Gransnet forums

Health

Kate Garroway-Care at home costs

(255 Posts)
Bea65 Tue 26-Mar-24 08:59:08

Kate has told viewers that she is in debt as the care at home costs were more than £16000 a month for her late husband Derek… very moving documentary later on ITV … she really is a good spokesperson highlighting the costs and the struggle for carers… she wants social care funding to be available

welbeck Fri 29-Mar-24 18:31:18

i think the point being made is that if you are self-funding due to personal assets, they there is no incentive for social services to suggest CHC, as they might if trying to push the cost away from their budget.
as long as they are not having to pay, they don't care.

Anniebach Fri 29-Mar-24 18:52:42

If that was the point being made why speak of some at the funeral who were wealthy and other comments not related to
funding

RosesandLilac Sat 30-Mar-24 06:24:55

Derek’s care needs were largely those that would have been funded by social care, not health, so he didn’t qualify for CHC.
As they were care needs then he also didn’t qualify for social care funding because they obviously had substantial resources, financial or otherwise, including a salary of £500k and owning two houses valued at over £4m.
Whilst I accept that the £16,000 a month care costs are frightening, there are so many others with far less money who are in this situation and who have to just carry on without the care input because they simply can’t afford it.
It’s these carers who I feel for.

Curtaintwitcher Sat 30-Mar-24 06:32:44

I hope people are not campaigning for this to be available on the NHS, which was never intended for end of life care.
Although we all want the best for our loved ones, the standard of care should be dependent on income. This is something else we should all consider when organising our own finances.

Luckygirl3 Sat 30-Mar-24 08:46:16

Curtaintwitcher

I hope people are not campaigning for this to be available on the NHS, which was never intended for end of life care.
Although we all want the best for our loved ones, the standard of care should be dependent on income. This is something else we should all consider when organising our own finances.

The standard of care should be dependent on income ... really!?
Can you seriously suggest that people of low financial means should receive worse care? ... that they deserve less dignity and professional care than those who are rich?
We are meant to be a civilised society and yet you want different standards of care for rich and poor ... though heaven knows we already have that in the NHS.

M0nica Sat 30-Mar-24 09:22:01

There are a significant number of households in this country who find it is all they can do to organise their finances to cover food and a roof over their head. Planning for any care they may need is a luxury beyond their wildest imaaginings.

Farzanah Sat 30-Mar-24 09:52:39

the standard of care should be dependent on income.
That is not only shocking but very sad to read.
Are we to return to the Poor Law for paupers?

Thank you for your post about the reality for many MOnica, and yours Luckygirl.

icanhandthemback Sat 30-Mar-24 10:56:16

Curtaintwitcher, maybe families could rely more heavily on the food banks so they can provide for social care should they need it. 🙄

Farzanah Sat 30-Mar-24 12:32:43

Work houses alongside food banks perhaps, so the “undeserving poor” who haven’t managed to put enough money aside for private (for profit) care in old age or ill health, could be deposited there?

Syracute Sat 30-Mar-24 14:30:28

Germanshepherdsmum

Well how do you suggest it’s funded? How much extra tax are you willing to pay? Genuine question.

There are plenty of wealthy people here that do not pay their fare share due offshored tax avoidance. People and companies that make their money here and pay little or no tax. That needs to stop. Compared to other countries I have lived in the UK is far behind despite its wealth. The government spends a lot of time waffling over things instead of actioning problems. You only need to see that privatization in other sectors isn’t working . Services get gutted in favor of shareholders . If the wealthy paid their fair share you wouldn’t have to fight for the care that should be provided.

M0nica Sat 30-Mar-24 14:57:33

Syracute What is your defintion of wealthy? Income, capital.

Farzanah Sat 30-Mar-24 15:09:27

Yes MOnica it’s not simply one or the other.

For those who are really interested in how this country’s tax system could be overhauled to enable the system to be fairer for all, I suggest reading Richard Murphy’s “Taxing Wealth Report 2024”.

nadateturbe Sat 30-Mar-24 15:58:16

Curtaintwticher, no wonder the world is the way it is when people actually believe like you.

orly Sun 31-Mar-24 11:55:37

Imarocker

I believe it was her choice to take him home. and she has said that she didn’t realise that this would mean he was no longer under the care of a consultant. I feel for her and she wanted to give him the best possible life and obviously it was better for the children to have him at home. I hope she keeps up her campaign for more support for people needing home care but there aren’t enough people willing to do the job and there isn’t the money to fund them.

Exactly right and people conveniently seem to forget this.

In the run up to the General Election look out for party manifestos which promise "We'll put up every tax by 50% in order to pay for everything you want".

Farzanah Sun 31-Mar-24 12:05:37

Unfortunately in a grossly unequal, but relatively rich country such as the U.K., our taxation system and economy is such that the wealthy are prioritised over provision for the rest, and ensures the status quo remains.

I have no hopes that the Labour Party should they win the election, will bring about any great change, as they are already talking up the Tory trop of “The Magic Money Tree”.

Everyone deserves conditions in which they can live and die with dignity, regardless of their financial state.

icanhandthemback Sun 31-Mar-24 12:25:39

orly, have you ever had to put somebody in a home? To go from having a husband who was healthy, lively and fully alive, to the disabled man he had become would have made that decision so hard. Even she admitted that she hadn't realised the difficulties she would face in caring for him and her young family. It isn't a convenience to forget she made that decision, it is empathy and understanding as to why she might have made that decision. There is a lot of truth in the adage that sometimes you can't see the wood for the trees.

JaneJudge Sun 31-Mar-24 12:28:36

he had mental capacity and was able to make his own decisions

Anniebach Sun 31-Mar-24 12:31:36

Derek wasn’t capable of making the decision of wanting/needing to be home ?

JaneJudge Sun 31-Mar-24 12:36:08

why wasn't he?

Anniebach Sun 31-Mar-24 12:40:26

I am sure Derek was capable of choosing to be home, hence my question mark

Farzanah Sun 31-Mar-24 12:41:43

Do you know that Anniebach?
I didn’t watch this documentary because I thought it was intrusive, but I still think Kate G did much to raise the issue of high costs of care, and physical and mental toll on family and carers.
It is a problem which many prefer to ignore, UNTIL it happens to them and theirs.

Honeybee1305 Sun 31-Mar-24 12:45:46

Social care is a ticking time bomb. The baby boom generation is getting older & the care system is just not in place to step up & provide what will he required in the coming years. Government does not want to talk about or acknowledge this as it's not a vote winner. When the caring profession is acknowledged properly & the staff given decent wages & proper training things might change. Action needs to be taken now before it's too late.

Anniebach Sun 31-Mar-24 12:47:10

Why is it assumed all decisions were taken by Derek’s wife, and
I didn’t find the documentary intrusive

Bea65 Sun 31-Mar-24 12:49:46

JaneJudge am not sure what you mean by mental capacity as in the documentary where we could see/hear Derek's voice am not convinced that he had full mental capacity- am not a medic but when a very unwell/dying person makes crying noises to communicate...have experienced this within family, they do not appear to have full mental capacity..

4allweknow Sun 31-Mar-24 12:52:14

Fancythat I can fully understand uour comments. Where I live the same happened last year. My DH was nearing end of life, I was caring for him at home on my own. Visit from OT with regards equipment to help. Shiwer seat too big for shower, table for bed couldn't fit underneath, bed raiser could only be fitted at 8 am as 2 man job and drivers left depot at 7.30 am (when DH was in middle of pain control meds) couldn't move, never mind get out of bed, so never fitted. Wheelchair, after I had pursued how to get one had to be measured by district nurse. Who? Where do I contact? Never seen one! Eventually found located at GP practice. When booking appointment was asked if I had a measuring tape as this was needed and she didn't have one to bring with her. When wheelchair eventually arrived, far too heavy, I couldn't lift it. Contacted service who advised they could provide lightweight one. Marvellous, no. Replacement arrived, exactly the same as other one. I had to search to find one I could hire and lift. Palliative care medic visited, she asked how things were going. As I couldn't lift my DH without causing pain she suggested going to hospice to help manage pain. Probably take a week. 40 mile round trip. Staff asked if I was ready at home for his return. No mention of any carers. I asked to speak with Dr who when I questioned how quickly someone coukd be at house to adjust pain meds, say 15 mins, answer was, unlikely. Therefore, my DH remained in hospice for 3 weeks until his death. The Hospice closed last year as emphasis is now on care at home. The only investment in the system, in my cynical view, is not in care staff but in more managers.