the home and buy a new 4X4 with the profits?
We are obliged to look after our own children so why are we not obliged to care for those that have cared for us, when we were children?
Obviously not if the old person is in need of medical intervention, then they DO have to be in a medical or semi-medical environment but there are 1,000 of elderly in homes who could quite easily stay in their own homes with just a little bit of support from their families and instead of that they are just abandoned.
I don't think that is right considering that these elderly people, did, as you say, contribute hugely to society AND their own families.

# 55

Posted: 23/03/2008 14:55

yes of course they should...many elderly patients are left by their families in acute hospitals because they do not want to care for them..this is not right..they are the families responsibility..they clog up desperately needed hospital beds if they are not mooved to nursing homes..

# 54

Posted: 20/03/2008 20:43

The Elderly should be cared for by the Goverment, in a Nursing Home of their choice and neither they nor their family should not have to contribute to their care . They have paid their dues to society and when they are assessed by the HSE as being unable to live independently ,they should be cared for in a suitable registered Nursing Home.

# 53

Posted: 19/03/2008 11:59

I don't think it is a matter of the elderly having to pay for their own care. If you look at it from another point of view, there are many elderly people in homes who do not need to be there. They are just abandoned by their families but these same families either rent the parents home out or sell it. Why should the state finance people who rip off their own parents?
If the family home has to be sold to pay for the elderly person's care, at least the old person is getting some benefit from it. Why should the uncaring 'kids' benefit?
Obviously, if an elderly person is only in receipt of his/her own pension, then, yes, the State should happily subsidise whatever is needed to care for that person.

# 52

Posted: 14/03/2008 19:34

This question comes up time and time again, and i think it is so so sad that the goverment can even suggest this, what about all the taxes the people have paid all of there lifes, its true what they say money is the root of all evil, would the TD'S be willing to take a pay cut in order to fund our health system ????? you know what they would say is no f***ing way pal

# 51

Posted: 28/01/2008 23:30

Looking through all the comments I have decided that I would not like to see my children or my grandchildren burdened with the fact that they would probably have to look after or pay for me when I become unfit to look after myself. If my pension can clothe and feed me at home it should be more than enough to cover me in a nursing home.
P.S. Anyway, I don't eat half as much these days.

# 50

Posted: 22/01/2008 10:35

Agnes, if you went part-time (and not all jobs will allow this), and could still earn a living wage to provide for your family then with the greatest respect it was within your means to do so.
I am not in that fortunate postion. Nor are thousands like me.
In the case of the family of more than half a dozen adult children, selling their parents home and dividing it amongst the off spring and then where there are circumstances where they cannot share the caring amongst, refusing to help pay for their parents care (equally divided of course) is very mean.
I wonder why this would happen.

# 49

Posted: 21/01/2008 22:20

Sorry Anonymous, what I should have said was that I gave up my career prospects by going part-time to care for my parent.
I certainly could not afford to do so as this was prior to Carers being recognised for what they do. It was very difficult as I had to ensure there was someone with my parent for the hours that I was at work.
It is a little easier now as there is good support and also financial recognition in its own right for Carers. Also, obviously the elderly person has a pension and may also have other assets.
That is the key I suppose.
On the other side, I know a family where there is more than half a dozen adult children. They sold the family home and divided it amongst the off spring and now nobody wants to care for the parent because they have the money. I would just hate to be an elderly person left at the mercy of such a family. Wouldn't you?

# 48

Posted: 17/01/2008 17:20

When the social welfare was initially set up, we were told we'd be cared for from the womb to the tomb or cradle to grave which is not the case in this country or any other that I know. What we must not overlook is the government's abdication of responsibility in all of this. They have mismanaged finances for the best part of 4 decades in this country and PLEASE DON'T MENTION THE CELTIC TIGER THAT WAS FOR EAST COASTERS AND CITY DWELLERS ONLY!!

# 47

Posted: 14/01/2008 17:46

In that case Agnes, you did have a choice and would that I could be in that position. I don't have a choice. I work - I pay my mortgage and bills.
I don't work and we no longer have a home, heat & light and food.
Giving up my job would not help me look after any elderly parent if I no longer had a home to look after them in.

# 46

Posted: 14/01/2008 16:12

Anonymous, Believe it or not, I know a bit more about this than lots of people, having been in that very situation. I gave up work to look after a parent. I couldn't afford to do so but it was the only choice I had other than to put my parent in a home when she did not need or want to be in a home.
Of course, my standard of living suffered greatly and so did every other aspect of my life but I couldn't have lived with myself if it was any other way.

# 45

Posted: 11/01/2008 10:01

Agnes, I know you're not picking but maybe you don't understand the realities for a lot of people. It is not a question of want or choice. Quite the opposite. We need to work in order to pay the mortgage and bills so simply staying at home is just not an option. I cannot be gone for 10 hours a day and stll be at home caring for an elderly parent. Not do I have the spare income to foot a nursing home bill. Perhaps youwere able to go part-time and give up your job or perhaps you had the support or a lot of savings or an excellent salary to do so. We don't. You are lucky, for us and thousands liek us, there is no 'biug earnings' to sacrifice. I wish indeed that there were.

Anon2, why are you so bitter? Providing a roof, a warm and well lit home and food for my children is not a choice, it is something one has to do as a responsible parent - I presume you don't advocate putting them out on the street or letting them starve.

# 44

Posted: 10/01/2008 20:16

Anonymous,
Firstly I want to clarify that I am not judging you or trying to 'pick on' you but I just don't understand how anyone would not want or choose to care for their own parents. There are a lot of support systems available now.
Just talking from my own point of view, I wouldn't have been able to live with myself if I had put my Mother into a home, just because she was elderly and in need of support in order to remain at home. There is always a way around it (so long as the parent is not ill or a danger to themselves or others). In my own case, yes, of course, I needed to work to live and so did my husband but we sacrificed the big earnings to care for my parent. To me, it was a no brainer. It doesn't go on forever.

# 43

Posted: 10/01/2008 20:02

To Anonymous,
Do your parents own their own home? Are they in receipt of a pension?
You do have responsibility to your parents. You cannot just say that it is not your responsibility just because you have, by choice, taken on other responsibilities.
How will you feel when your children discard you in that way just because they have children of their own?

# 42

Posted: 10/01/2008 09:08

I am talking about elderly parents having paid taxes. Given their age this provides them with some entitlements.
If am working full time with childcare responsibilities - and these ARE my responsibilities and cannot care for an elderly parent 24 X 7 and cannot afford nursing home fees of €3000 per month (heck I barely earn that), then it IS the states responsibility to step in.

# 41

Posted: 09/01/2008 18:09

Anonymous,
The answer to your question is -
You have a choice.
We pay taxes because we couldn't function as a viable economy if nobody paid taxes.
You don't pay taxes in order to abdicate your responsibilities.

# 40

Posted: 08/01/2008 10:45

Still waiting for my questions to be answered.

# 39

Posted: 07/01/2008 17:52

Well Said Martha Stewart. You said very eloquently what I had been trying to say. I'm tired too of hearing that same old argument. The State are expected to step in every time someone wants to shirk their responsibility.
We all pay taxes and we all have to live. No excuse for not caring for our own elderly.

# 38

Posted: 07/01/2008 16:17

If people do not have the means then yes the state should step in. Not 'everything' falls back on the 'state'.

# 37

Posted: 07/01/2008 08:51

If an elderly parent is in a position where they can no longer live by themselves, then obviously they need the type of care where somebody is in the house with them or they live with someone. You cannot do this if you are out of the house for 10 hours per day. That is not an excuse it is reality. If you cannot care for a parent them the state to whom that parent has been paying taxes all their lives is entitled to be cared for by the state.
I never mentoned inheritance - why are you trying to put words into my mouth?
By the time someone has paid for childcare, their mortgage and bills, out of what do you propose they pay for nursing home care? You cannot pay money which you do not have.

# 36

Posted: 04/01/2008 18:13

Listen, we 'all' pay our taxes!!! I am so tired of people saying things like that! The state does not owe us in any way. The duty of care should lie with families NOT the state. If a 'family' does not exist then the state should step in.
Where I work, I hear horrer stories every day. Stories where really, when you read between the lines, people dont want to look after their elderly parents. There is 'always' an excuse. Where possible families should be involved, its SO easy to say 'let the state do it, they owe us'... People that make such statements, well, its says SO much about YOU.

# 35

Posted: 04/01/2008 13:41

Anonymous,
This discussion is about whether families should pay for elderly care in nursing homes.
There are 1,000's of people who choose to look after their elderly at home. Fair play to them. They should be given every help & support possible.
There are other conditions such as Alzheimers and/or other physical/mental conditions that mean the patient cannot be looked after at home because it would be unsafe to do so, these people HAVE to go to a home and should be given priority.
However, to use the excuse that you have to go to work is not quite good enough as a reason not to care for an otherwise healthy, but elderly parent who may well be quite well able to cope with just a little support.
Why should the tax payers have to support you in not caring for your parent? If you choose not to care for your parents then why should you be entitled to get that free?
Of course, it is all our responsibility to care for our own as best we can, when we can.
Basically what you are saying is that because a parent pays taxes all their lives, have their own home etc, then you should inherit that, whilst the state pays for the care of your elderly parent?
That is not morally right to me. If you choose not to care for your parent who is just elderly (and not particularly sick) then you should be the one to pay for it. It stands to reason.

# 34

Posted: 03/01/2008 17:02

No it is not their responsibility to look after our babies as we choose to have them but they step in in cases where (for a number of reasons) we are unable to do so.
With elder care however it is different. They have paid taxres all their lives and so it is the states obligation to provide care, just as it is their adult children obligation to care for their own young children.
How is it possible to help every middle aged person in the country to to care for our elderly in our homes where they can longer look after themselves when we ourselves have 8 hour work days, 2 hour commutes (to pay our bills and mortgage) and childcare commitments of our own.

# 33

Posted: 03/01/2008 16:50

Sorry Anonymous, I totally disagree with you.
The State's responsibility is to support people who need support but it is not their responsibility to look after either our babies or our elderly.
I consider that abdication of responsibility to expect anyone to look after my family whether they be young or old.
We should all be helped in whatever way possible to care for our elderly at home and it should only be the States responsibility to the elderly to have them cared for when the family fails to do so or if there is no family.
Personally, I would find it difficult when I get elderly to have my family dump me in a home if there was any other way around this.

# 32

Posted: 03/01/2008 10:30

People have paid taxes all their lives Agnes. For this reason they are ENTITLED to be cared for by the state and the state has an obligation to do so.

# 31

Posted: 02/01/2008 21:31

I agree totally with Martha.
It is NOT the states responsibility to care for their own families (old or young).
We are each responsible to care for our own young and old.
Obviously there are times because of certain illnesses that one would have no choice but to institutionalise an elderly relative but not as many times as people would make you think. Most people just don't want to do it. It is THEIR responsiblity first and foremostly.

# 30

Posted: 19/12/2007 15:07

People have saved the state a fortune by caring for relatives - this s very true.
Carers have done this for years and saved the state a fortune where otherwise it would have been the DUTY of the state to take care of.

# 29

Posted: 19/12/2007 14:38

Care in public nursing homes is so much better than in (most) private ones. Why would anyone wish to contribute, for whatever reason for substandard care

# 28

Posted: 19/12/2007 13:53

There is a point here though.
What is to stop anyone refusing to care for their elderly, putting them into a home and then just selling their house or waiting for them to die, then selling their house?
I have seen this happen time and again.
Anyone who is caring for the elderly in their own homes should be helped in whatever way they can, and they are recognised much more now that in the recent past. (I know because I did it and got no help whatsoever).
If a person is institionalised and HAS the finances to pay, then they should pay. Why leave it for the kids that didn't do a thing?

# 27

Posted: 19/12/2007 13:00

Anon, People have saved the state a fortune by caring for relatives???!! Are you serious?? People should be looked after by family where possible, NOT the state. Obviously the state should step in where necessary. Too many people are wanting to throw relatives into homes, the least some people could do is care for them if at all possible.

# 26

Posted: 18/12/2007 16:22

My family was fragmented by the govt. and my siblings and I were forced on the emigration boats when our day of release from the institutions dawned. Let the govt. make retribution to all of the elderly current and retrospectively if need be. Shame on them. Callow creatures. Mind you, we did vote them in! Did we get what we deserved?

# 25

Posted: 11/02/2004 14:25

I think it is a disgrace to expect that the people who have already saved the state a fortune by caring for their relative up to the point where full time care is needed should be expected to deal with the financial burden of that care.
We want to keep my mother who has Alzheimers Disease in her home for as long as we can but there will come a stage when she will need full time care. My Father still works full time and if he gave up work to care full time their would be a huge financial burden to run the household on a carers allowance nevermind having to pay for my mothers full time care when it is needed. We all chip in as much as we can but with mortgages and the cost of living in this country it is very difficult to make ends meet.
The Tanaiste should be ashamed of herself. If all the carers working for free in this country went on strike the country would come to a stand still.
She should be helping carers to provide as much care as they can for as long as possible, she should increase the carers allowance which is a laugheable amount of money, and full time care should be provided by the state when it is need, this would give carers a light at end of a very dark and lonely tunnel. We are an aging population and the government are doing nothing to put proper services in place.

# 24

Posted: 30/01/2004 12:17

That is a domestic issue which also needs to be examined, now with both parties working, care of theelderly needs to beshared by all siblings both male and female.

# 23

Posted: 30/01/2004 12:01

Women in Ireland should let Mary
heartless Harney know what they
think of her suggestions re: care
of the elderly.

It is women for the most part who
are caring for their elderly
parents.

With T.Ds like her representing
us we don't need enemies!

# 22

Posted: 28/01/2004 21:53

No. I am disgusted with Mary Harney
to even think about the state not
looking after the elderly of this
country.I am speaking as a wheel-
chair user in my 50's,It is bad
enough to be depending on physical
assistance in some areas, but I think it would not encourage people
both eldery and disabled to keep
going or in other words "not to quit". Who wants to be a burden!
and to have children struggling to
pay for their parents maintenance
would only make one feel that they
had become a burden.

# 21

Posted: 27/01/2004 14:24

Mary Harney considers she is safe in the knowledge that her government pension and rich friends will see her through the difficulties of her old age. But she might like to consider something more immediatede like votes in the next general election and the disdain in which we regard her.

# 20

Posted: 27/01/2004 09:07

IT'S ALL VERY FINE TO SAY FAMILIES SHOULD PARTICIPATE FINAACIALLY BUT THOSE NOW GROWN CHILDREN ARE STRUGGLING TO KEEP A ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD AND KEEP THEIR JOBS AS WELL AS RAISE AND EDUCATE THEIR OWN CHILDREN. ALL IF WHICH ARE TASKS TREMEMDOUSLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IN THEIR PARENTS TIME. IN SHORT, THEY CANNOT GIVE WHAT THEY DO NOT HAVE.

# 19

Posted: 27/01/2004 07:45

This question certainly has provoked a reaction from people. It is obvious that it a very emotive subject. I work in a Hospital which cares for the elderly and I see the ongoing problems that relatives and carers meet to try to keep their parents at home.
I dont believe that it will come to needing families to sell their parents homes to pay for long term care. I believe that in 25 years time we have enough young workers in Ireland to pay enough taxes to subsidise care of the elderly. It is not as if all our population will be over 65 in 25 years time. We are very fortunate to have had an increase in population in the past few years and I see those people being the strength behind the vunerable. However in saying that only 10% of the elderly fall into the catagory of being vulnerable and need long term care or services in the community.

I support Mary Harney in her thinking that families should support their own. Parents give a lot to educate and maintain their children so surely children should look out for their parents in financial waysespecially. Many families can make it appear that they have no income yet have lifestyles beyond that of their parent's lifestyles. I would be willing to finance my parents should the need arise. I would not take on the full burden of care but would ensure that my siblings participated.

# 18

Posted: 26/01/2004 15:30

Mary Harney should be caled Mary Heartless.She would have felt very much at home if she sat at Thatchers cabinet table.She has brought economics to a new low.Its a wonder she doesn't suggest euthanasia on demand for those elderly people frigtened of staying alive in case the burden on their families become too much.Ireland is now an Ireland of the cold welcome for our elderly.Shame on you Mary!