Two-thirds of older and disabled people in England who turn to their local councils for help with care are turned away, figures show. Only 144,000 of the requests for help resulted in them being admitted to care homes or given home help for tasks such as washing and dressing. Of the remainder about 220,000 got short-term help, such as rehabilitation after discharge from hospital, and another 300,000 got low-level support such as walking aids and telecare. The rest either received nothing or were advised to seek help from charities, the NHS or from housing services.
Social care is not free, so all the above who are accepted into the system pay something towards the cost of their care, with some covering the entire cost. Only the poorest get financial help. An estimated 1.5 million older people with care needs rely on family and friends for help. One in ten older people faces bills in excess of £100,000 for care when they are old and need it.
There has been a steady year by year fall in the number of elderly people who are helped by social services. The Local Government Association predicts if extra money is not put in there will be a shortfall of more than £4bn in care services by 2020 – and that is before the implications of the national living wage are taken into account.
An elderly relative, who my wife and I looked after, was born with cerebral palsy. She was unable to look after herself at all. For years Social Services visited her daily at home. One day she received a letter from the local Council telling her that “Halleluyah! The era of choice had dawned and she could choose what level of care she wanted!” This was a lady who needed maximum care and visits three times a day, but, because she was in her own home, it cost less than in a nursing home. She was, of course, quite unable to decide how to reply to the letter, whose subtext was that they offering reduced services, and which of these reduced services would she like? While my wife and I were trying to find out what the implications were and telling the Council that the patient was totally helpless, she died. It was a blessing, because the outlook was horribly grim. This situation is and was re-played many times all over the country, as local Councils, starved of funds, have to reduce services. Meanwhile, the government talks about updating the Trident nuclear submarine fleet and bickers over Brexit, the self-inflicted wound.
Epicurus would suggest that the priority is the well-being of the the population and, among other humane objectives, ensuring that the elderly are treated decently and with rsepect.
Even the fiscally conservative Economist magazine says the status quo is unacceptable. To help fund social care, the government recently announced that councils will be able to raise council tax (for non-Brits, a property tax) by 2% to fund social care. But because council tax often hits the poorest harder, councils are unwilling to do this. Councils with higher value houses (Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea), will be able to raise more money, despite not necessarily having the greatest burden of care (London’s boroughs tend to have a younger population.) Even if they do raise council tax, the funds will be completely insufficient to meet demand.
Now the solution is not to abolish the Living Wage. Social care workers are amongst the worst paid, despite working long hours doing a vital job. Instead, we must ensure that the elder generation live in dignity by paying for them. Unfortunately, this means higher taxes, but I’m perfectly happy to pay them if it means we treat seniors with the respect they deserve. Having said that, the elderly overwhelmingly back Trident and Brexit, so if those things end up depriving the social care system of funds, they only have themselves to blame.
Good post, Owen. The only thing I would say is that no one I know in my age group think either Brexit or trident are good ideas. I don’t know who these old folk are who think they are acceptable, but they are living in the past. Shame.