Posted on 10/22/2011 4:28:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
Last week, the Obama administration dropped one of the signature provisions of its healthcare plan. The CLASS Act (Community Living Assistance Services) was intended to provide affordable insurance for long-term care to individuals who, because of infirmity or age, could no longer care for themselves. But the reality that not enough healthy Americans would sign up to make it self-supporting finally doomed the program.
Many opponents of Obamacare will no doubt cheer this turn of events because it confirms the view that we cannot afford to, in essence, nationalize health care. I agree --but I also recognize that the problem that the CLASS Act was trying to address is a legitimate concern for which we now have no workable solutions.
The nation faces a looming crisis in caring for the elderly, whose life expectancy often exceeds their ability to live independently. Millions of Americans need long-term care, but we currently have no system that adequately provides it a cost that most Americans can afford.
This topic holds more than public policy interest for me. Three years ago, my then-87-year-old mother came to live with me when it became clear that it wasn't safe for her to continue to live on her own. Although in good health, my mother is virtually blind and quite frail. She values her independence, prepares all her own meals, has excellent long- and short-term memory and follows the news avidly. But without daily assistance, she could not shop for food, get to the doctor or clean her own living space.
Last week, however, her situation changed dramatically. After returning from a doctor's visit, my mother fell on the last step of a steep climb down from the car to our home. I was just a few feet away from her when I heard her hit the floor. In that instant, her life and future changed dramatically. She broke her hip -- the scourge of the elderly -- and within 24 hours had undergone partial hip replacement surgery. Three days later, she was released from the hospital.
Medicare provides coverage for up to 100 days in a rehabilitation facility so long as the patient needs daily services that can be provided only by a doctor or nurse or is receiving the rehabilitation therapies provided and making progress. But when the 100 days are over, the patient is on his or her own. My mother is now in an excellent rehabilitation center in Boulder, Colo. -- but it's unclear what will happen when she's released.
If you're very wealthy and can afford upwards of $60,000 a year in private, long-term care, the alternative of an assisted living facility is available. But what if you don't have those means? I would gladly take my mother back into my home, but I don't think it's feasible for her to continue to live there. If we can manage to get her down those same steep stairs and into the house again, she'll be trapped there indefinitely, unable to go to the doctor, grocery or anywhere else except to the hospital if she falls and injures herself again. And she'll need someone with her 24 hours a day.
Since my mother has never owned a home or any other assets -- only a meager Social Security and Veterans' pension and the help I've provided since my father died -- she is eligible for Medicaid. And unlike Medicare, Medicaid does provide coverage for long-term care. But having visited the local facilities that accept Medicaid, I can tell you the decent ones have long waiting lists -- a year or more -- and the ones that don't have waiting lists break a daughter's heart. I simply cannot imagine putting her in one of these crowded, dreary, hopeless places.
Currently, 40 million Americans are age 65 and older, and of these, nearly 6 million are 85 years of age or older. One in 5 elderly Americans are currently considered dependent, but the proportion will grow to nearly 40 percent by 2050. We continue to expand the frontiers of life expectancy, but we have yet to figure out how to care for our ever-growing population of older Americans.
The administration's failure to come up with a feasible plan to solve the problem is no cheering matter. We must find a way -- not only for our parents but for all of our sakes.
By letting the families they lovingly raised, and their churches they faithfully attended—do it, while getting rid of the government socialism that robs their ability to care for themselves in the first place.
I don't understand what you mean by "trapped."
The fact that the writer expects someone else to pay for, and care for, his/her ailing mother tells you what that means...Having worked in the healthdare field, I am familiar with these types of children. It’s part of the communist plan to make everyone part of the welfare states. Separate parents from their children by indoctrinating people to believe children are a burden, then when they grow up, reinforce to children that their parent’s aren’t worthy of their time or money. There’s nothing new about this, once upon a time it was referred to as Corban.
We don’t care for the elderly.We warehouse them in some of the most expensive nursing homes around.They are poorly managed from what I have seen and the patients usually get substandard care.
People that can’t fend for are not even fed usually since there is not enough staffing or the staff is busy doing things that have nothing to do with patient care.
The supervision of those same people is attrocious.I only hope that should I get to that point in my life I’m not left to die of starvation in a nursing home.
I don’t get that from the article at all. Ms. Chavez is simply stating that a solution must be found.
She is a moderate-to-conservative commentator, not a friggin’ communist!
“And she’ll need someone with her 24 hours a day.”
My wife and I have taken care of my mother, who has very advanced Alzheimer’s, for the past eight and one half years. She has outlived all of the early predictions of her death by almost five years now, is bed ridden, and cannot communicate except by her wonderful smile and the occasional pat on the hand of the person feeding her.
Five years ago, we took advantage of a “respite” program that the local hospice offered and put mother in a nursing home for four days while we took a very short, belated “honeymoon”. When we came back, Mom had been starved almost to death. After that, we made the decision together that she would be with us and we with her, no matter her condition, until she died.
In most cases, our parents put their love for their children ahead of their own personal wants and desires for many years. Why should they not be honored by us in their decline by knowing that we are going to be there for them as they walk their last mile?
I find this incomprehensible. My own mother disliked her mother-in-law intensely, and had the means to put my grandmother in a lavish setting with a legion of nurses; but my grandmother wanted to be with family when she started to fail. She lived with us five years, and NO nurses -- my mother did it all herself, and got over her disaffection in the process.
That's all of one experience, however. But how did people take care of their elderly up until recently? And why do they call it a family if they don't provide for their own? The more government becomes "humane," the less individuals retain that quality. We are seeing the natural bonds loosen.
Your post made me cry, Big Harry. The love, compassion, sympathy and kindness that you are showing your Mother is amazing and admirable. You are a wonderful son and your wife is an angel.
God love ya, Big_Harry!
“your wife is an angel.”
You certainly have that part right! :)
With how long people are living, you have 70+ year old “children” trying to take care of 90+ year old parents.
I acknowledge that there are a fair number of 70+ year old people who are hale and hearty, but many are not. They would not have the physical strength and stamina to render round the clock care to a 90+ year old parent.
You could do down a generation or two and try to tap the 50+ year old grandchildren or the 30+ year old great-grandchildren. But they have their own set of responsibilities (full time jobs and rearing children) and precious few extended families live in proximity to each other.
I fully understand Chavez’ points but have no idea what the solution is.
**Ms. Chavez is simply stating that a solution must be found**.
She is advocating that Government must find a solution.
Clearly she has the resources to hire a qualified live-in caregiver and I wonder why she hasn’t considered it.
The fact that life expectancy has been extended by superior health care from birth to middle age - has not prepared families for the inevitable decline for the aged over 70.
When families consisted of parents, several children, aunts uncles, cousins - family members rotated the care of their elderly patriarchs & matriarchs (Japanese still do). It is a cultural thing - and we have lost that culture.
Thanks Lady Lucky,
My wife and I have been blessed beyond measure by having mother in our house. We have seen professionals quit their jobs to take care of their own parents because of the testimony that God has given to us through our care for Mom. We have “converted” several liberal nurses to the conservative cause, witnessed to many others the love of Christ, (well, my wife has! She says that I speak the truth and she supplies the love... ...and the spiritual band-aids).
Agreed, which is exactly why I said:
“while getting rid of the government socialism that robs their ability to care for themselves in the first place.”
What evidence that was presented in the article leads you to that conclusion? I couldn't find any.
When families consisted of parents, several children, aunts uncles, cousins - family members rotated the care of their elderly patriarchs & matriarchs (Japanese still do). It is a cultural thing - and we have lost that culture.
My family hasn't.
Good points and question.
There are some private companies that provide qualified, nursing/daily care for the home-bound, frail elderly.
It is probably quite expensive - but a better alternative than warehousing parents in nursing homes.
For elderly parents who have several adult, working children - they could pool their resources and rotate living arrangements. Workable- if they ‘plan ahead’.
Linda Chavez could afford it.
This comment leads me to believe that she has not.
***I would gladly take my mother back into my home, but I don’t think it’s feasible for her to continue to live there. If we can manage to get her down those same steep stairs and into the house again, she’ll be trapped there indefinitely, unable to go to the doctor, grocery or anywhere else except to the hospital if she falls and injures herself again. And she’ll need someone with her 24 hours a day.***
You are blessed to have a wonderful family that still holds to the tradition of caring. (Please adopt me;)
I know a liberal, whose mom is failing at a fairly early age (72). He is researching who he can pawn her off on....I suggested maybe he should take her in, under his roof. You’d think I had shot the pope, with the look he gave me. That option is, apparently, outrageous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.