Removing the elderly from their homes (in the US only?)

[icehorse]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

 

[George-ananda]

I think it can be a touchy situation but sometimes the government has to make decisions.

For example, if an elderly person is living in squalid conditions and not getting fed, medicated and cleaned reasonably then the government can be within its rights to force changes in the living situation. These are rights we willingly give to our government through the legal system and democratic process.

Yes, some may be belligerent towards the government's forced action and then the belligerent's competency to decide needs to be considered by the government. Yes, I would allow for forced actions.

 

[ChristineM]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

Sorry im not American but i hope defying the US only mandate is OK to put my limited 2¢ in.

Although i see the need, I think moving your aunt 60+ miles from her husband is rather heartless. Surely they could have located her somewhere close.

 

[Subduction Zone]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

That is not good. I wish I knew more. Let's give the social service people the benefit of the doubt and assume that your uncle could not take care of your aunt. Taking care of another person is not easy. I did it for my mother the last year of her life and she was still moderately active. It was a 24 hour a day "job". Well, it was also supplementing my father's care at a nursing home. I would go and see him 2 hours a day. My mother could toddle along with a cane, eventually after breaking her hip, but she tired easily so I had to do all of the household chores. Also she could get to the bathroom at night by herself, but she needed help getting back into bed. I would have my bedroom door open so I could hear her call for me.

Could your uncle have done all that? We were also fairly close to emergency services. I had to call them a couple of times for her. And take care of her until they got there. How far away from those services were your uncle and aunt?

Lastly, did they give your uncle the choice to go with her? If not then I would say that the state blew it. That sort of distance at that age makes visiting extremely difficult.

The main point is that without more info it is hard to judge this properly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry im not American but i hope defying the US only mandate is OK to put my limited 2¢ in.

Although i see the need, I think moving your aunt 60+ miles from her husband is rather heartless. Surely they could have located her somewhere close.

Parts of the US are still very rural and there may not have been anything closer. A drive across America can be very educational in that matter. Miles between individual houses themselves is not unusual in the west.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

It is a hard one, but sometimes it is necessary. But I can't tell with your aunt and uncle.

 

[ChristineM]

Parts of the US are still very rural and there may not have been anything closer. A drive across America can be very educational in that matter. Miles between individual houses themselves is not unusual in the west.

I am assuming they are city/town dwellers. The vast majority of Americans are. Though it's only a guess

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am assuming they are city/town dwellers. The vast majority of Americans are. Though it's only a guess

The seventy mile distance to me implies that they are not. Any good sized town will have at least one nursing home. That they had to go implies that either it is rural or worse for his case that she had special needs that could not be handled by just any nursing home.

 

[Trailblazer]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

What I am dealing with is somewhat related although no social service people are involved yet.
My husband cannot take care of himself due to his illness but he has me at home 24/7 taking care of him. He has gross hematuria and a catheter bag and he cannot move around very well, but even before this he was not moving around much for a long time so he has muscle weakness and cannot walk without a walker.

He was in the hospital for two weeks but the doctors do not know what is wrong with him yet. They released him from the hospital last Wednesday and the doctor ordered home health care to come in (a registered nurse, a physical therapist and an occupational therapist). he also needs a mental health counselor and he has a Zoom meeting set up with one.

Last Friday a nurse told us to go to urgent care because the visiting nurse called my doctor's team and told the nurse his catheter bag was leaking. The doctor on duty saw how dark red his urine was and he wanted my husband to go back into the hospital and tried to manipulate him to say yes. I have never seen such an arrogant and unethical doctor.

It makes no sense to send him back to the hospital because other doctors including a urologist decided to release him to come home two days before that, and nothing was different. His urine was the same color when he was released from the hospital, and it had been that color for a long time BEFORE he ever went into the hospital.

The urgent care doctor sent him to the hospital before because he needed a blood transfusion and they can only do that in the hospital, so I can understand that rationale, but the last thing my husband needs is to go back to the hospital and lay in bed all day. If there as a logical REASON for him to go back there I would take him, but the hospital did all they could do and then they discharged him.

 

[Nakosis]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

I suspect if he had the money for a lawyer things would have worked out different.
Tough having to rely on the government to look out after your own best interests.

 

[Twilight Hue]

About 4 years ago, the local "social services" people where my folks lived decided that my folks couldn't safely take care of themselves, and they came and took them and put them in a nursing home. In this case, my parents were happy to go.

Then a couple of years ago, these same "social services" people decided that my uncle couldn't take care of his wife, and they took her from her home and put her in a nursing home 60 or 70 miles from my uncle. My aunt and uncle didn't want this to happen, and 2 years later, we're still fighting it.

The SS people claim it wasn't "safe" for my uncle to take care of his wife. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that they were correct in this assessment.

I'm not sure it matters. This seems like government overreach to me.

I think so. It's authoritarian behavior.


The only time that government intervention should occur is in very extreme, hopefully rare cases where life or limb is in actual jeopardy.

 

[John53]

I'm having the opposite problem here in Australia. My 92 year old mother and my sister need to go into care but the authorities are trying to keep them at their home. My mother is virtually caring for my sister.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm having the opposite problem here in Australia. My 92 year old mother and my sister need to go into care but the authorities are trying to keep them at their home. My mother is virtually caring for my sister.

I am sorry to hear that. Are the authorities trying to save money by keeping them at home?

My husband was in the hospital for two weeks and they released him to go home, although he is still very ill. I could not take care of him at home by myself but I am fortunate to have health insurance that covers in home care by visiting nurses, physical therapists, and occupational therapists.

 

[John53]

I am sorry to hear that. Are the authorities trying to save money by keeping them at home?

My husband was in the hospital for two weeks and they released him to go home, although he is still very ill. I could not take care of him at home by myself but I am fortunate to have health insurance that covers in home care by visiting nurses, physical therapists, and occupational therapists.

They privatised elderly care and now it's all about the companies making money. The best interests of people run a distant 2nd to profit.

 

[Trailblazer]

They privatised elderly care and now it's all about the companies making money. The best interests of people run a distant 2nd to profit.

So what if some people cannot afford elder care?

 

[John53]

So what if some people cannot afford elder care?

It's all a complicated mess of grants and subsidies. It's hard for people trying to live on the pension.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They privatised elderly care and now it's all about the companies making money. The best interests of people run a distant 2nd to profit.

That is what we have here. It is not better. I worked for a while in the business and have some horror stories of my own. I swear that the business practice of the chain that I worked at was to save money by constantly being understaffed and paying the fines when caught since they make more money that way. It is not the low level workers that provide the care that is the problem. It is the upper management that knows that they can abuse workers and pretend to do something occasionally. Where my father stayed was not ideal either, But since I spent time with him every day supplementing his care he got the care that he needed. Quite a few did not.

Also I do believe that the social services know of the problems with nursing homes. The need for care was probably fairly high since there are places in between. Houses where a single nurse lives with five to ten people is common when the people do not need total care.

 

[John53]

That is what we have here. It is not better. I worked for a while in the business and have some horror stories of my own. I swear that the business practice of the chain that I worked at was to save money by constantly being understaffed and paying the fines when caught since they make more money that way. It is not the low level workers that provide the care that is the problem. It is the upper management that knows that they can abuse workers and pretend to do something occasionally. Where my father stayed was not ideal either, But since I spent time with him every day supplementing his care he got the care that he needed. Quite a few did not.

Also I do believe that the social services know of the problems with nursing homes. The need for care was probably fairly high since there are places in between. Houses where a single nurse lives with five to ten people is common when the people do not need total care.

Exactly, the workers are doing their best but are hampered by the system. If the provider gets $500 a month from the government to do the care they will do their damnedest to have it done as cheap as possible because anything under the $500 is money in their pocket for nothing.

 

[icehorse]

I think so. It's authoritarian behavior.

The only time that government intervention should occur is in very extreme, hopefully rare cases where life or limb is in actual jeopardy.

For those that asked, yes in this case my parents and aunt and uncle live(d) close together in a very rural area.

But I think I agree with Mr. Hue here. I think it's about quality of life not length of life. Fingers crossed, when my wife and I get to be that age, perhaps we'll CHOOSE to go to a nursing home. But perhaps we'll choose to stay in our home, even if we can't do a good job of taking care of ourselves, it's OUR life to live, isn't it? In other words, why should being elderly deprive a person of their rights? There are millions of young and middle-aged adults who can't really take care of themselves, and we don't think of forcibly placing them in "homes".

 

[Subduction Zone]

For those that asked, yes in this case my parents and aunt and uncle live(d) close together in a very rural area.

But I think I agree with Mr. Hue here. I think it's about quality of life not length of life. Fingers crossed, when my wife and I get to be that age, perhaps we'll CHOOSE to go to a nursing home. But perhaps we'll choose to stay in our home, even if we can't do a good job of taking care of ourselves, it's OUR life to live, isn't it? In other words, why should being elderly deprive a person of their rights? There are millions of young and middle-aged adults who can't really take care of themselves, and we don't think of forcibly placing them in "homes".

It may not seem like it, but those workers are really looking out for your uncle and aunt. It is not easy taking care of someone that age, if they need help and it sounds like your aunt does. It would probably be too much for your uncle.

One question, did they offer him a chance to live with her? If not I have to disagree with the state's actions.