Kate Garroway-Care at home costs

There is also the question of what equipment might be required - you could not, for instance, have a crash team sufficiently close by, and some patients are continuously being monitored. What Jannipans describes sounds more like an old fashioned convalescent home.

Jannipans

In case anyone reads this far - when my dad was in hospital in Cyprus, it was expected that a family member would stay with him (day and night) and provide the necessary "care" - washing, feeding, pillow plumping and, of course, company.
Why not have some small houses or flats on the hospital site where families and the patient can stay but have doctors etc on hand. (could another storey be built on perhaps to facilitate this?) Surely the rental cost would be less than £16k a month - family could be together - doctors and consultants nearby - and the family home could be rented out to cover some of the rental cost if needed. 24/7 care for patient, less worry for family.

Just not realistic. It will only work in countries where families live close to each other and there are a number of otherwise unemployed relatives, either non-workig women or unemployed youngsters who canundertake the work.

In this country where families are scattered and may not live near a sick relative. For someone to give up their job to care for an old sick relative, could cast a family into financial disaster with house repossession, being plunged into extreme poverty children changing schools.

What works in one culture does not work in other cultures,

Bit surprised that ITV1 are repeating KG Derek’s Story tonight 22:45 as it’s already on ITVX ..

This country is not “broke” despite what some politicians would have us believe. It is a political choice how money is spent, and the government running a deficit is how the economy works. After the 2nd world war there was a much bigger deficit, and the government managed to invest in people and infrastructure, which led to growth.

National insurance doesn’t fund the NHS.

annsixty

I am aware that people will say we are already paying this in National Insurance
My point is that this is just not enough for today’s needs.

I totally agree with you

I am aware that people will say we are already paying this in National Insurance
My point is that this is just not enough for today’s needs.

Surely if this country in its present parlous economic state cannot afford to give pensioners enough to keep some of them warm and fed and need food banks to feed working families it goes without saying that at this time, it cannot afford tens of thousands of £s to keep people in homes fully funded.
We need a drastic overhaul of insurance, paid for from working age ,to fund it
The idea of a welfare state and NHS from “the cradle to the grave” is so unrealistic.

I do not think the personal financial circumstances of this family are the point.

What the programme has done is to highlight the high cost of care for everyone, but more so for those with complex needs. Hopefully it might start a national debate about how this should be funded, and has opened the eyes of many to the burdens of caring (both personal and financial). And the difficulty of providing care that is dignified and sensitive to the individual's needs. This is especially true of younger adults, where care in a nursing home is often entirely inappropriate.

In case anyone reads this far - when my dad was in hospital in Cyprus, it was expected that a family member would stay with him (day and night) and provide the necessary "care" - washing, feeding, pillow plumping and, of course, company.
Why not have some small houses or flats on the hospital site where families and the patient can stay but have doctors etc on hand. (could another storey be built on perhaps to facilitate this?) Surely the rental cost would be less than £16k a month - family could be together - doctors and consultants nearby - and the family home could be rented out to cover some of the rental cost if needed. 24/7 care for patient, less worry for family.

No idea what different that makes to funding, as I dont know anything about the subject.

I think I am right in saying that Derek's company went bankrupt? As he was not there to keep it going?

That was the point of the programme.
To highlight how difficult it is for people other than Kate.

Whilst I feel sorry for KG and everyone else who is in this position she has a second home she can sell and ways of making a very good income, many others do not have the same income or property

pigsmayfly.

So say Derek had not gone home to Kate. Where would he have gone? To a nursing home? Standard nursing home fees on the nursing floor would be maybe £1400 per week. But in Dereks case would he have been allocated 1:1 care within the home? And Derek himself would have been responsible for paying for his care.
So Kate is in debt because she has personally taken responsibility for Dereks care. This, most of us would not be in a position to do that would we? Do you think I have this right?

£1400 certainly wouldn't cover care in our area. We are paying £2150 a week plus the Nursing Component which goes straight to the home. My Mum's last home was £1800 per week but that would be more now.

Sorry some predictive text and typos I was on the iPad

Yes and know you may have got it right but I am not sure Kate has personally paid for everything she would have used Dereks money presumably to pay for his care as this is how it works. If that dried up she would have used their joint funds and even her own if she had that sort of arrangement. We all do the finances differently as we saw on a recent thread on here.
I am not sure Derek would have been awarded 1to1 care in a nursing home, he was recovering at that stage and would definitely not have had the level of treatment he did at home. Their choice. he would presumably have been self funding unless everything is in Kates name. We do not know any of it for sure just that she says SHE is in debt, which indicates Derek left her very little or nothing at all!! As others have said. She does not need two houses so can hopefully pay the debt off quickly. Anyway we do not know by how much it could be less than we imagine and that she is merely making a point

I can’t comment on you, but I would always take the temperature before phoning out GP. It is the first thing they ask also how do you know what you are dealing with?

So say Derek had not gone home to Kate. Where would he have gone? To a nursing home? Standard nursing home fees on the nursing floor would be maybe £1400 per week. But in Dereks case would he have been allocated 1:1 care within the home? And Derek himself would have been responsible for paying for his care.
So Kate is in debt because she has personally taken responsibility for Dereks care. This, most of us would not be in a position to do that would we? Do you think I have this right?

Win One of the low points of looking after my husband (and I'd been doing it for several years) was when an emergency doctor came to see him because he was in a lot of pain. "Has he got a temperature?" asked the Doctor. "Oh no I don't think so" was my answer. When the doctor took his temperature it was 40 degrees and he was actually seriously ill with peritonitis!

MissAdventure

So of those of us who cared for a loved ones, did we all work full time, too?
Difficult to get carers allowance for caring 35 hours a week and working the same amount, too.

Are people saying that Kate (or rather, Derek) was getting something they shouldnt have?

Did they cover up ownership of expensive houses?

No I don't think anyone is suggesting any of that, all we are discussing is whether Derek should have been funded or not. (he was not as you will know, but Kate and lots of people think he should have been)
We are also discussing how much good Derek's story will do for unpaid carers as a whole, I am personally hoping Kate's interviews will do more for unpaid carers than Derek's story although it has certainly got people talking about it all, which can only be a good thing. We need as much awareness of unpaid carers as we can get.
To answer your other question yes I have been a 24/7 hands on carer 3 times now and had CHC for 2 of my loved ones. I chose to give up a managing position to care for my late husband but was too old to claim carers allowance. We lost two good income overnight. I would do it all over again though.

Could she have panicked and needed reassurance? , obviously she didn’t have your wisdom

Anniebach

What are you asking win. You said said you had been there more than most

It was not a question as such more of a statement. I was amazed she would state that she rang Dr.Hilary because she was not sure whether Derek had a temperature or not, nor sure what she should do. I would suggest she should have taken his temperature to make sure presuming she had a thermometer like most households do. That is what I was referring to, I find it impossible to understand that a lady in her position can be quite so "naive" I suppose might be the word I'm looking for.

So of those of us who cared for a loved ones, did we all work full time, too?
Difficult to get carers allowance for caring 35 hours a week and working the same amount, too.

Are people saying that Kate (or rather, Derek) was getting something they shouldnt have?

Did they cover up ownership of expensive houses?

Loving is caring

Anniebach

I have much sympathy for her, money does not take grief away

I think we all have sympathy for her loss, if you have lost a loved one you will know how hard it is to move on when you have cared for a long time. That however if a different issue to the funding.