Inhertitance - Care homes get it!!!

margaretclare

beecher2 wrote: »

That's all very well and good, but elderly people often have much more complex health problems than they did a few decades ago, and providing care within the family isn't always as easy as people think. Maybe I'm over sensitive, but I don't like the implication that people who don't care for their elderly parents are in some way uncaring.

Even a few decades ago, it wasn't always possible, but what happened then was that people ended their lives in geriatric hospitals, often what had been workhouse infirmaries. That happened to my grandad, also his brother-in-law, many others. The generation before that, one of my great-great-grandmothers ended her days in a workhouse infirmary and the explanation I heard when I was a child was 'they couldn't do with her at home'. Couldn't do with her. So, providing care at home by the family has never been easy and it is an illusion to suppose that it was the norm in some mythical past.

EclipsedMind

margaretclare wrote: »

I don't believe that anyone has any God-given right to an automatic 'inheritance'. An inheritance only exists when someone has died. Not until. Up to then, it is my money and my assets, to do with as I choose.

Well Said. I have always told my folks that they earned it so they should spend it and enjoy their retirement and I am thankful they are doing so in a prudant manner. I will make my own way in life using what they taught me and plan for my old age the same as they did.

If you need residential care in your old age then you have to pay for it and as was pointed out it is a minority of people that require this. I don't see why the tax payers should foot the bill just so your mam/dad can leave you money they earned and not you whilst we taxpayers pay for their care.

Far too many people think everyone else should pay for things they require. This taxpayer, quite frankly, is fed up of it.


EM

p00hsticks

beecher2 wrote: »

That's all very well and good, but elderly people often have much more complex health problems than they did a few decades ago, and providing care within the family isn't always as easy as people think. Maybe I'm over sensitive, but I don't like the implication that people who don't care for their elderly parents are in some way uncaring.

I'd agree that they are not uncaring, but would suggest that those of them who then go on to moan about the fact that they are not going to get an inheritance because their parent's money is all being spent on their care are selfish and greedy.

If you want an inheritance ,then look after your elders yourself. If you can't or won't, then that's fine, but don't expect the state to fund their care just so you can preserve your inheritance.

roddydogs

Loopgames wrote: »

Well I plan on looking after my parents when they're older which is what we used to do in the UK before care homes were common places.

Does that include double incontinence and Alzheimers, possibly with physical violence?

pineapple

Iancfp wrote: »

but honsetly would your children want you if you were in need of full time care to go to the cheapest smallest 2nd rate home that your local council could put you in or to see you in a good quality home of your choice

It's not as simple as that. When my father went into an excellent Anchor home he was fully private. When his capital got down to a certain level he got assistance. The fact is you often get fully private and fully assisted in the same home - the latter will be on a lower rate contract agreed locally. My father always looked on it as unfair and I agree - in that having worked and saved all his life he was paying through the nose. Whereas other residents had had a rare old time with their cash then had everything paid.

dzug1

pineapple wrote: »

. My father always looked on it as unfair and I agree - in that having worked and saved all his life he was paying through the nose. Whereas other residents had had a rare old time with their cash then had everything paid.

So the conclusion is that those who have been profligate with their cash (or never had any) should be denied care? There is a perfectly valid argument that that would be 'fair'. A delightfully woolly word.

p00hsticks

pineapple wrote: »

Whereas other residents had had a rare old time with their cash then had everything paid.

And it's not a as simple as that either - yes, some of those residents might have been in well paid jobs and simply chosen to just fritter their money away on luxuries rather than save for their old age. But the majority are likely to have spent their working lives in low paid menial work or, in the case of women, staying at home to look after their husband and raise a family as was expected of them by society at the time, and so never had a chance to accumulate any sizeable savings.

Don't assume that every OAP with no savings is in that position becasue they have spent it all on luxuries.....

jamesd

AdamS wrote: »

Nursing homes will simply destroy the average persons inheritance, one year in a care home £26,000+ a year!!!! Some £700 a week, £36K a year!!!

The average pensioner has an income of about £18,000 a year. The average time for those forced into care for medical reasons to live is about two years, increasing to four to six for those who go in voluntarily. That's £16,000 to £48,000 in savings to spend or other income to generate to pay the extra on top of normal income for the lower cost care.

AdamS wrote: »

In old age whats the point of money saving with the view of your kids/gran kids getting some when most of it goes to the care homes. ... What can we do?

Put aside money to cover your possible needs and remember that the main purpose of the money you accumulate in life is to care for you, not to provide an inheritance for others. Don't skimp on your own needs.

I don't recommend planning to live in the cheapest care that your council can find through a lowest bid wins competitive bidding process.

The couple could place their home into a tenants in common arrangement that will generally effectively block sale of the house. The assets of one partner can't be used top pay the bills of the other so splitting assets between partners will reduce the amount of money that is at risk if a single party needs care.

If there are children and they want the property they also have the option of coming to some agreement to subsidise the cost of care to increase the value of the estate.

Loopgames

roddydogs wrote: »

Does that include double incontinence and Alzheimers, possibly with physical violence?

What do parents do to their children when they suffer health issues and worse - many plod on and look after them.

Your choice what you do with your parents when they need you like when you needed them as a child. Of course that's assuming they WANT you to look after them! (not you personally) It's not a question in our family. We'd look after them no matter what - no excuses - getting professional support to do so is not the same is putting them into care.

AdamS

Maybe its a good think my reply was accidentally lost by laptop misclick! arrggggh

If the concensus is blow your money have a good time you'll get the free care if you need it, then fine.

However, I cant believe the number of people quite willing to see family money go to care homes, which millions of others get for free and we could all get for free if we all rented, lived off pensions and enjoyed every other spare penny to the very last!

I dont think 1 - 10 end up in a care home, Ive had 4 gran parents in care homes out of 6.

If we get medically ill and end up in hospital we dont have to sell our houses, why should we do so for care in old age when we are too ill to look after ourselves?

Certainly why should we pay when millions get for free (for whatever reason).

IMO, anyone who has a house worth under the average house price should not have to sell it to pay for care, so lets say £170,000. If parents have bought that house, the kids have a right to it IMO!

Now if you dont mind selling your house to pay for your own care while others who think about it and enjoy every penny to the last get it free ((and say i sell my house for £170K and save £20K back up money, £150K buys me a lot of holidays and fun!

My final days care might not be as good as someone paying for care (bless them after having the extra stress of raising the funds and selling house), however theres a chance we will still be on the same level of care. I might not even be aware of any difference in care levels, lets face it, I might hate being in care, whether luxuary or not.