Senior Care

[Argus]

Day care is still a national issue which pops up from time to time. I imagine the opposition will resserect it next election. But I don't hear very much about senior care. Senior care, imho, has been given scant attention the last few decades, but it's one of the driving forces behind health care problems, both in terms of system overload and budget increases. The provinces don't seem to have a clue, and senior care is a fragemented and confused ... don't know if I can even call it a "system". Mess might be more appropriate.

It's already a big problem. Go into any hospital and you see the results. Most of the bed shortages and ER overloads are because of seniors. A lot of this is because seniors aren't getting the proper home care. In the long term, I believe it would be a lot cheaper on the system to increase home care and particularly in-home health care for seniors than it would be to look after them in ERs and hospitals. I also think we ought to be looking at some kind of national strategy to provide intermediate level health care to seniors, perhaps constructing special wings or even buildings attached to major hospitals specifically for seniors who are in need of temporary nursing care.

Right now when seniors are hurt and go to hospital they often have to be kept there simply because they can't be sent home alone. This is a driving force behind hospital overcrowding and has been for years. It's only going to get worse, but I've heard of no one even having ideas on how to address it, much less actually implimenting anything. All our governments seem addicted to short term thinking, with none planning beyond the next expected election.

[Smallc]

Manitoba has an excellent home care system, and our healthcare costs are lower than other provinces. Perhaps it should be looked at nationally.

[BubberMiley]

Manitoba home care is staffed by some very amazing people, too. That's tough work that they do so well.

But it's true that it's a big problem that demographically is only going to get worse.

Edited May 14, 2010 by BubberMiley

[Bonam]

Reality is you're probably right, shifting care to homes before seniors go to hospitals would probably save money for the health care system overall. I dunno about a national program though, healthcare is the responsibility of the provinces.

That being said, idealistically most of this type of care can and should be provided by the senior's families.

[Muddy]

Care for seniours is altimately a dead end job. If I have the strength I will blow my brains out before I ever go to a seniours home. My daughter was a personal care worker in a seniours home. She was fired because she thought rules should apply that were laid down by the province and blew the whistle. Her horror stories will make sure I die my way.Fast and quick ,maybe at the hands of a jelous lover!

[Shwa]

Actually Argus, the aging of the baby boomers has been a well known topic for quite a few years now. We are just beginning to see the affects of it:

Stats Can Daily - A portrait of seniors (from Feb 27, 07)

The aging of the population will accelerate over the next two decades, particularly as baby boomers begin turning 65. Between 2006 and 2026, the number of seniors is projected to increase from 4.3 million to 8.0 million. Their share of the population is expected to increase from 13.2% to 21.2%.

If the supporting infrastructure is not changed within the next 10-15 years you can pretty well guarantee that the problems will be twice as bad as the present infrastructure ages right along with the population.

This issue could be a culture changer.

[Moonbox]

In this the Baby Boomers have pretty much screwed themselves. The deficits they ran over the last 30 years have pretty much made it impossible for provincial and federal governments to look after them comfortably and if they haven't saved money themselves (most of them haven't) they may be in a fair bit of trouble....unless of course my generation is prepared to pay 60% income tax....

[Muddy]

In this the Baby Boomers have pretty much screwed themselves. The deficits they ran over the last 30 years have pretty much made it impossible for provincial and federal governments to look after them comfortably and if they haven't saved money themselves (most of them haven't) they may be in a fair bit of trouble....unless of course my generation is prepared to pay 60% income tax....

Your right Moonbox! My generation let you down and sold out your inheritance. It all began long ,long ago. This guy named Trudeau took over the steering wheel of the good ship Canada. He spent worse than the drunken crew. But the difference was sailors stop spending when they run out of money and go back to the ship. Not Trudeau as his happy merry band of socialist. They spent and the youngsters of the day kept on voting for him. They thought the balloon would never burst. It did and still new generations keep yelling let government do it. It fell apart on my watch youngster so you can blame me.

[Argus]

Your right Moonbox! My generation let you down and sold out your inheritance. It all began long ,long ago. This guy named Trudeau took over the steering wheel of the good ship Canada. He spent worse than the drunken crew. But the difference was sailors stop spending when they run out of money and go back to the ship. Not Trudeau as his happy merry band of socialist. They spent and the youngsters of the day kept on voting for him.

And then came a huge world-wide recession to add double digit interest rates onto that debt, making it even bigger. The chance to do something about it came when that recession finally ended and the bucks started flowing in. Unfortunately, that was Chretien's era, and he couldn't have cared less. Now we're in an era of tight money and minorities, with every political party holding their cards tight to their chest and glaring at their neighbors warily. No one is coming up with any big ideas today. Instead, they're just trying to cut the legs out from their opponents.

[August1991]

Manitoba has an excellent home care system, and our healthcare costs are lower than other provinces. Perhaps it should be looked at nationally.

On what basis do you make this claim, smallc?

Based on demographics, Manitoba has had a top heavy population pyramid for years. Maybe Manitoba has experience. Maybe Manitobans instinctively take care of their older parents.

Or maybe, to quote Rick Salutin quoting David Frum, Manitobans just don't abuse the system:

He still opposes Obamacare, mild as it is, and says Canada's system "shouldn't" work -- showing a true ideological mindset -- but compares it to the bumblebee that shouldn't be able to fly. He says it works in Canada anyway because Canadians somehow overcome human nature and don't apply for all the benefits available to them. He doesn't trust Americans to behave that way.

rabble.ca

Sorry for my cynicism. But when someone tells me that people can get something for nothing, I look for the catch.

In the long term, I believe it would be a lot cheaper on the system to increase home care and particularly in-home health care for seniors than it would be to look after them in ERs and hospitals.

The problem here Argus is that many soon-to-be seniors either have no children, or have children who take no or little interest in their parents. This is mitigated if the parents have saved money to leave as an inheritance but many soon-to-be seniors will leave nothing to their children or related family.

I suspect that we will soon have a public debate about assisted suicide. It will be presented in CBC fashion as progressive and advanced. Even Radio-Canada will do this, without a trace of irony.

Edited May 15, 2010 by August1991

[Smallc]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Manitoba has a population that is growing quickly, and our healthcare expenditures are less than 40% of the government's budget. That said, we have a shortage of specialists (our biggest problem). We have a very good home care system:

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/prb0232-e.htm

A few years old, but based on what I've seen, things have gotten even better in this system.

[Oleg Bach]

On what basis do you make this claim, smallc?

Based on demographics, Manitoba has had a top heavy population pyramid for years. Maybe Manitoba has experience. Maybe Manitobans instinctively take care of their older parents.

Or maybe, to quote Rick Salutin quoting David Frum, Manitobans just don't abuse the system:rabble.ca

Sorry for my cynicism. But when someone tells me that people can get something for nothing, I look for the catch.

When you get something for nothing there is always a catch - take welfare or the so-called social safety net..when you except the postion of parasite then you are at the mercy of the host - human rights are lost - freedom in general along with good health through poor nutrition and finacial stress. IF fortunate we will all slip into fragile and delicate old age and need maintanence...from what I see the care of the old in this nation function on a utlitarian industrial level where old folks are hauled around from hosptial to nursing home in rusty old ambulances driven by jerks who toss old ladies around like bundles of fire wood.

[Moonlight Graham]

Argus, yes this is a hugely important issue. Not just senior care, but healthcare overall (among many other things, like gov`t pensions) will crumble as the babyboomers keep aging. As you said, politicians think short-term (on almost anything) so it hasn't been getting dealt with properly. However, its also the fault of voters. Politicians react to what voters demand, and seemingly everyone seems keenly aware of what the future holds as the babyboomers age, yet there has been little voter demand on this issue.

Its the babyboomer's fault and they will suffer for it, as will my generation that will have to care for them and pay the tax hikes & service cuts to everything while my children pay off the massive debt that will be racked up to keep the country afloat.

Hurray for the stupidity of human nature.

Edited May 15, 2010 by Moonlight Graham

[Oleg Bach]

The care of an old person is just as important as the care of an infant child.. once we stop car ing for the old - we will eventually stop caring for our children. Senior care should be closely monitored and always be an on going important issue. Children are wise - the old are like wise children..those in the bloom of youth and power are not wise..they are preditorial and wait for the old to die in some cases to absorb their wealth - bad seniour care is akin to bad abortion policy - It can not be made self serving and become a finacial issue..people are not money.

[Moonbox]

Its the babyboomer's fault and they will suffer for it, as will my generation that will have to care for them and pay the tax hikes & service cuts to everything while my children pay off the massive debt that will be racked up to keep the country afloat.

Hurray for the stupidity of human nature.

Exactly my point thanks Moonlight you rock.

[August1991]

Its the babyboomer's fault and they will suffer for it, as will my generation that will have to care for them and pay the tax hikes & service cuts to everything while my children pay off the massive debt that will be racked up to keep the country afloat.

Uh, "... as will my generation that will have to care for them..."

Moonlight Graham, you are apparently talking about your parents since presumably, they are boomers. Now, if you have issues with your parents, take it outside.

IOW, anyone alive today had a Boomer parent.

Please don't get me or my parents or kids involved in your family dispute, or what any of us have to pay.

[August1991]

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Assisted suicide, the CBC and the progessive Netherlands - I reckon that you wouldn't understand what's going on.

Smallc, you're like a civilized person in Sweden or Denmark in 1943.

Edited May 15, 2010 by August1991

[Smallc]

I don't know what you're talking about (and I'm not sure you know, either). For the record, I support assisted suicide under the right circumstances.

[August1991]

For the record, I support assisted suicide under the right circumstances.

Smallc, I admire your good-hearted naivety.

Let me lay a trap for you, before getting into your claim of Manitoba's good treatment of seniors.

Smallc, what would be the right circumstances for assisted suicide?

[Smallc]

First, I didn't say anything about "Manitoba's good treatment of seniors", I said that we had a very good home care system. As for assisted suicide, the example that jumps to mind for me is a terminal illness causing a great deal of pain or suffering that does not allow for a significantly longer life going forward.

[Moonlight Graham]

Uh, "... as will my generation that will have to care for them..."

Moonlight Graham, you are apparently talking about your parents since presumably, they are boomers. Now, if you have issues with your parents, take it outside.

IOW, anyone alive today had a Boomer parent.

Please don't get me or my parents or kids involved in your family dispute, or what any of us have to pay.

"IOW, anyone alive today had a Boomer parent." - i dont get what you're saying here.

When i said "...my generation that will have to take care of them..." i was talking mostly about literally taking care of them when they are aging seniors, not able to find a room at the inn at long-term care or at the hospital, so i may have to take them in to my place for an extended period if they can't find an opening for long-term. This could occur to countless other boomer kids, not just me.

I don't have issues with just my parents, but their entire generation and whomever else is responsible for this mess. That could include me too, though in less of a sense, as i've been able to vote for several elections, but not nearly as many as my parents.

[Bonam]

IOW, anyone alive today had a Boomer parent.

Obviously false. Many areas of the world did not have a baby boom in the relevant time period, and Canada has many immigrants from all regions of the world. There are plenty of people alive today who did not have boomer parents. Oh and there also happen to be a lot of people alive today who are boomers themselves, or who are indeed from the previous generation. And there are also people whose grandparents may have been boomers but whose parents were not.

[August1991]

Obviously false. Many areas of the world did not have a baby boom in the relevant time period, and Canada has many immigrants from all regions of the world.

Anyone alive today in Canada had two parents.

Why should I give money to the child of these parents, or why should he/she give money to me?

---

Nevertheless, I am more interested in this assisted suicide discussion, or however you Leftists will describe it.

At its base, it is the criteria for deciding whether old people should die. That makes sense but the sad thing is that what you Leftists offer is Death, not Hope.

Based on example, when the State takes care of children, there is eventually no family - and no children.

Based on historical example, a socialist State has a remarkable ability to eliminate what it promises to create.

Edited May 15, 2010 by August1991

[williat]

To begin with the original discussion, I personally agree with many that senior care will be at the forefront within the next few years of the political debate in Canada, through simple mathematics it is clear that our population will be getting much older, as someone has already posted reaching roughly 21%. I can foresee this becoming the focal point of many political campaigns, although we do need to improve senior care it cannot come at the expense of overall healthcare, we need to renovate our healthcare system, and more doctors never hurt anyone.

To address the assisted suicide debate, I have lived in the Netherlands for some time now (returning to Canada soon!!), and I have been fairly interested in learning about both sides of the coin, here in the Netherlands it isn't so much a decision between life or death, it relates to an individuals right to choose. They aren't proclaiming that if you wish to kill yourself come to the hospital and we'll do it for you, clearly certain pre-requisites apply however it is your god given right to choose, no one should be able to say "No you can't end your life of pain and suffering because I say so". Although that's just my two cents on the matter, take it as you will.

[Argus]

To begin with the original discussion, I personally agree with many that senior care will be at the forefront within the next few years of the political debate in Canada, through simple mathematics it is clear that our population will be getting much older, as someone has already posted reaching roughly 21%. I can foresee this becoming the focal point of many political campaigns, although we do need to improve senior care it cannot come at the expense of overall healthcare, we need to renovate our healthcare system, and more doctors never hurt anyone.

More doctors and more nurses. But we have to be wary as a society of having too many people on the government payroll. That way lies Greece.

I think right now the most bang for the bucks lies in increasing funding to home care services for seniors. Would we rather have them living at home, perhaps with a occasional visits from a home care worker to check on their health and perhaps do a few needed chores, or living in government housing?

Second, all our hospitals are jammed with elderly people who are too sick to go home yet because they live alone, and yet don't really require all the facilties of a hospital or ultimately belong in a nursing home. We need to build intermediate care facilities for transient seniors like this to get them out of the hospitals where they don't need to be, on a short term basis, until they're ready to be released. This would save increase efficiency by freeing up a lot of hospital beds, and cut costs because they don't really need as much monitoring or services as hospital patients.

Third, we need more nursing homes. And we need them affordable. I'm thinking a combination of subsidies and tax exemptions might help here, as opposed to governments building and running such homes.