22-Dec-2011 AGED care is in crisis. Our Productivity Commission, after exhaustive consultations, recognises the seriousness of the issue with its final recommendations.
So why does our Prime Minister want a "conversation" about it, and why is the Victorian Minister for Ageing calling for a national summit?
The commission's report has used up 16 months and gone through the process of numerous public hearings and a draft report last January.
Enough "conversation", time for a little more considered and decisive action.
There is already early support from the Federal Opposition - a bonus in a hung parliament - as well as encouraging feedback from many aged-care providers and consumers.
So why the bottleneck? Why does Julia Gillard not push on with policy changes when many elderly Australians are waiting for help that is not there?
Council on the Ageing (COTA) chief executive Ian Yates wrote last week that aged care in Australia was broken and older Australians were being let down by a system that was also broken. In an opinion piece co-authored with Martin Laverty, the chief executive of Catholic Health Australia, Mr Yates described the recommendations as good public policy.
"There is overwhelming consensus among older Australians and those who care for them that the commission's report offers the basis of an affordable and achievable plan for the future needs of our ageing population," he said.
COTA is the voice for 500,000 senior Australians.
I know there is no easy salve, but the recommendations such as making sure those able to pay for their care do pay, that elderly Australians are not forced to sell family homes to pay for care and the introduction of a super new agency to more efficiently access needs make a lot of sense.
There is also a focus on helping more elderly people stay at home longer and that will become important for every one of us.
Here's the thing. If you have placed an elderly relative in care you will know why the system needs to change. It is a complicated, confusing and time-consuming process that requires not only the navigation of complex government regulations, but also the filling out of a mountain of paperwork.
Then there is the stress of finding a place and selling the family home to pay an expensive bond and the guilt and social stigma often associated with placing a parent in the care of others.
To get a better understanding, I asked two families about their experiences. They asked their surnames not be used to protect the privacy of their parents.
Karen from Melbourne spent six months researching nursing homes for her 84-year-old mother.
"I think most people are caught off guard; you usually don't get a lot of warning an elderly relative will need to go into care," Karen said.
"And most of us are unfamiliar with the government legislation and the difference between high-care assessment and low care or of the Centrelink assessment and implications."
Karen said she was surprised to learn hostels in Victoria were able to charge a bond with no upper limit for those with assets, but still had to have 25 per cent of resident intake available for non-paying individuals.
"Another thing many people do not realise is that you can negotiate a fee. You are not told that. Some families end up paying more than they need to."
Karen said most people were confused and did not know where to start. She worried for those who did not have the support of a family member to guide them through the process.
Wendy agreed. Her parents - Lindsay and Edith - are both 85 and live in the family home thanks largely to the support and commitment of their five children. Wendy said one of the biggest difficulties was accessing services and information.
"Imagine how difficult it is for those who are not computer-literate."
She said recently her mother was struggling with the release valve on her asthma puffer.
"I knew she couldn't be the only elderly person struggling to use that medication, so I looked into it," Wendy said.
She found a local outlet that had an inexpensive and smart solution.
"My parents would not have been able to find that place," she said. "And I think that is the case for many older people. Services need to be more central and more readily available."
Lindsay and Edith have told their five children they will go into a nursing home when they require care.
Wendy said the family felt they were too independent to go into care, even though Edith had a stroke 10 years ago that required Lindsay to become her carer.
The five siblings - Glenda, Wendy, Lynette, Rodney and Warren - all help their parents remain in the family home, but it is a big commitment.
"It is what we do as a family to keep them together, but it would be good to have more support services," Wendy said.
That is what must motivate Ms Gillard. She made a commitment to reform the aged-care sector, but the worry is she will become bogged down in detail rather than bring about reform.
And that would be a shame because this has the potential to have an impact for generations to come.
We have an ageing population funded by a declining number of taxpayers and the forecast is that within 40 years almost a quarter of Australians will be over 65.
Last Monday, the 500- plus-page Caring for Older Australians report by the Productivity Commission had plenty to say, but the bit that caught my eye was on page 486. It read: "If a reform is worthwhile and in the national interest, it is well to implement it as quickly as possible. Effectively, the transition period should be as short as practicable."
Did any politicians read that, I wonder?
So why does our Prime Minister want a "conversation" about it, and why is the Victorian Minister for Ageing calling for a national summit?
The commission's report has used up 16 months and gone through the process of numerous public hearings and a draft report last January.
Enough "conversation", time for a little more considered and decisive action.
There is already early support from the Federal Opposition - a bonus in a hung parliament - as well as encouraging feedback from many aged-care providers and consumers.
So why the bottleneck? Why does Julia Gillard not push on with policy changes when many elderly Australians are waiting for help that is not there?
Council on the Ageing (COTA) chief executive Ian Yates wrote last week that aged care in Australia was broken and older Australians were being let down by a system that was also broken. In an opinion piece co-authored with Martin Laverty, the chief executive of Catholic Health Australia, Mr Yates described the recommendations as good public policy.
"There is overwhelming consensus among older Australians and those who care for them that the commission's report offers the basis of an affordable and achievable plan for the future needs of our ageing population," he said.
COTA is the voice for 500,000 senior Australians.
I know there is no easy salve, but the recommendations such as making sure those able to pay for their care do pay, that elderly Australians are not forced to sell family homes to pay for care and the introduction of a super new agency to more efficiently access needs make a lot of sense.
There is also a focus on helping more elderly people stay at home longer and that will become important for every one of us.
Here's the thing. If you have placed an elderly relative in care you will know why the system needs to change. It is a complicated, confusing and time-consuming process that requires not only the navigation of complex government regulations, but also the filling out of a mountain of paperwork.
Then there is the stress of finding a place and selling the family home to pay an expensive bond and the guilt and social stigma often associated with placing a parent in the care of others.
To get a better understanding, I asked two families about their experiences. They asked their surnames not be used to protect the privacy of their parents.
Karen from Melbourne spent six months researching nursing homes for her 84-year-old mother.
"I think most people are caught off guard; you usually don't get a lot of warning an elderly relative will need to go into care," Karen said.
"And most of us are unfamiliar with the government legislation and the difference between high-care assessment and low care or of the Centrelink assessment and implications."
Karen said she was surprised to learn hostels in Victoria were able to charge a bond with no upper limit for those with assets, but still had to have 25 per cent of resident intake available for non-paying individuals.
"Another thing many people do not realise is that you can negotiate a fee. You are not told that. Some families end up paying more than they need to."
Karen said most people were confused and did not know where to start. She worried for those who did not have the support of a family member to guide them through the process.
Wendy agreed. Her parents - Lindsay and Edith - are both 85 and live in the family home thanks largely to the support and commitment of their five children. Wendy said one of the biggest difficulties was accessing services and information.
"Imagine how difficult it is for those who are not computer-literate."
She said recently her mother was struggling with the release valve on her asthma puffer.
"I knew she couldn't be the only elderly person struggling to use that medication, so I looked into it," Wendy said.
She found a local outlet that had an inexpensive and smart solution.
"My parents would not have been able to find that place," she said. "And I think that is the case for many older people. Services need to be more central and more readily available."
Lindsay and Edith have told their five children they will go into a nursing home when they require care.
Wendy said the family felt they were too independent to go into care, even though Edith had a stroke 10 years ago that required Lindsay to become her carer.
The five siblings - Glenda, Wendy, Lynette, Rodney and Warren - all help their parents remain in the family home, but it is a big commitment.
"It is what we do as a family to keep them together, but it would be good to have more support services," Wendy said.
That is what must motivate Ms Gillard. She made a commitment to reform the aged-care sector, but the worry is she will become bogged down in detail rather than bring about reform.
And that would be a shame because this has the potential to have an impact for generations to come.
We have an ageing population funded by a declining number of taxpayers and the forecast is that within 40 years almost a quarter of Australians will be over 65.
Last Monday, the 500- plus-page Caring for Older Australians report by the Productivity Commission had plenty to say, but the bit that caught my eye was on page 486. It read: "If a reform is worthwhile and in the national interest, it is well to implement it as quickly as possible. Effectively, the transition period should be as short as practicable."
Did any politicians read that, I wonder?
Comment