This Is So Wrong

[youngmafbog]

We can find money to house people who have contributed zilch after having fleeced all thus couples money they can't keep them together.

We often see a right to family life for foreigners what about our own people?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6198671/Devoted-couple-91-86-separated-care-home-funding.html

[Old_Geezer]

Terrible. Although I don't see it needs to be compared to other budgets.

[ummmm]

As sad as it it's always been the case.

[Mamyalynne]

Funding issues for couples are heartbreaking, it happens a lot and must tear at the hearts of relatives too.

[youngmafbog]

Yes it does need to be compared to other budgets since it is spending money on them that causes this sort of disgusting issue.

[ummmm]

You can't compare social housing with nursing care.

[woofgang]

Its horribly sad. The problem is that the care that this lady needs is very expensive. The council can't spend the money to place her husband, who doesn't need the same kind of care there because it would be wasting its budget and someone else would lose out. I have feeling that councils as statutory bodies have a legal duty to make the best use of the money entrusted to them, so it may be that they actually cannot fund someone in care that they don't need. There are no bottomless buckets of money anywhere. There used to be dual registered homes, may still be, which could cope with this kind of problem but they were never that many of them.
This is not intended as an excuse but an explanation.

[cassa333]

Although he needs care himself he would, up to his ability, be able to make sure she is cared for properly.

How many times a day do careers have to go to someone to make sure they eat?

He can help with her care and she, in her way, will care for him in as much as he would be lost and lonely without her.

Separate them and one or both will be dead pretty quickly.... or is that the intention.

[emmie]

life and social services can be so hard sometimes, i don't know what the answer is but i hope somehow they can stay together.

[Zacs-Master]

Well, it will be wrong IF it happens.

[emmie]

maybe they are waiting till one of them passes away, seems cruel in the extreme to separate them, if that is what happens.

[woofgang]

cassa that's not the intention and you know it! I am not sure how what her husband can do for her makes a difference in where she could go for care? Specialist care such as she needs is regulated. If the council are paying, even if they could find a suitable place, they couldn't place her there if the home isn't suitable according to the regulations which have the force of law; and the home couldn't accept her if they weren't staffed and set up to care for people with her needs which is very expensive in terms both of facilities and staffing.
In any case, its not eating that she needs help with. She wanders and had left the house alone and her husband has been unable to stop her. This requires very specialist and secure care.

I do suspect (have seen it before) that the family did think that one or both of the couple would not survive long enough to see the money run out and that this may have had an effect on the decisions that were made about where to place their parents.
Its very sad indeed.

[bednobs]

personally i'd be pretty peed off if my council were paying £1k PER WEEK to provide someone with care they didn't need. That's 52k per year. although i fail to see how he could live at home if the house was sold to put him in care in the first place! Plus as normal, the actual story does not live up to the headline

[woofgang]

bedknobs, the story is pretty muddled. I suspect that the suggestion about Mr remaining at home was made early on in the process. If he had remained at home, the value of the house would have been set aside until he died so the council would have contributed more to the care of the wife, and probably more to the care of the husband in terms of visiting carers. Addtionally depending on how the house was owned, any financial assessment would have been much more beneficial to the couple. I really really understand why the family acted as they did but it might not have been the best thing to have done and from the subtext of the article, it seems as though this might have been pointed out to them at the time. I have known situations like this where the non resident partner has spent everyday at the care home, only going home to sleep. The cost is less (much less) than full residence but is not covered by council payments......of course it may not have been available at this home.

[hereIam]

ymb I agree with you 100%. I find this heartbreaking in the extreme and it makes me angry too.