Perhaps the public need to feel and see the unreality of the situation regarding social care. With so many of the population ignoring their possible future needs, and health care being free, whilst social care is means tested, there is a perverse incentive for those making the decisions (who also hold the purse strings) to class as much as possible as “social”, and as little as possible as “medical”. The actuary is founded in reality, but even their solution only applies to 33% of us!
No wonder the people “ignore their future costs” when they have been told they can have (in health) Everything for everyone for ever.
I have had several families as patients who have deliberately given away property in plenty of time to avoid the state getting their hands on their cash, and to ensure it all passes on to the next generation. Since inheritance tax is a double tax I am in favour of abolishing it, but that does not mean lucky people who live into their late 90s should avoid payments. The system needs to be altered, and to face reality.
Despite the warnings, especially from “Community Care” the politicians will not grasp the nettle. Homes are going to close. There are many areas of the country where the privately funded are so few that there is only one payment schedule. In richer areas the wealthy often subsidise the state funded clients….. its one of the questions needing asking when being admitted to a home and in my view, in the interests of openness, needs to be publicised on their internal notices, literature and website.
The Actuary 25th June 2019 (They really do know) reports: Social care reforms proposed for third of UK population – Around a third of the UK population could benefit from targeted government incentives that boost saving for social care, the Pension Policy Institute (PPI) has proposed.
Luke Haynes in “Community Care” opines 26th |June 2019: Worsening social care funding position wreaking increased human cost, warn directors – Numbers affected by home care provider closures double as fragile care market and NHS cost shifts exacerbate financial woes for councils
( A report equally in the clouds of unreality. If we cannot afford the one for free, we cannot afford both! ) The BMJ opinion from Anita Charlesworth is well intentioned but unrealistic.