Welcome to our new, regular Friday feature Good week/bad week: a
round-up of how the week is looking for older people.
Good week
Good week for economists: Andrew Dilnot's thoughtful review
single-handedly raised the reputation of a much maligned group of
academics this week, not to mention offering a glimmer of hope to
thousands of people by reducing the anxieties that many feel about
paying for care in later life. The suggested cap on the amount
someone should pay for social care (around £35,000 or no more than
30% of their assets) is a much clearer way for people to know in
advance how much they might be expected to pay. We don't agree with
every single word (not quite convinced by the "granny tax" idea)
but the almost universally positive response to the report made
George Osborne's apparent intent to kick it into touch that much
harder (and gave economists a temporary reprieve as we all have a
bona fide reason to hold on the jokes about them, for now at least
anyway.)
Bad week
Bad week for Elaine McDonald and what her case says for the
potential care of older people. The 68-year-old disabled
ex-ballerina was denied the right for an overnight carer to help
her use her commode following a stroke. Instead, she has been left
to use incontinence pads overnight even though she is not
incontinent. Elaine herself described the decision to be an
"intolerable affront to her dignity". We have to ask ourselves, if
going to the toilet is now regarded as a privilege in our
overstretched social care system, what on earth are they going to
cut next? We have to decide whether, as a society, we would rather
have our older friends, parents and grandparents in incontinence
pads, because we are not prepared to face the question of how best
to pay for care. This is a clear warning of what care and support
will become if the coalition fails to act on Andrew Dilnot's
recommendations.
