Old Age Care

Keep_pedalling

hugheskevi wrote: »

It is important to appreciate the probability of requiring care and the different types.

As you age and start become less active and able, having funds to be able to pay for tasks you would have previously done yourself will go a long way toward improving quality of life. Things such as gardening, housework, window cleaning and such-like. You would expect most households to either need or at least benefit from being able to fund this.

Common wisdom has generally been that as couples age and become less active, funds that were previously used for entertainment, travel, etc, can be redirected to greater support at home. Statistics show that unlike the widely assumed U-shaped retirement (lots of money needed at start of retirement whilst active, less as become less active but still independent and then lots at end of retirement on care), most elderly people do not experience a significant increase in expenditure toward the end of their life.

Couples typically look after each other, and will often manage perhaps with some care-in-community type support or even privately funded care at home and so usually avoid the need for residential or nursing home care. As males tend to pre-decease their spouse (on average) it is much more common for females to require residential care than males, after their partner has died.

Whilst it would be prudent to cater for funding a degree of in-home support, it is likely to be impractical and inefficient to fund for 2 sets of residential or nursing home care, especially as it is very unlikely both individuals would need this. Planning to fund this either from funds which would otherwise be passed on in inheritance or from property no longer needed would usually be part of the plan (either an explicit plan, or just being what happens without any plan).

Excellent post, it is not just health care you should be planning for, but the day to day stuff like keeping the garden and house in good order when you can no longer do it yourself. I have seen far to many people living in squalor as their one major asset falls into disrepair because they can no longer maintain it themselves and can’t or won’t pay others to do it for them.

I have also seen the damage that looking after someone in poor health can have on their unpaid careers. I do not want either my wife or my children to ever have to carry that burden, and the only way to guarantee to avoid that is to have the funds to pay for help even if that means having enough for a live in career for a few years.

GibbsRule_No3.

https://www.continuing-healthcare.co.uk/what-is-continuing-healthcare-funding

Does anyone know about the above? The BBC had a tv film called “Care” with Sheridan Smith. Her mother had a stroke that brought on a dementia illness, she was put in a care home that was not very nice but then went to a rather nice care home, luckily for her someone mentioned NHS Continuing Healthcare, in the film she fought for it and obviously got it, it is tv after all. It did make me wonder what criteria would be in real life to get the same result. It was tucked away on BBC 2 on a day when something else big was on other stations, so I’m wondering if that was why it did not create more noise on social media. I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts?

Keep_pedalling

GibbsRule_No3. wrote: »

https://www.continuing-healthcare.co.uk/what-is-continuing-healthcare-funding

Does anyone know about the above? The BBC had a tv film called “Care” with Sheridan Smith. Her mother had a stroke that brought on a dementia illness, she was put in a care home that was not very nice but then went to a rather nice care home, luckily for her someone mentioned NHS Continuing Healthcare, in the film she fought for it and obviously got it, it is tv after all. It did make me wonder what criteria would be in real life to get the same result. It was tucked away on BBC 2 on a day when something else big was on other stations, so I’m wondering if that was why it did not create more noise on social media. I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts?

The vast majority of people with dementia and / or mobility problems do not get CH funding, so it is not much use from a financial planning perspective.

Spreadsheetman

GibbsRule_No3. wrote: »

https://www.continuing-healthcare.co.uk/what-is-continuing-healthcare-funding

Does anyone know about the above? The BBC had a tv film called “Care” with Sheridan Smith. Her mother had a stroke that brought on a dementia illness, she was put in a care home that was not very nice but then went to a rather nice care home, luckily for her someone mentioned NHS Continuing Healthcare, in the film she fought for it and obviously got it, it is tv after all. It did make me wonder what criteria would be in real life to get the same result. It was tucked away on BBC 2 on a day when something else big was on other stations, so I’m wondering if that was why it did not create more noise on social media. I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts?

My father went through various assessments in his final days and despite being in a very bad way with severe heart failure and multiple strokes he didn't come close to qualifying for full CHC. He had the nursing care element paid for by the NHS which was relatively easy to get, but was self-funding for the rest of his care home costs.

I can't imagine just what combination of things would allow you to qualify for CHC.

LHW99

Spreadsheetman wrote: »

My father went through various assessments in his final days and despite being in a very bad way with severe heart failure and multiple strokes he didn't come close to qualifying for full CHC. He had the nursing care element paid for by the NHS which was relatively easy to get, but was self-funding for the rest of his care home costs.

I can't imagine just what combination of things would allow you to qualify for CHC.

Yes, been there. My mother had progressive strokes, ending in her being completely paralysed down one side, unable to communicate and fed through a PEG device. No CHC given. Fortunately she didn't suffer for more than a few months, but it was pretty horrific at the time, and we were thankful she had savings to cover the (about 2 weeks) she was actually fee paying, having moved around various places previously by the Council.

cfw1994

fred246 wrote: »

Make sure that when the time comes you have less than £23.5k in savings.

More Fredisms.....take with a pinch of your own favourite seasonings.....

If you are happy to take whatever care your local authority deign to offer you, then this is fine.

If, however, you want some degree of choice, my suggestion is owning your own house that *could* then be sold to pay for such care (or have suitable savings pots!).
F-I-L is going through this kind of thing at the moment, currently flitting between being home and being ambulanced into hospital. Has 4 care visits a day at home, and if that were enough, I reckon that might cost around £30-50k p.a. (area might impact that - he is Midlands, and the care is excellent!)

Obviously soaking up this sort of sum will be at the risk of lowering (or removing) any inheritance you might pass on, depending on how long it lasts. Still cheaper than full time care-home, I am sure.

In my view, there are simply too many variables to over-think this. Such care might be needed for 20+ years in the case of debilitating illness or injury....or could be gone within a few months.

fred246

Care at home is relatively cheap. Worked out about £10 an hour a couple of years ago. This is arranged by social services. They make visits very short. If you have money you pay, if not the council pays. Same care unless you arrange private carers. 4x15 minutes a day is £300 a month. We payed that for a few years and then she went into a home which was shared between private and council funded. The council payed £500 a week and private individuals payed £700 a week for exactly the same care.