I'm assuming that they've not been to a "normal" UK carehome now.
Its staffed with minimum wage workers who are in perilous conditions, with no support, time or backup. They are cleaning shit a piss all day long, and being shouted at for being foreign by the demented.
Not much different than the US, really. I had to hire some at-home care for a relative with brain cancer, and almost all of them were drunk on the job, falling asleep when they were supposed to be monitoring at night, or getting offended at something their patient said, who's mental state resembles that of a psychotic 8 year old. Oh and if you don't lock shit up, some of them will steal.
At a certain point, you fire so many there aren't any left in the area. I moved my relative to another area for unrelated reasons, but it was the same story at the new place too.
There were a few really good ones tbh, but 95% were in private care because nobody else would hire them.
We just finished a 6-week period where my mother-in-law was cared for at home 24/7 by personal assistants, with three shifts per day. Whole dumb, long story on why we had to do this, and I am very glad it is over (she's in memory care now), but I can say:
First, the PAs from the agency who employed them did a better job than we could have. Most of them were current nurses picking up extra money or former nurses who had retired from active work. Save for one who was new to the job and clearly in over her head (and removed from the account after one short shift), they were all competent and conscientious caregivers, if maybe struggling personally one way or another. Not a job anyone chooses to do, I suspect, but one they're often driven to by circumstance.
Second, that kind of care is prohibitively expensive long-term. The memory care facility costs 25% to 30% of the in-home care, and is far safer. We got lucky and had access to a smaller facility with a very low resident-to-staff ratio.
In the US, at least, I don't see the prospects for this kind of care getting anything but worse. I worry that once the Baby Boomer volume of elders passes through the system, the capital that has swallowed so much of elder care up will pull out and a lot of it will collapse and what survives won't be particularly good or affordable, even compared to current levels.
Did you go through an agency or a private hire? I took care of my dad in his final months during Covid. The hospital gave him Covid and then forcibly discharged him, so none of the agencies wanted to deal with him. I was able to find someone who wanted direct work and who was not daunted by the 'rona. They were fantastic. But of course one person can't do every day or around the clock care. I had another great mother+daughter+third care team lined up for when it was time to ramp up even more (they had taken care of my uncle), but (un)fortunately I never got quite there.
Agencies. I ended up doing private hires, which was a little nerve-wracking since I didn't have somebody doing background checks, etc. One of them was a total scammer who I probably should have reported for fraud, but the others ended up being really good and went above and beyond.
We see this in UK prisons too, because the pay is so low, the work is dangerous and conditions are kinda shit there's now an increasing amount of hybristophiliacs (people attracted to criminals) being found within the service, who start up romantic relationships with prisoners and corrupt the service. It's harder to weed these people out when you're desperate for staff.
The solution is to pay these positions well enough to attract people who genuinely believe in the profession. But society optimises away from doing that because there's no obvious ROI outside of making running costs cheaper.
Great, and I do agree, we know who to pay more (and who less), but how do we get there democratically? Should we vote for the party that says "we support LGBT and an infinite influx of cheap labor" or the "we support the military and the free market" party?
I think its one of those ones where we don't fix it because the market conditions of democracy can never justify spending that money in terms of prisons and most families of people who need care see limited value in spending more for an experience they don't receive. Improved spending in prisons only works in nordic societies because of laws that would never pass elsewhere, mostly allowing ex-convicts to not disclose their past (with some exemptions for sensitive jobs). You need that because the ROI in spending more on prisons is rehabilitation into society (which saves you the money on re-offending), but most other societies don't accept that and the maths is long term.
So we'll get the robots instead and the cries in response to the horrors of malfunction, will not be heard because the victims are politically weak. I only hope we never do this in education.
Personally I feel like it would be less undignified and infantilising to have a machine take care of my basic bodily functions than a human being. There's no feeling of judgement or being shamed in front of someone else, and the machine could even restore a feeling of autonomy since it would feel like you're using a tool instead of being helplessly reliant on another person's help.
I agree with your parent comment. People should have the option to go on their own terms. Maybe many people won’t have the courage (as you phrased it) to do it, but that shouldn’t stop the ones who do.
I recently learned of the term “medical divorce”. Elderly couples divorcing, so they’re not saddled with the medical bills if one of them passes away. How insanely cruel is this? Is allowing people to go out on their own terms worse than this?
I don’t know about “generally mandated” but if I am lucid enough to decide, I should be allowed to. It is more humane, safer, cleaner to do with medical professionals than jumping from a bridge.
Our choices are either improve healthcare, elder care so people spend their last years in dignity or give them other options. By now,
We have proven that we cannot or will not make healthcare, elder care affordable (it would be ideal to make it affordable). Which leaves us with what other options? Birth rates are falling almost across the world , we’ll have more and more older folks
This is possible for example across Europe, in some countries more openly in others a bit less so but still. It’s not advertised, one reason being that there are ugly cases of pressure by relatives…
This can be covered in advance, when you can set what to do with your organs after death, or whether to resuscitate you or not and so on, it can be done for this scenario.
In advanced societies of course, but we have few and unfortunate people travel from far and wide to reach those services.
There's a long period between beginning and full, diagnosed dementia. You won't be able to tell what you're signing but you won't be protected by a dementia diagnosis either.
You have that freedom. But in most countries you'll have no support. So you have to arrange for it yourself. Which might be fair. Also if you have people in your life they might object.
Shoulder pain? Sorry, but your insurance only covers suicide. Dementia? Every day you don't agree to end your life, your caretakers will take it personally.
Is this headline a humblebrag about being able to afford a plane ticket to the US?
Eldercare has been quite dystopian here for quite some time. You don't need robots to be dystopian, rather just the casual indifference of a paperclip-maximizing bureaucracy. I can't read the full article, but it seems like these robots at least move around and interact rather than merely being an automated process that automatically checks off boxes like "patient turned" and "bed cleaned". So they would appear to be a step up from the current absurd staffing ratios.
I'm assuming that they've not been to a "normal" UK carehome now.
Its staffed with minimum wage workers who are in perilous conditions, with no support, time or backup. They are cleaning shit a piss all day long, and being shouted at for being foreign by the demented.
Not much different than the US, really. I had to hire some at-home care for a relative with brain cancer, and almost all of them were drunk on the job, falling asleep when they were supposed to be monitoring at night, or getting offended at something their patient said, who's mental state resembles that of a psychotic 8 year old. Oh and if you don't lock shit up, some of them will steal.
At a certain point, you fire so many there aren't any left in the area. I moved my relative to another area for unrelated reasons, but it was the same story at the new place too.
There were a few really good ones tbh, but 95% were in private care because nobody else would hire them.
We just finished a 6-week period where my mother-in-law was cared for at home 24/7 by personal assistants, with three shifts per day. Whole dumb, long story on why we had to do this, and I am very glad it is over (she's in memory care now), but I can say:
First, the PAs from the agency who employed them did a better job than we could have. Most of them were current nurses picking up extra money or former nurses who had retired from active work. Save for one who was new to the job and clearly in over her head (and removed from the account after one short shift), they were all competent and conscientious caregivers, if maybe struggling personally one way or another. Not a job anyone chooses to do, I suspect, but one they're often driven to by circumstance.
Second, that kind of care is prohibitively expensive long-term. The memory care facility costs 25% to 30% of the in-home care, and is far safer. We got lucky and had access to a smaller facility with a very low resident-to-staff ratio.
In the US, at least, I don't see the prospects for this kind of care getting anything but worse. I worry that once the Baby Boomer volume of elders passes through the system, the capital that has swallowed so much of elder care up will pull out and a lot of it will collapse and what survives won't be particularly good or affordable, even compared to current levels.
Did you go through an agency or a private hire? I took care of my dad in his final months during Covid. The hospital gave him Covid and then forcibly discharged him, so none of the agencies wanted to deal with him. I was able to find someone who wanted direct work and who was not daunted by the 'rona. They were fantastic. But of course one person can't do every day or around the clock care. I had another great mother+daughter+third care team lined up for when it was time to ramp up even more (they had taken care of my uncle), but (un)fortunately I never got quite there.
Agencies. I ended up doing private hires, which was a little nerve-wracking since I didn't have somebody doing background checks, etc. One of them was a total scammer who I probably should have reported for fraud, but the others ended up being really good and went above and beyond.
This framing is ridiculous. Elder abuse and neglect is rampant. Nursing homes are run like prisons and you're empathizing with the guards.
We see this in UK prisons too, because the pay is so low, the work is dangerous and conditions are kinda shit there's now an increasing amount of hybristophiliacs (people attracted to criminals) being found within the service, who start up romantic relationships with prisoners and corrupt the service. It's harder to weed these people out when you're desperate for staff.
The solution is to pay these positions well enough to attract people who genuinely believe in the profession. But society optimises away from doing that because there's no obvious ROI outside of making running costs cheaper.
Great, and I do agree, we know who to pay more (and who less), but how do we get there democratically? Should we vote for the party that says "we support LGBT and an infinite influx of cheap labor" or the "we support the military and the free market" party?
I think its one of those ones where we don't fix it because the market conditions of democracy can never justify spending that money in terms of prisons and most families of people who need care see limited value in spending more for an experience they don't receive. Improved spending in prisons only works in nordic societies because of laws that would never pass elsewhere, mostly allowing ex-convicts to not disclose their past (with some exemptions for sensitive jobs). You need that because the ROI in spending more on prisons is rehabilitation into society (which saves you the money on re-offending), but most other societies don't accept that and the maths is long term.
So we'll get the robots instead and the cries in response to the horrors of malfunction, will not be heard because the victims are politically weak. I only hope we never do this in education.
So you don’t think any of this is down to not enough staff and poor training?
I'm sure there are many systemic issues but the primary victims are the elders. For starters, they don't have a choice but to be there.
To play the devil's advocate, if the issues are systemic, the elders are the ones that have been cultivating that system their whole lives.
I feel that this is the case in most developed countries unless you can afford to pay $10,000 - $20,000 per month for an upscale nursing home.
Robots might make it a little less terrible.
[flagged]
https://archive.is/PSPZz
Personally I feel like it would be less undignified and infantilising to have a machine take care of my basic bodily functions than a human being. There's no feeling of judgement or being shamed in front of someone else, and the machine could even restore a feeling of autonomy since it would feel like you're using a tool instead of being helplessly reliant on another person's help.
More likely than not, a human would be remote controlling it, at least at times. So, they're there, you just can't see them seeing you.
I think this is more of a cultural problem. Aging is a normal part of life.
Give me the freedom to end my life when I want to end it and you don't have to care about my care and I bet I am not the only one.
Can you guarantee that you will feel the same as your mobility becomes more and more restricted?
Do you think that your current resolve is correct for everyone around you, and should be generally mandated?
I agree to a reluctance to rely upon others, in the face of infirmity, but will I have the courage to forego that reliance in euthasia? I don't know.
I agree with your parent comment. People should have the option to go on their own terms. Maybe many people won’t have the courage (as you phrased it) to do it, but that shouldn’t stop the ones who do.
I recently learned of the term “medical divorce”. Elderly couples divorcing, so they’re not saddled with the medical bills if one of them passes away. How insanely cruel is this? Is allowing people to go out on their own terms worse than this?
I don’t know about “generally mandated” but if I am lucid enough to decide, I should be allowed to. It is more humane, safer, cleaner to do with medical professionals than jumping from a bridge.
Our choices are either improve healthcare, elder care so people spend their last years in dignity or give them other options. By now, We have proven that we cannot or will not make healthcare, elder care affordable (it would be ideal to make it affordable). Which leaves us with what other options? Birth rates are falling almost across the world , we’ll have more and more older folks
>> Give me the freedom to end my life when I want to end it...
> and should be generally mandated?
or even encouraged?
This is possible for example across Europe, in some countries more openly in others a bit less so but still. It’s not advertised, one reason being that there are ugly cases of pressure by relatives…
Sure, but a lot of those elderly people have some significant degree of dementia. That make it difficult to go out on your own terms.
This can be covered in advance, when you can set what to do with your organs after death, or whether to resuscitate you or not and so on, it can be done for this scenario.
In advanced societies of course, but we have few and unfortunate people travel from far and wide to reach those services.
There's a long period between beginning and full, diagnosed dementia. You won't be able to tell what you're signing but you won't be protected by a dementia diagnosis either.
You have that freedom. But in most countries you'll have no support. So you have to arrange for it yourself. Which might be fair. Also if you have people in your life they might object.
Shoulder pain? Sorry, but your insurance only covers suicide. Dementia? Every day you don't agree to end your life, your caretakers will take it personally.
The UK parliament just spent a year and a half on an assisted dying Bill, but then it ran out of parliamentry time. So the powers that be decided no
The powers that be decided to quietly drop it because they’re not willing to come out and publicly support it.
The government could make time for this and they could tell the lords to do one. They just chose not to.
Is this headline a humblebrag about being able to afford a plane ticket to the US?
Eldercare has been quite dystopian here for quite some time. You don't need robots to be dystopian, rather just the casual indifference of a paperclip-maximizing bureaucracy. I can't read the full article, but it seems like these robots at least move around and interact rather than merely being an automated process that automatically checks off boxes like "patient turned" and "bed cleaned". So they would appear to be a step up from the current absurd staffing ratios.
Facebook can do a pretty good necro-avatar. That's better than flesh. Cheaper than a retirement home too.
https://www.businessinsider.com/meta-granted-patent-for-ai-l...
[dead]
Please stop paying any attention to the Torygraph / Reformgraph. It used to be good decades ago but now it just spews propaganda nowadays.
Really? Downvoted for speaking the truth?
https://westenglandbylines.co.uk/opinion/daily-telegraph-dis...
Someone watched Roujin Z and thinks they are so smart.