tfw you say you're willing to work cross-party on a total reform of social care but then rule out any of the revenue-raising steps needed to pay for it. #Cakeism is clearly alive and well.
Публикация
33 прямых ответов · 106 сообщений
Oh, and the idea that you're protecting people who've saved all their lives is utterly laughable. As if the current system does that!
‘End-of-life’: different definitions … “Most recipients of long-term social care in Britain rely not on cradle-to-grave but on ‘asset-based’ welfare – using the wealth accumulated in their working lives to pay for what they need when they get old and sick” www.tortoisemedia.com/2021/03/11/t...
The whole process is designed to exhaust you. Even before Mum needed to go into care, trying to find help to support her in her home, where she wanted to be and where she knew, was just an absolute nightmare. There isn't the staff or infrastructure in the system, even when you have the money to pay.
Spot on. We spent over 3 yrs applying and appealing. My brother was welfare rights, social care and tribunals trained. We eventually got a specialist law firm involved. They fought us tooth and nail but eventually conceded 3 days before mum died. It was harrowing but they had to backdate it 2 years.
I don't have an issue with "hotel" costs but do object to paying for what is in reality palliative care in advanced dementia. www.alzscot.org/campaign-for...
It's high time we got away from this "Tax is bad" narrative. We all want public services that work, stands to reason they need to be funded adequately, ergo we all need to pay a bit more especially those with broader shoulders & clever offshoring accountants. Highly disingenuous from Badenough