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.
"Should the government be the solution for poor planning"? Turn it around: "should my parents' poor planning or inability to pay for extremely expensive care mean that I am now responsible for it?" That doesn't seem fair, either, but again, different cultures will say differently.
It also tends to be a matter of degree - some flippantly say that families should do X in Y situation, but the reality means a great deal of sacrifice, and the more sacrifice, the more those people start backing off, because it starts to, again, seem unfair. Yes, of course, I would be willing to pay for my parents care to be wonderful if I had the money, but in reality VERY VERY FEW people have that kind of money. So how much will others demand I sacrifice rather than asking the government to help? Will they demand I use up all my savings? Sell my belongings? Will they demand I live in actual, literal poverty because I cannot work and also care for my parents? Will they demand I give up my career and only source of income to care for my parents myself (putting myself and them in poverty, because they and me would then have no income?) Put myself, then, on the mercy of the government for my own future care because I've spent all my money and given up my career caring for my parents? Give up my job's health care and open myself up to higher medical costs and/or worse outcomes because I have to make do with whatever someone who doesn't work can get for free? ...how much sacrifice is fair to ask of me? Yet these are all things that would happen, right now, if I, an only child, HAD to care for my parents. Insta-poverty. This is the reality. Others might have it better. Others might have spouses who could support them, or jobs that give them enough to support a parent's care, but MANY DO NOT.
The "families take care of their elders" model only seems to be even remotely possible on a large scale when either a large portion of the population doesn't need to have a job to survive (like marriages where one partner doesn't "need" to work because the other makes so much money) OR where an average job makes so much that someone can pay for parental care. This is not the situation today for the vast majority of people, and that shifts the equation.
"But my family took care of Nana when she needed it!" Great. But look clear-eyed at what it cost your family, monetarily, or in labor, or in lost opportunities, to do that. These are often invisible costs, because someone (often a woman) is providing their labor for free, but that is STILL A COST.
Also, everyone who has paid taxes has supported Medicaid for just this reason. Saying "why should it be put on the government" is, to me, like asking why we should expect the government to pay for health care for the elderly (via Medicare) - because that is the deal American citizens get. We pay X taxes in exchange for Y services. That's the point. It helps spread the weight so that an individual is not forced to shoulder the hardship alone simply because they are the only family member left. And the government stepping in makes sense: it allows families to break the cycle of poverty where younger family members cannot work or cannot build wealth because they must be willing to take on an unpaid job for however many years are needed.
Now I am 68, single (with no life anyway :) and Mom is almost 97. We get along well now ( after having butt heads a lot during the first 2 years ), and I have this "invisible barrier" that " if things get too hard or overwhelming ( i.e. dementia and / or her becoming bed bound or "something" ), that then I would think about the nursing home route. But as long as I can, I want to keep her at home where her QOL is the best it can be.
And I am grateful that in our society, it would be "acceptable" to go the nursing home route. And I think you are right about the "nuclear family" being the beginning point for that viewpoint.
Being 68, I remember much more of "the way things used to be" before that. Through conversation, reminiscence, reading, history, shows ( think The Waltons ) and movies, I realize that our beginnings of life in the U.S. came from those family-valued traditions from European, Native American, Latin, Asian, etc. cultures. It used to be that families took care of one another... it just was.
For me personally, our family had strong family values which instilled in me the "I can do it myself" attitude. We had a very good but small ( 2 parents, 2 children ) and supportive family who loved one another. My Mom was a stay-at-home mother which is all I ever wanted to be. But parents insisted I go to nursing school before my engagement turned to married status. I was very lucky coming from this up-bringing and I treasure it.
Not everyone has had this experience; and I would never subject them with a condescending or negative attitude for placing their LO's in a nursing home. I think it is fortunate we have such a resource for those who need it. And it is not my place to say who should or should not go to one.
And knowing how expensive nursing homes are ( i.e. $8k-10k monthly ), it is necessary for the government to help. No one could ever pre-plan for the sky-rocketing costs of nursing homes. Does your friend realize that everything is taken from the LO before Medicaid kicks in ? Does your friend think you should give up your salary toward that amount ? That is not reasonable.
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.
My husband and I were both raised with a family first belief. It was thought that with enough advanced planning we would keep our parents in our care to the very end. Fate had a different plan. With just us now, the LBD, Capgras syndrome, hallucinations, paranoia and delusional outbursts has become unbearable to think our LO's must suffer more because we aren't trained to help -- especially with my mom as my sibling's education was in part for THAT EXACT purpose until sib died young-ish.
I won't morally speculate on anyone else's circumstances as to why they are needing government LTC assistance and hopefully they will return the favor and only legally judge mine.
Though one aspect is objective that the cost is not something we can readily sustain with our current system. Something has to change to meet the rising the cost and demand of elder care.
For example my LO does not need the medical need of SNF but since medicaid does not cover AL or MC in our state SNF is where they have to be. This is an unfortunate waste of resources but is a very common tale in our country.
A family who insists Medicaid pay while staying in the home is also limiting Mom's options. The places that take Medicaid immediately are typically more limited and less nice. Nice homes that take both often prioritize private pay residents for private rooms, and prioritize those who have been on private pay over those needing Medicaid right away. When mom gets placed, the priority should be to make her existence as tolerable as possible in a nice place--of which the majority require private pay going in.
That message is very true applying to the dead and the living.
I think it's also true applying to the culture differences between the US and Korea when it comes to elder care.
Generations ago, the US was like Korea, but soon, Korea will be like the US.
Though one aspect is objective that the cost is not something we can readily sustain with our current system. Something has to change to meet the rising the cost and demand of elder care.
For example my LO does not need the medical need of SNF but since medicaid does not cover AL or MC in our state SNF is where they have to be. This is an unfortunate waste of resources but is a very common tale in our country."
@sighopinion,
I'm neither going to agree or disagree right now.
Just as conversations, like the one you had with your games partner and this one that you've started here, organically expand/grow/change, I posit that your answers have expanded/grown/changed the conversation from subjective ethics/morality to objective legal/politics/money.
That conversion creates a different debatable subject. And as much as I'd really, really like to join in on that, I have neither the time or the energy to attack that soap box of mine today. :-)
A slightly morbid thought, but maybe after the LO's are out of their suffering.?. ;-)
My mother is in a care home, although she self-pays, because she is totally immobile and we are not capable of caring for her. It is likely she will run out of money and have no option but Medicaid. We currently can't pay for her care due to the cost so I personally have no issue with her having to use Medicaid if she outlives her money. Even if that means she has to move to another facility. We have no option as she needs 24-hour care.
I don't know the answer, but I think there needs to be more affordable options coupled with people taking responsibility for their future.
I think your control group wasn't diverse enough to say not taking care of a loved one is a western culture thing. Many, many western families care for their own, no matter what. That's what this forum is about.
I have contributed financially to both my parents because their bad choices left them in dire straights. Doesn't mean I am capable or willing to bring them into my home. But that doesn't mean I am not caring for them as an advocate, taxi services, entertainment director, appointment setter and a hundred other things.
I, honestly, think that other cultures consider boundaries, as not taking care. They expect blind obedience from adult children and that is a big difference that makes "western" culture seem wrong to many. Even though they have left their countries to come to the USA, Great Britian or other western cultural countries.
I do see the 35 and younger crowd not having any respect for their elders, across all cultures though and I find that very sad.
Sure many in the west take care of their own and put their entire lives into disarray living for the past instead of the future. I do think generally the west generally is in favor of placement even at the expense of others to save oneself. I know I did it, I have my own personal views on the matter but by no means would I take my LO into my home. I enjoy my current life style far too much and having them would greatly inconvenience me. That said I am also fully aware that my choice is a massive waste of resources on the system since they really only need supervisional care at this time.
I also do make enough and have the time to make it so they could have remained in their home. I love my LO but I love myself more and refuse to go down that rabbit hole. I often get begged by family and staff to take my LO home since they are doing poorly in their NH but I cannot do so since it would come at my own expense. Many do view this as selfish and entitled to a degree I understand and agree with that statement. I am entitled to having my own life and future if that makes me selfish so be it is what I tell them.
That said if Medicaid did make it possible to place my LO in AL I would do it in a heartbeat but the system at least here in my state works that way. Some may feel I fall in camp of youth that does not respect or care about their elders and in a sense they are not wrong. I think prolonging many elders lives in MC, and SNF is pointless but that is for another topic.
If I had the option between letting my LO pass in their sleep or move them to AL I would pick letting then pass in their sleep and putting an end to this suffering on both fronts.
So, it's not always so black and white. I don't believe all Asian cultures etc. are just sacrificing out of the goodness of their hearts. Sometimes, it's just the pure bull headedness of the parents that dictates what happens in the future and the kids are just sacrificial lambs in the big scheme of things.
At the SN facility my mother is in it is very hard to imagine residents there living in a private home. Of course they could but it would require alot of outside help.
My next door neighbor has a wife who was severely injured in a car crash. The cars coming and going there go on all day. In this case it is his wife and I understand wanting to be with her. I feel that differs from a parent.
There may come a point when there is no money left. My mother has outlived her LTC policy which was significant. She is now going through a trust left to her by her mother. This will not last forever. I find little quality to her life and she keeps asking me when she will be better which is never. Her monthly costs are significant made more so by a mistake on the part of the SN facility yet they are dealing with it. It absolutely requires the daily care of a nurse. Once her money runs out if she lives that long should my husband and I have to pay for her. We are retired. Both of us worked for many years. We live a simple life. Should we not be allowed that life? We would have to move into different housing to support her.
I understand certain cultures thinking differently but do they consider worse case scenarios? I know I never want to be a burden to my children. Some people go on and on. I witness this on every visit to the SN facility my mother is in. I live a much more healthy life than my mother did. I hope I do not go on way past an expiration date which may sound crass which I don't mean it to be but sadly is greatly the reality for many.
Even in Japan, which currently has one of the lowest birthrates in the world, is having trouble dealing with their aging population because their people tend to live a long time. A few years ago I read in the NYT about how Japanese elders are dying by themselves in pension apartments and aren't found for quite a while. It doesn't help that their culture supports stoicism.
Our elder care here may be expensive and imperfect but at least we have some options.
Well, you obviously don't have much life experience to believe that is always an option.
Some people have accidents and everything changes in an instant, some have strokes and they are literally gone with a living body that someone else needs to take care of.
So, wishful thinking aside, you should really consider your options based on reality. Because I don't know one person that wouldn't feel the same way, had they been able to see it coming but, then you get old and dying is more real then it is in your 20s or 30s, so perspectives change.
Like I said, for the most part we talk a good talk, but seldom walk it.
Many of the times the reason a family does not place someone it largely boils down to; inheritance, false sense of obligation, misinformation, fear, housing, etc… in my personal opinion rarely is it out of the goodness in ones heart.
Medicaid related services do provide a safety net for many families, without I do feel elder abuse would sky rocket. Give people limited options, they will create their own.
I do wonder how long the coffers can remain solvent with the increase spending across the board, and longer life expectancies and declining birth rates. I know it is a running meme long before now, but younger millennials and older zoomers may really be the ones that face the realities of no more money in the system.
Before we spend money on citizens of other countries, we must take care of our own.
P.S. Free diapers for both!
So their view is clearly far from the norm. I said I would ask so I did, thanks for the different views and opinions it was a fun discussion.
And I bet it was mostly the women in the community who helped, also. I'm sure the mother just loved to go to her H's work functions (NOT). Too bad she couldn't go off and have some alone time somewhere! I bet the father never even helped out when he was home.
People like your friend and his cultural expectations really annoy me, quite frankly.
I don't think it's "proper, ethical and/or moral" for children to be expected to be their parents' caregiving slaves.