can we give are kids are home

margaretclare

p00hsticks wrote: »

I'm not too sure about your last statement - I could be wrong, but before the advent of the NHS in 1946, I suspect that if the family was rich, they would have paid for him to be looked after in a private sanatorium somewhere, and if they couldn't afford that then one of his family woudl have had to take him in and look after him at home -I'm not sure what would happen if you had no family, but I suspect you wouldn't have lasted long.

Possibly a workhouse infirmary, when these still existed up to 1930. Their successors, geriatric hospitals, painted magnolia instead of dark brown/green, which existed through the early years of the NHS. There was even a special grade of nurse who trained in this type of care, a 2-year rather than a 3-year course. You can see, therefore, that it has always been a 'poor relation', people in these hospitals were given 'basic' nursing by pupils, not students, who were considered to be 'not academic enough' for the 3-year course.

One of my great-great-grandmothers ended her days in a workhouse infirmary in the early 20th century. What I was told as a child was 'they couldn't do with her at home'. Couldn't do with her. That says a lot.

John_Pierpoint

But in those days it would only have required a nurse with flu to cough in his face and the "problem" would have solved itself.

zygurat789

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

I don;t want to get right off thread, but we used to export our criminals to Tasmania, very secure but even more expensive than reopening Dartmoor.

I don't want to sound like a lilly livered liberal, but prison does not work, it is a university for crime. These people have to learn that "if you don't work you don't eat".

I'm surprised at you given your family business. Of course prison does not work because it isn't a place to keep the very naughty away from us.
Our justice system isn't just and prisons should have locked cells, no phones, no TV but lots of books and no communal anything. Then it will work.

Battybird

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

So neither he nor his wife claimed child benefit? Died before claiming his pension? Didn't benefit from the Winter Fuel Allowance, or the free bus pass?

He was given family allowance, winter fuel allowance, (maybe,I think?) state pension and bus pass. (although he never used the pass.)

Personally, I don't class these as claiming benefits, I class these as "givens."

Thanking all posters for their replies, I am now leaving this thread.

(and my apologies to the original poster for taking over their thread.)



Edited to add, I've found out I was mistaken, my relative didn't have a bus pass.

margaretclare

The son would not automatically have been able to take over the tenancy: they can't be passed on more than once, maybe twice, I don't rightly remember, and I think the person has to have some 'need' for council housing. Obviously not having his own home would demonstrate that need.

I understand that a council tenancy can be passed on once only. There has recently been a case in this area where a man is being asked to leave the 3-bed council house where he grew up and where he lived with his parents over half a century, until the second survivor died. He's lived in the house since he was a toddler and thinks he should have the tenancy: council thinks otherwise.

He was given family allowance, winter fuel allowance, (maybe,I think?) state pension and bus pass. (although he never used the pass.)

These are benefits. Bus pass has to be applied for, you don't have to have it. Family allowance/child benefit is definitely a benefit, as is state retirement pension. You don't get this if you haven't paid in for it, therefore it's one of the contributory benefits.

angelatgraceland

Back to the original post: would it not be assumed that the sons would look after their parents in their own home at the end of their lives? As you have provided a home for them all this time surely it is payback time? Why should you be in the position where you need to leave your own home??? If that was me and my brother we would simply take on the duty of care for our parents if they had looked after us all of our lives and shared their home with us.

John_Pierpoint

"I suppose you are going to give up your job now, and look after your mother ".

(Elderly relative to 50 year old single daughter of woman, now a Zimmer-frame user, left incontinent by a stroke).

"Oh some families say they can make care arrangements at home, believe me it never works"

(The hospital doctor charged with removing the above bed blocker in local hospital)

"In my experience you go into the living room and nobody is talking, the room is festering with resentment as the old crone in the corner dominates proceedings"

(Family doctor and local charity director)

".........and then she hit me......."

(Daughter of dementia suffer kept at home).

Mojisola

angelatgraceland wrote: »

If that was me and my brother we would simply take on the duty of care for our parents if they had looked after us all of our lives and shared their home with us.

Never a good promise to make!

Who knows what your own situation will be like when the need arises? Who knows what needs an elderly parent will have? Why should a parent have to live with an untrained carer worn out from 24/7 care when he/she could be in a properly-equiped home cared for by trained and monitored staff?

It's one thing to think that looking after an elderly parent means doing a bit of shopping and making some cups of tea. The reality is often much messier and stressful.

pollypenny

Exactly! When my father broke his hip we briefly considered having him live with us. However, he would have been stuck here all day, alone and bored.

In his residential home he enjoyed company, including enjoying arguments.

margaretclare

angelatgraceland wrote: »

Back to the original post: would it not be assumed that the sons would look after their parents in their own home at the end of their lives? As you have provided a home for them all this time surely it is payback time? Why should you be in the position where you need to leave your own home??? If that was me and my brother we would simply take on the duty of care for our parents if they had looked after us all of our lives and shared their home with us.

When you say 'the sons' as in 'me and my brother' I assume you really mean 'the sons' wives' would do the nitty-gritty day-to-day 'caring'. I believe this occurs as routinely expected, in certain other cultures. The said wives' opinions are never sought.

Echoing what JohnPierpoint writes, I recall when my late MIL was diagnosed with dementia, this was in the late 1970s, she'd been living with us for a couple of years and nearly drove us all insane, her and her pet poodle....Anyway, I was in my first year of a degree course, as a mature student. I spoke to a hospital social worker - well, they called them something else then, hospital almoner or something like that. 'Oh I'm glad to see you, I wanted to talk to you about....' 'She's not MY mother, you know!' 'Oh I know that, but it's always down to the woman, isn't it?' (coy smile, as if it was all so obvious as to require no discussion). The inference was, I could just jack it all in, my degree, my career, the lot, just for this woman who'd never liked me and who went around saying 'that woman isn't my son's wife, you know, his wife ran off and left him...' Shock horror. Grain of truth. Our marriage had broken up in its early weeks but we got back together a couple of years later when he'd joined the RAF to get away from widowed mum, and I was a second-year student nurse. She didn't even recognise her granddaughters by then, so it would have been impossible. We used the money from the sale of her house to fund a care home, then when that ran out the LA took over. Just the *expectation* that it would be ME who'd do it all, I got so angry about that.