Was having a discussion with some friends while playing games last night about elder care here in the states. One who lives in VA and is Korean asked how my LO was doing, and I mentioned they were in a NH. Granted, I know he grew up with his grandmother in their home when his grandpa passed. So knew we would have differing views, but he did bring up an interesting points that got me thinking.
Why exactly should the government be responsible for a person if they have family that is still alive? Should the government become the solution for poor planning? Where does the money come from to care for the elderly? At the very least he thought I was paying for my LO’s care, when I told him I do not this shocked him.
He asked how I went about it, and I told him I had to do the ER leave and refuse to take them home method. Which brought up the following point that hit me hard for a second, “So if you tried to place her without the ER would it have been possible?” In truth I do not think it would have been, they did not meet the requirements listed. We went on for a tad but essentially we went back and forth and I explained my reasoning for doing what I did, it was simply impossible for my LO to stay home, and I refused to give up my life to care for them.
Which saying out loud and not in text form does not come off as right, but that was the reasoning behind it. If they had money I would have gladly put in the time to find aides and allow them to stay home, but they didn’t and getting Medicaid to cover supervising care for safety is not exactly possible, not without me giving up some of my personal time to watch them.
My friend knows I make good money, and brought up a fair point if someone in the family has the money to provide care why should the burden be put on local and/or federal government to supply care if the family could supply the care? I get it is a cultural difference but their views got me thinking, we started to ask our other friends the same question.
We got interesting responses but it seems generally though those of us from the west, fell into the camp that burden to care for a family member should not fall on the family if they choose to do not so. While our friends that are from Asian or Latin cultures had strong feelings about taking care of family no matter what.
It was interesting because it seems both sides had a differing view of personal responsibility, on one hand in the west I would say our personal accountability is more so geared towards ourselves and our own I guess nuclear family, while the other side it extended to their entire family or at the very least to grandparents and parents.
I know this is a weird and slightly out of place, but just got me thinking being as this is a global forum I do wonder where people fall.
Our government sees no problem printing MONEY to finance whatever wild hair they get up their butts, so they can ALSO finance old folks' lives in care as needed.
Old folks lives are valuable, no matter what you or anyone else may think, and whether they saved 'enough' to finance their old age at ASTRONOMICAL costs is neither here nor there, really. It's like asking if a $250,000 bill for a surgery in a hospital is fair, and whether you should be expected to pay it b/c the hospital billed you for it and you didn't have insurance? If you aren't expected to pay IT b/c you can claim indigence, then by God, I should not be expected to pay for long term care at $12K or more PER MONTH in a SNF if I don't have the funds to do so either.
As proven countless times when it comes to spending money on the people government will always count pennies. Aren't we shooting future gens in the foot if we try to bleed the stone dry now. Costs are only projected to go up. I fall in your camp I will not give up my income to pay for my LO's care I will rather share the cost across the board of tax payers but on the same token I do know that is not viable long term.
It is because business, profit, and greed are allowed to operate without restraint in this country (U.S.A.).
Unless a person is extremely wealthy where they can pay upwards of ten, fifteen, twenty thousand dollars a month for nursing home or assisted living care, they have to go on Medicaid.
Many seniors cannot afford to pay two and three thousand dollars a month in LTC insurance premiums for years. That's not because they made poor financial decisions. It's because they're just not millionaires.
It's not because they did anything wrong in life or didn't manage their money well. It's because everyone isn't rich.
Poor people at any age do not get good healthcare and are lucky if they get any.
I would ask your Korean friend how the family caregiving dynamic works after the elderly person dies. What happens to the caregiver who took years off from working and now has huge gaps in their employment history? Does the family take them in and all chip in together to provide for them because they now can't support themselves?
Here in the U.S. if a person isn't earning to survive and isn't collecting from other sources, they become homeless. Literally on the street. Caregiver homeless makes up a large segment of the homeless population in America. People who were out of the workforce for years at a time but don't have addiction problems and are not suffering from mental illness. They were home caregiving for elderly parents and keeping them out of the nursing home. Then the parents die or their care needs exceed what can be done at home and they have to be placed. The parent's home (if they own one) and their income has to be given over to the care facility. Their adult child caregiver is left with nothing and no way to support themselves. Maybe it's different in Korea, but in America people are on their own. Even in families.
There are many people who don't want to put their parents into care facilities but don't have the resources to be able to quit their jobs to become unpaid caregivers. It's not because they're selfish or don't want to. They don't have the option of doing it. They have to support themselves and have bills to pay, and families of their own to provide for. Maybe it's not like this in Korea, but it probably is. It may be that your friend doesn't want to admit it.
WE THE PEOPLE
Here who attempt to care for one another when help is needed. We ARE the government.
Children supporting their elders, rather than working and saving, will lead to children without funds THEMSELVES, so that it is a self-perpetuating merry-go-round of care demanded of the generation before from the next generation. A terrible burden in which they have literallly no say whatsoever.
I think our way is so much better.
Everything is a matter of your own subjective opinion and of how you look at things. As my Dad always said, "let me give ALL THE MONEY and let someone else have ALL THE NEED. I am happy to share some of my money with them." Meaning, if we have health, and can work, can make a great salary, then we can help those who don't have health, or cannot work any longer.
Back to when a person starts working.
People do not think about what happens in 30, 40, 50 years.
So people starting do not save for retirement.
So many take it that Social Security IS their retirement fund. It may have been when people had a much shorter lifespan. We now live more years retired then we worked.
It is unfair, irresponsible for a parent to assume that it is their child's responsibility to care for them when they get older. If that means application for Medicaid then so be it.
I have saved for my retirement. I have planned and IF and or when I need care I can afford it part in thanks to the insurance I am currently paying for. (would I like to do other things with that money...you bet I would)
I want to make the choice to stay in my home or if necessary I want to pick where I will have to go in order to be cared for safely. I do not want my family having to make that choice nor do I want a Court appointed Guardian making that kind of decision for me and I sure as heck do not want Medicaid to select where I have to go.
This is not to say ALL places that accept Medicaid are substandard but I want the right to chose.
I will say that a caregiver in a facility is not going to treat Ms. Smith in bed A any differently than Ms. jones in bed B simply because 1 happens to be on Medicaid. The food for Ms. Smith and Ms. Jones is going to be the same, the shower they get is the same, electricity is the same, the water the same......
You must have some fun game nights.
What do you do for a serious discussion?😉
Over thinking things just saps one's energy.
In the past, people had larger families and rarely lived to a ripe old age. They could get by with only one wage earner so someone was home to lend a hand.
Now it takes 2 incomes just to get by. People live well into their 90s...even when they shouldn't. And if you take the route of trying to care for them at home, any mishap could end up in criminal charges. I have yet to meet a regular person who could afford to support a parent in assisted living. My father's assisted living was over $75K a year....I don't have that kind of disposable income.
We pay taxes that fund social programs, so yes there should be some help for seniors.
I find it repulsive to think that someone who works hard to get ahead would be required to support a family member that made a lifetime of poor decisions. And how far removed of a family member would we be required to support?
My ex-inlaws all had only minimum wage jobs. They had no chance to save for their old age. With that said they also spent what little disposable income on alcohol and cigarettes. So if I was still part of that family should I be required to support them because I have a college degree, professional license, and a job with a good pension? I worked hard for myself, not for someone else. My sacrifices should go to someone who didn't?
It is from prior to 2018, so a few years older.
" The proportion of the elderly people in Korea is rapidly increasing. About 11.0% of the population is currently over 65 years of age, a percentage that is expected rise to 14.3% by 2018 (Statistics Korea, 2011). " and this .....
" For these reasons, the Korean government has provided a Long-Term Care Insurance System (LTCIS) since July 2008. As a result, the number of nursing homes and nursing home residents has increased rapidly. In 2001, 7,864 elderly people resided in 128 nursing homes throughout the whole of Korea. In 2012, following the launch of LTCIS in 2008, 103,973 elderly Korean people resided in 4,079 nursing homes (Ministry of Health & Welfare, 2012). This number is expected to grow steadily in the future due to the increase in the elderly population and financial support from the Korean government. "
*************
So, "new values" are also seen in Korea. Not sure your or your friend's age is, but
family vs. nursing home is around the world, short of a handful of countries. While it would be lovely to envision multi-generational families in lovely homes, everyone taking care of one another, it just isn't possible.
I do know that here in the USA there is often problems for the change generation, but that second generation BORN here. Pretty AMERICAN, for the most part. Right from birth.
So many of us come from an era where one didn't get a promotion if one was female. The corp excuse at that time was "you might get married and move away", "you might start a family and stay home", etc. One could have a college degree and at the interview the first question asked "how fast can you type?".
Therefore, so many women had to scrimp and save, but it was almost impossible for the average person to save enough for one's later years at today's prices.
If one was married and hubby died first, both retired, instead of getting two social security checks, the woman found she was only getting one [usually her late hubby's amount]. Hopefully if hubby had a pension that helped. Today, so many businesses are no longer offering pensions.
Without those two social security checks, the woman usually had to downsize to afford a place to live. Same if the wife passed first, hubby was now down to one check. I think that needs to be corrected.