When there is discussion about Care Homes the debate seems to centre on choosing the right one and the cost.
It always surprises me that no one seems to question the cost and figures of a thousand pounds per WEEK and above seem to be accepted as 'the normal' going rate.
I would like to ask providers to justify these figures, why such heavy costs in an industry that would appear to pay a good proportion of their staff at less than top rates of pay.
When I have raised these issues with a few friends, I have been met with some mention of insurance costs being a significant factor.
A recent experience is where my son-in-law's father has had to go into a home at what seems to me a ridiculous cost. He has dementia, but his care needs do not appear to be particularly demanding. My sister also has dementia and has to be supervised taking medication and helped with bathing, but again not particularly demanding. Benefits reduce her costs, but the non-benefit costs would be high. I cannot see where costs in the thousand pound a week bracket can be justified.
If the insurance costs are the culprit, could the Government not provide insurance cover with sensible safeguards against excessive liabilities.
I can see there may be cases where care is costly because of the extensive needs of an individual, but in my view there could be a significant number of cases where care costs are well in excess of the level of care provided.
Perhaps a 'housing association type care provision ' could provide value for money. In my view people would be prepared to consider paying for care at a figure that equated to renting a flat or house, rather than having to be stripped of the equity in their house.