We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
Over 55's don't want to pay for their own care
Comments
-
As a 56 year old I can't understand why anyone should'nt expect to pay for their care.
If you are alive you are responsible for your keep no matter what stage of your life you are in.
I must admit I have come into contact with people of my generation who have never considered provision in old age,something that has always been part of the "plan" for me and my husband since we were young.
No way will we ever leave such an important aspect of our lives to the mercy of the state.
I've seen some of those nursing homes,I'd prefer to be able to choose somewhere decent if and when the time comes.
We've always considered our future to be our own responsibility just as we have in our past and its ridiculous and unfair to expect someone else to take on the financial burden of later life.
Its something you have to plan for just as you plan for retirement.0 -
erm. were the under 55's really keen on the idea then?0
-
MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »As a 56 year old I can't understand why anyone should'nt expect to pay for their care.
If you are alive you are responsible for your keep no matter what stage of your life you are in.
Its something you have to plan for just as you plan for retirement.
Large swathes of the population live a hand-to-mouth existence throughout their lives, and struggle to plan beyond the end of the current week...
The numbers will probably increase in the short to mid term
TruckerTAccording to Clapton, I am a totally ignorant idiot.0 -
MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »As a 56 year old I can't understand why anyone should'nt expect to pay for their care.
If you are alive you are responsible for your keep no matter what stage of your life you are in.
I must admit I have come into contact with people of my generation who have never considered provision in old age,something that has always been part of the "plan" for me and my husband since we were young.
No way will we ever leave such an important aspect of our lives to the mercy of the state.
I've seen some of those nursing homes,I'd prefer to be able to choose somewhere decent if and when the time comes.
We've always considered our future to be our own responsibility just as we have in our past and its ridiculous and unfair to expect someone else to take on the financial burden of later life.
Its something you have to plan for just as you plan for retirement.
Personally I'm winging it0 -
Eton_Rifle wrote: »
Yes and that's great but bear in mind that you come from an extremely privileged generation.
Many, if not most older working class people did not have the opportunity to accumulate the wealth necessary to fund such independence that your generation was fortuitously granted.
"Granted"?
Is there some deus ex machina at work that we've not been told about?
Many "older working class people" certainly did plan for their old age and always have.0 -
I wonder what you will be thinking when it comes down to it and Mr Reaper is knocking on the door :eek:
Depends on the person. But my FIL certainly thought the same way as he was dying - he refused to drink or have a drip put in, and died of dehydration. Well, died sooner of dehydration, rather than a few days later of pancreatic cancer....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
At the end of the day, you can't take it with you. Should the state be protecting the welfare of the old? Yes, absolutely. Should that extend to protecting their children's inheritance at everyone else's expense? Of course not. There may be problems with the system as it stands, but there's essentially nothing wrong with the concept of selling houses to pay for care.0
-
If they want to protect their kids inheritance, and it matters that much to them, they can always take a swiss bumper box of paracetamol pills with a mug of ovaltine and a hot water bottle.0
-
OptionARMAGEDDON wrote: »If they want to protect their kids inheritance, and it matters that much to them, they can always take a swiss bumper box of paracetamol pills with a mug of ovaltine and a hot water bottle.0
-
I honestly admire them. I wish I have the balls and the prescience to realise when I become a burden to my family and have the guts to see it through. And I certainly dont want to end up in a care home, where standards of care are variable to say the least. I also dont want to end up having pea soup scraped off my chin, by my kids who should be out enjoying their own lives, as a result of frankenstein medical science prolonging life long after the grey matter has turned for the worst.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 349.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.9K Spending & Discounts
- 242.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.3K Life & Family
- 255.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards