Should children be expected to care for their parents in old age?

stovelid · 03-07-2011 1:23am

oldyouth wrote: »

though I appreciate it isn't the same for everyone

Unfortunately so.

crazypanda · 03-07-2011 3:38am

I've already told mine that they better have enough saved to take care of themselves cause I'm not doing it. It's payback time.

Oranage2 · 03-07-2011 5:06am

i don't care as long as its not me, one of my biggest fear is being stuck lookin after a parent

jive · 03-07-2011 5:13am

If they cared for you, then you should care for them.

Lord TSC · 03-07-2011 5:55am

flutterflye wrote: »

In a way I'd love this.
I would get to treat my dad the way he treated me.
Unfortunately I don't think I have it in me to be that deliberately cruel though.

Was what I was going to say, to the letter. But, same as you, don't think I could be that cruel so I'll likely just leave him to fend for himself and take care of himself....

The_Conductor · 03-07-2011 6:58am

Personally I think that we have to come to some sort of a consensus as to what are automatic rights for the elderly, and how we propose to pay for them.......

Many people can be independent into their 80s or even their 90s- while others might suffer impairments before then- so while the elderly might be presumed to have rights- we have to be able to arbitrarily decipher when these should kick in- and it should be on a means basis, not on an age related basis.

So- should the state be in the business of providing nursing home places? Personally I don't think so. I do think that there should be mandatory care in the home, alongside homehelp, by properly vetted nurses and homehelpers- and that this should kick in automatically if there are certain preconditions met- such as- a diagnosis of alzheimers, oncology treatment being undertaken, other predefined health conditions on either the part of an individual, their partner or a nominated carer, which potentially changes the care structure or endangers the health of another person presumed to be caring for an elderly person........

Next- we have to decide how to pay for this. So what that we've all paid tax- last time I checked there was no pool of money ringfenced to care for the elderly- it all comes out of either the private means of the elderly or their relatives- or current government expenditure. The fair means scheme- was a reintroduction of death taxes by the back door- but far from condemning it- I think its to be applauded. If the government are to provide more community nurses, home help etc- let them take a whack of my estate when I die- its not going to be of any use to me one way or the other. Make it a fair tax though- x% across the board- regardless of how wealthy a person may be. If the rich want to pay for extra frills privately- let them. However provide communities nurses, homehelp and hot meals for those unable to do so themselves.

There is a presumption built into our current systems that the elderly are among the worse off in the communities- and that society should care for them- when in fact they rarely have mortgages and have assets far exceeding those of the average person- so while they should have care in their old age- there is no reason whatsoever that there shouldn't be a reasonable effort to recoup the cost of this care when they pass away.

I would also do away with the right of people to refuse assistance- unless a person can satisfactorily show they are capable of exceeding the basic rights of the community nurse/homehelp/mealschemes- they should be forced to accept this help.

Some older people see it as below themselves to admit they need help- regardless of how bad things get- I'm not sure where this mindset evolved from- but it is a bad thing........ Its the same mindset that refuse to use vouchers or coupons when they're shopping........ If I get a voucher from Huggies for a couple of quid off nappies- I'm damn well going to use (or indeed any other grocery vouchers).........

Should children be expected to care for their parents in their old age? There are plenty of reasons why they shouldn't- many detailed in previous posts in this thread. Historically the youngest girl stayed at home and gave up her life to care for her parents- or in farming communities- the son and daughter in-law inheriting the farm were expected to provide for their elderly parents. As a society we have moved on from this notion of self sacrifice, and towards an expectation that the state is responsible socially, for care of the elderly. I don't have an issue with this- but we do need to make Son no. 1 or daughter no. 3 aware that in recompense for the state caring for their parents (however this may be structured)- that there is a unilateral percentage of their estate going to the exchequer on their death- no more sweetheart deals for inheriting farms or any other assets.

janmaree · 11-08-2011 2:31pm

Sorry to come in here so long after the discussion ended but I feel the need to make one observation about the Fair Deal Scheme and how it could impact on the later life of an adult child caregiving for a parent. Yes it does seem to usually fall to a particular child to do the caregiving, yes single and female, often for many years as medical advances prolong the lives of our elderly loved ones. Caregiving is an expensive business in many ways and the one providing the care generally ends up paying the most whether it's lost earnings, personal pension provision or just covering some of the day to day living expenses of the elderly parent. It all adds up, often even costing the caregiver a family and a future of their own. What if the caregiver lives with the elderly parent? Now, whether they like it or not, they're probably providing REAL 24/7 care at a REAL cost to themselves in terms of health, physical and mental well-being and all that goes with it. This can go on for years and years...................and if the elderly parent isn't lucky enough to go peacefully in their sleep, there will eventually be a requirement for nursing home care either due to their increasing needs or to the deterioration of the caregiver, or both. After a lot of years, there is a danger of seriously diminished funds which is where the Fair Deal Scheme comes in, thankfully.

However, should the caregivers, who have lived in the house for years and now very likely have health, strength and financial difficulties of their own after years of providing care for others, be rendered homeless themselves? Where is their care to come from or is it really going to be a case of "tough luck, nobody made you do it"? This scenario isn't make-believe, it's happening all the time and it's been happening forever. I fail to see any sweetheart deal in that.

11-08-2011 2:45pm

I lost my Mother last year, and next week have to attend an inquest into her death. I only wish I got the chance to look after my Mother. I would have cared for her for as long as was needed, and would have been glad and proud to do it for her.
I think if you have a good parent/s, then you its only right you would do everything and anything to make their last years safe, peaceful and as comfortable as possible. I feel a lot of people dont honour their elderly as much as they should.

enda1 · 11-08-2011 3:14pm

No not at all.
It is a waste of youth and a drain on the new family of the child. The child presumably has a family of their own and should focus their attention on providing for them.

Old people should have the good grace not to be a burden on the young, its selfish.

jdooley28 · 11-08-2011 3:16pm

I should have to anyway owe them too much already

Karona · 11-08-2011 3:44pm

We looked after my nana for 4 years when she broke her hip, before the doctor told her for her best interests we'd have to place her in home when she broke the 2nd hip.

Its such tough work trying to look after an elderly person. She was the type of woman who knew what she wanted and when she wanted it. Her mind was fully there only her legs wouldn't work.

Every weekend, I would take over and let my mam have a break. I was only 18 at the time and I did miss a hell of a lot of time out with my friends but family always come first and anyhow my Nana looked after me when i was little so it was my time to take care of her.

I would gladly do it for either my mam or dad.

kincsem · 11-08-2011 3:56pm

enda1 wrote: »

No not at all.
It is a waste of youth and a drain on the new family of the child. The child presumably has a family of their own and should focus their attention on providing for them.

Old people should have the good grace not to be a burden on the young, its selfish.

I don't know what to say.

The Internet Explorer · 11-08-2011 3:59pm

But what if your parent is Gay Byrne ? What if your parent is an ex TV presenter who is running for the presidency of your country ?

D1stant · 11-08-2011 4:34pm

enda1 wrote: »

No not at all.
It is a waste of youth and a drain on the new family of the child. The child presumably has a family of their own and should focus their attention on providing for them.

Old people should have the good grace not to be a burden on the young, its selfish.

I know at least one case where the old person took that very advice and killed themselves. Is that also selfish?
_________________________________

A happy medium between familly and state has to be worked out though because, we will not have the money to pay state pensions let alone for additional care

With my grandmother, the family shared (not equally but everyone chipped in and everyone got a break). This allowed her to die with dignity, around people she loved. How people (with other means) could put their parents in a folks home is beyond me.

Caraville · 11-08-2011 5:25pm

Oranage2 wrote: »

i don't care as long as its not me, one of my biggest fear is being stuck lookin after a parent

enda1 wrote: »

No not at all.
It is a waste of youth and a drain on the new family of the child. The child presumably has a family of their own and should focus their attention on providing for them.

Old people should have the good grace not to be a burden on the young, its selfish.

Aw, such lovely, lovely people around here. So pleasant.

norris_minor · 11-08-2011 5:32pm

Now that promiscuous 1st generation skobes are pumping bambinos out by the bucketload.. heck maybe 2nd generation already too ..

shouldn't the focus now be on parents looking after their children in their youth? and beyond...

Ah

futile. Like AWOL father / like son. This cesspool of humanity is now the very fabric of our aspiring chav society.

janmaree · 11-08-2011 6:03pm

Well, I don't know quite what to say either.

Except this, to those of you who have cared for a loved one, or wanted to, you have my respect and admiration. To the others, good luck when it's your turn to need someone's help - I hope it's there for you. Will you deserve it though?

looksee · 11-08-2011 6:27pm

I would like to think that my family would look out for me, but provided I was able, possibly with the help of paid carers, I would prefer to be independent. Ideally in sheltered housing, which is such an obvious way of living in a cost effective way, as against nursing homes or struggling with a family home, there should be much more of it here.

If I were totally incapacitated I would hope that my children would care for me if it were practicable, with the help of carers, or as a last resort, in a nursing home.

However I have seen situations where parents have been abandoned by their children, and in some instances it has been because the children had such bad memories of childhood that they had lost contact with the parents. In that case what goes around, comes around.

CavanCrew · 11-08-2011 6:45pm

Ive worked as a carer and I dont think families can do it alone..
Its usually one member of the family being the main carer.. and they end up burned out and with little life themselves.

Of course it depends on how able bodied the elder person is.
But if a family do decide to take on minding a parent I still think there should be help from the state.

The_Conductor · 11-08-2011 7:19pm

Ok- so if the state were to put a system in place- homecarers/homehelp/meals on wheels/community welfare nurses etc- would you see it as a duty of the state to pay for this- or should this come from the means of the family and more pertinently the person to whom the care/assistance is being offered?

janmaree · 11-08-2011 11:20pm

Unfortunately there's no "one size fits all" solution to this. It's a problem, it's going to get worse, it will affect most of us one way or another and I shudder to think what it will be like in years to come. However, following on my post earlier, I really pity the carers doing it all now because they get very little real support, they do most of the worrying and the hard work, they're often resented while they're at it because there are plenty who think they only do it for the "inheritance" and then when they're worn out and burned out, there's the added danger of being thrown out. Nice work if you can get it!

Creature · 11-08-2011 11:30pm

I'll be damned if I ever let my parents end up in a home. There's not much that I'd put ahead of taking care of either of them if they ever needed it. They've given too much over the years for me to leave them out in the cold so to speak.

looky loo · 11-08-2011 11:43pm

Having cared for my father and then after he died working in a care home, I would honestly prefer someone to shoot me in the head before I was put into one....to most carers its just a job, there is never enough staff on to cover the amount of elderly people that need caring for, you dont get time to have a conversation with them, its all about money saving exercises.

Its an awful shame that some people who have posted dont appreciate the sacrifices that some of their parents have made for them whilst growing up, I believe karma will take care of those posters.

A little bit of humanity goes along way, and also to the people who do send their parents into a home, make sure you go visit....some people in the home i worked in, their children never came to visit, just dumped them there and forgot about them, you would find them at nite pouring over pictures of their families with tears in their eyes.

southsiderosie · 12-08-2011 12:50am

flutterflye wrote: »

The thing is though that it is simply not functional in our present society.
The nuclear family is here because it is what works.
There are so many reasons why it is the way it is, and why it remains this way.
Unless there is some major shift in societal or economical structure (bigger than our current recession), I cannot envision this occurring in the foreseeable future.

In our world of information, services, materialism, greed, transport, education, mass media, urbanisation, medical advances etc... and all that comes with it, a large community style family unit is not really compatible for society to function.

Nice idea in an ideal word though....

Eh... may have gone a tad off topic again.

Actually I don't think the nuclear family works well at all. It is isolating for mothers with young children and for older members of the family, it doesn't make sense economically, and it pushes a lot of costs onto the state. Of all my girlfriends with small children, the only ones who are managing to work full time while maintaining some semblance of sanity are the ones whose mothers help with child care.

As for elder care...I can only speak for my situation. I just got a call today from one of my brothers saying that my father needed surgery, and would not be mobile for a while. I am going home, and we are going to collectively take care of him. He spent thirty years in a steel mill so we wouldn't have to; the least we can do is take care of him now that he needs help.

Ickle Magoo · 12-08-2011 1:01am

We have a bit of a family joke that my parents keep threatening to blow our inheritance (their words, not mine) and we joke back that they'll end up in an NHS old folks home watching endless daniel o'donnell and eating soggy cabbage if they do - but the truth of it is I couldn't do that to them regardless. We're already looking at our next move being to a house with a granny flat and the like so if needs be we can have them closer to us. :cool:

starlit · 12-08-2011 1:05am

Personally no, but I suppose we need to repay the favour up to a certain point when they need to go to a nursing home if caring for them is difficult but if they have a sound mind and somewhere what mobile they should be ok to live at home as they age whether they are caring for themselves or their children care for them. If they are ill then I think the children should at least look after them up to a certain stage until they need hospital care. Its only fair that the children would look after their parents in old age since the parents looked after them when they were babies!?

Happyzebra · 12-08-2011 1:16am

looky loo wrote: »

A little bit of humanity goes along way, and also to the people who do send their parents into a home, make sure you go visit....some people in the home i worked in, their children never came to visit, just dumped them there and forgot about them, you would find them at nite pouring over pictures of their families with tears in their eyes.

There is always a reason why people don't visit and only sometimes it's because the people concerned are selfish... there's little point in trying to explain why an adult would not visit or take care of a parent to people who were lucky enough to have loving and supportive parents.

Also it is easy to pay 'lip service' to claim that one will definitely look after elderly relatives when the time comes (and even geniuinely believe that you will) but when the time comes the reality sets in that sh!t this is a heck of a lot harder than I thought.

kincsem · 12-08-2011 1:25am

People can look after their parents in old age for a time. But there comes a time when you are not capable of looking after the needs of the parent when their mental or physical condition deteriorates (or both.)

The people who say they will look after their parents in old age have not yet got to the situation where the parents need care.

K-9 · 12-08-2011 1:32am

smccarrick wrote: »

Personally I think that we have to come to some sort of a consensus as to what are automatic rights for the elderly, and how we propose to pay for them.......

Many people can be independent into their 80s or even their 90s- while others might suffer impairments before then- so while the elderly might be presumed to have rights- we have to be able to arbitrarily decipher when these should kick in- and it should be on a means basis, not on an age related basis.

So- should the state be in the business of providing nursing home places? Personally I don't think so. I do think that there should be mandatory care in the home, alongside homehelp, by properly vetted nurses and homehelpers- and that this should kick in automatically if there are certain preconditions met- such as- a diagnosis of alzheimers, oncology treatment being undertaken, other predefined health conditions on either the part of an individual, their partner or a nominated carer, which potentially changes the care structure or endangers the health of another person presumed to be caring for an elderly person........

Next- we have to decide how to pay for this. So what that we've all paid tax- last time I checked there was no pool of money ringfenced to care for the elderly- it all comes out of either the private means of the elderly or their relatives- or current government expenditure. The fair means scheme- was a reintroduction of death taxes by the back door- but far from condemning it- I think its to be applauded. If the government are to provide more community nurses, home help etc- let them take a whack of my estate when I die- its not going to be of any use to me one way or the other. Make it a fair tax though- x% across the board- regardless of how wealthy a person may be. If the rich want to pay for extra frills privately- let them. However provide communities nurses, homehelp and hot meals for those unable to do so themselves.

There is a presumption built into our current systems that the elderly are among the worse off in the communities- and that society should care for them- when in fact they rarely have mortgages and have assets far exceeding those of the average person- so while they should have care in their old age- there is no reason whatsoever that there shouldn't be a reasonable effort to recoup the cost of this care when they pass away.

I would also do away with the right of people to refuse assistance- unless a person can satisfactorily show they are capable of exceeding the basic rights of the community nurse/homehelp/mealschemes- they should be forced to accept this help.

Some older people see it as below themselves to admit they need help- regardless of how bad things get- I'm not sure where this mindset evolved from- but it is a bad thing........ Its the same mindset that refuse to use vouchers or coupons when they're shopping........ If I get a voucher from Huggies for a couple of quid off nappies- I'm damn well going to use (or indeed any other grocery vouchers).........

Should children be expected to care for their parents in their old age? There are plenty of reasons why they shouldn't- many detailed in previous posts in this thread. Historically the youngest girl stayed at home and gave up her life to care for her parents- or in farming communities- the son and daughter in-law inheriting the farm were expected to provide for their elderly parents. As a society we have moved on from this notion of self sacrifice, and towards an expectation that the state is responsible socially, for care of the elderly. I don't have an issue with this- but we do need to make Son no. 1 or daughter no. 3 aware that in recompense for the state caring for their parents (however this may be structured)- that there is a unilateral percentage of their estate going to the exchequer on their death- no more sweetheart deals for inheriting farms or any other assets.

What a great post.

The state does have to intervene. You can have daughter no.1 and son no.3 not caring and the person who suffers is the 80 year old pensioner with alzheimers who gets left to deal with the problems and son No.2 with little help.

No.1 and 3 get very interested when it comes to selling the house and passing on the belongings.

wonderfulname · 12-08-2011 2:17am

I think where an elderly person is capable of independence they should have it. Our demographics have shifted in part because a person no longer needs their children to look after them once they hit a certain age, pensions, life assurance and social welfare are there to take that mantle.

Now, if we are talking, not in fact about the elderly, but the elderly who have succumbed to age related conditions, then there is no universally correct answer. Both the state and the family have a role to play, as can private care homes and other facilities, but the balance is entirely personal, the needs, wants, and abilities of all individuals have to be taken into account. I admire people who give up so much to care for elderly relatives but I don't for one second think they are any way superior to those who don't, every situation is different, and you can't judge whether somebody has done the 'right' thing when you can't possibly know the true nature of that situation.

Off topic: I can't believe this is AH everyone is so well behaved!

Should children be expected to care for their parents in old age?

Comments