Protecting pensions from politicians - or preparing for a Labour coalition

thepurplepixie

justme111 wrote: »

Again, provisions are made for it in legislation - they would have left POA or there would be court of protection or whatever is its name.

So you can't choose not to have care, the decision will be taken out of your hands?

Malthusian

thepurplepixie wrote: »

So you can't choose not to have care, the decision will be taken out of your hands?

Only if you lose mental capacity. And if you have lost mental capacity then you almost certainly require care. To stop you wandering off into the woods and freezing to death if nothing else.

If the spectre of losing mental capacity worries you, and you don't want to face the choice between either whittling away your children's inheritance or being thrown on the tender mercies of the state, then I recommend regular physical and mental exercise. Not poring over political party manifestos.

justme111

thepurplepixie wrote: »

So you can't choose not to have care, the decision will be taken out of your hands?

The same as any other decision. Do not see what it has to do with paying for care or not , you would not need your money for anything else and the point will be beyond mute.

thepurplepixie

Malthusian wrote: »

Only if you lose mental capacity. And if you have lost mental capacity then you almost certainly require care. To stop you wandering off into the woods and freezing to death if nothing else.

If the spectre of losing mental capacity worries you, and you don't want to face the choice between either whittling away your children's inheritance or being thrown on the tender mercies of the state, then I recommend regular physical and mental exercise. Not poring over political party manifestos.

Surely someone without mental capacity should be being cared by the NHS with qualified MH nurses rather than HCA in a private home?

ex-pat_scot

Malthusian wrote: »

If the spectre of losing mental capacity worries you, and you don't want to face the choice between either whittling away your children's inheritance or being thrown on the tender mercies of the state, then I recommend regular physical and mental exercise. Not poring over political party manifestos.

Sadly the regular physical and mental exercise isn't a panacea for physical and mental wellbeing, as our family know rather too well.

greenglide

Surely someone without mental capacity should be being cared by the NHS with qualified MH nurses rather than HCA in a private home?

You mean the NHS continue using care?

Very difficult to get that and there tends to be a long road when a person with dementia (or similar condition) can live a life in a care home without knowing who they are or where they are.

This requires specialist care but not really mental health nursing.

thepurplepixie

greenglide wrote: »

You mean the NHS continue using care?

Very difficult to get that and there tends to be a long road when a person with dementia (or similar condition) can live a life in a care home without knowing who they are or where they are.

This requires specialist care but not really mental health nursing.

It isn't always not know who or what they are. Sometimes it is violence, anger and psychotic episodes. At one local home I have seen the poor carers coming out with blackeyes and split lips. Amazing what a frail old lady can do. The home has closed now and the site is being redeveloped, I heard one of the problems was they just couldn't keep good staff due to the violence.

Teaandscones

justme111 wrote: »

These are particular cases which should be dealt with by relevant legislation. If the house is to be sold then that 65 yo if he/she is vulnerable( no means on their own) would become homeless and should be accommodated by local authority appropriately. If they have means to rent/buy privately (with 100 000 left from the house it would be possible) they do so.

What a cruel way to treat carers who save the country £billions. The public seem to have picked up on this, which is why the Conservatives poll lead has fallen back despite having a hard left opposition.

BobQ

justme111 wrote: »

These are particular cases which should be dealt with by relevant legislation. If the house is to be sold then that 65 yo if he/she is vulnerable( no means on their own) would become homeless and should be accommodated by local authority appropriately. If they have means to rent/buy privately (with 100 000 left from the house it would be possible) they do so.

Fair enough but the proposal is half baked and there are lots of these special cases.

The scenario above assumed that the 65yo is the sole inheritor of the property. It may be that the £100K is split among many others or left to someone else. Also it creates an obligation on the LA to house someone.

BobQ

Malthusian wrote: »

It's exceptionally rare for an elderly person to be so far gone they need someone to spend every waking hour looking after them (i.e. their 55 year old daughter has to give up her career) and survive in that state for 10 years. 1-2 years at most would be more typical. Hard cases make bad law.

.

It is rare for people who have some conditions (eg late diagnosed cancer) but not for some degenerative cases.

Many people spend 5 years or more getting progressively worse with conditions like Parkinsons, dementia, and MS while relying on access to home care in their own home or with resident relatives as carers. They may then get so bad that residential care is needed. Remember that the proposals apply to care in the person's home and in a residential care setting.

I agree some pre-death scenarios are short but some are not.