[Closed] Petition - stop ex prisoner of war being forced into care home against will

nickc - Member

sad situation for all concerned. But in all honesty "it would remind me of being a prisoner of war"...Is a bit daft.

Must have been a pretty unusual POW camp. Everyone spoke tagalog instead of german and they had tai chi after lunch.

Very sympathetic but pragmatically, is his home the best place? My grandma would have loved to stay in her house but she needed constant care and emergency support, it could have been provided at gigantic cost but that's just not realistic. War veteran or not. The issue isn't "he should be cared for"- nobody's denying him care. It's just a question of reasonableness.

It is [b]wrong to force[/b] him to go to the care home if he does not want to.

DezB - Member
"Nobody remembers the heroes who didn't pick up a gun."

Like Winston Churchill you mean?

He was at the pointy end of some very nasty stuff in his military career.

"Apportioning care because somebody is labelled a war hero is a bad way of deciding if it is merited or not. "

Yeah but that's the complete opposite of what is happening. He isn't getting special treatment despite of his "hero" status. I would be in favour of giving him special treatment (After the family have exhausted their options).

It doesn't mean I favour a two tiered system, which of course we have anyway with unlimited private healthcare for those who can afford it.

I don't see the harm of every now and again giving someone a leg up in recognition of contribution or sacrifice. Most people don't, except communists, totalitarians and some folks on the interwebz.

It doesn't mean I favour a two tiered system, which of course we have anyway with unlimited private healthcare for those who can afford it.

Yes it does. You can't simultaneously advocate giving some people preferential care and say that you're not in favour of treating some people preferentially.

edit: well you can, it's just incoherent.

It isn't what is happening, it is what is being asked for.

It doesn't mean I favour a two tiered system,

I don't see the harm of every now and again giving someone a leg up in recognition of contribution or sacrifice

???

Which brings me back to

Who should decide this differential worthiness, the government, you, me or the Sun?

Would Alan Turing have been worthy? would Colin Parry? how exactly do we classify who is worthy and who isn't. If we make special cases then we by definition are excluding others from the same care.

Most people don't, except communists, totalitarians and some folks on the interwebz.

...and those capable of coherent rational thought.

Also quite arrogant of you to insult people who don't agree with you.

I'd give the guy a break, you wouldn't. I often give to charities too and have the temerity to decide which I think is most worthy, rather than dividing the donation equally between all charities.

I must be really arrogant / insane. I will seek help, thanks for pointing it out. God bless the internet.

I'd give the guy a break, you wouldn't.

Nope, I'd treat him the same as everyone else, no better and no worse.

I often give to charities too and have the temerity to decide which I think is most worthy, rather than dividing the donation equally between all charities.

I must be really arrogant / insane. I will seek help, thanks for pointing it out. God bless the internet.

The arrogant comment was in reference to the way that you insulted people who didn't agree with you by calling them "...communists, totalitarians..." unless of course you meant those terms as a compliment! I'd have expected anyone with a reasonble degree of intelligence to be able to tell the difference between a calling a single act arrogant and calling a person arrogant in general. Apparently I was wrong in that regard!

I would give the guy a break too, by supporting a system that provides the care needed according to the care needed, not by making making special cases for some, and denying it to others. If that that makes me a totalitarian communist, I will wear that label with pride.

Let me put it another way, should the attack on Alan Barnes have been treated as a lesser crime than if he had served in the forces. Should the police prioritise crimes against ex servicemen?

GF - your the poorest troll I've read today. You need to work on your pedantry. F-.

MSP - I know, I get it. You don't agree with making any special cases for "emotional" reasons. I just don't agree with you. I doubt my expressing this opinion will bring about the collapse of the NHS or civilization as we know it.

Newsflash - "Ex-squaddy thinks WW2 vet should be given a break with his care funding". Wow. No way.

Hey you are the one that thinks people should be treated differently based on their background, not me. As for a troll, no just a different opinion to yours and a desire for equality for all.

MSP - I know, I get it. You don't agree with making any special cases for "emotional" reasons. I just don't agree with you. I doubt my expressing this opinion will bring about the collapse of the NHS or civilization as we know it.

Expressing you opinion will clearly break nothing, but implementing it would. Apportioning "care" for any arbitrary reason other than the need for care, and the financial ability to provide that care for everyone equally, would clearly break the core tenant of its existence.

Expressing you opinion will clearly break nothing, but implementing it would.

Personally I love the idea of some from the council apportioning my level of healthcare based on how worthy they consider me. I think that there is absolutely no way in which that could ever have any negative consequences.

I think your eyes are too close together, next case please 😉

Surprised that most think it's the state that should provide for people in thier old age and that their family has no role to play financially or with care? It's irelevent what thier background was.

Pawsy_Bear - Member

Surprised that most think it's the state that should provide for people in thier old age

I think the state should. And that's exactly what they're offering to do. But the state shouldn't be obliged to fork out for someone to get a much more expensive service due to their personal preference, especially when they could pay for it themselves.

I spent a wee while in hospital getting my leg unbroken. THe state paid the tab; seems reasonable. If I'd insisted on having the surgery in my garage, the state would have told me to bugger off, regardless of how many STW quote wars I'm a veteran of.

The only person who seems to arguing that is accusing people who don't agree with him and think otherwise of being communists. Which is odd.

Surprised that most think it's the state that should provide for people in thier old age and that their family has no role to play financially or with care? It's irelevent what thier background was.

Well you would hope that family's who can afford to look after their aged relatives would do so. But life isn't always that simple. What if our aged war veteran had rich kids who couldn't give a flying ****. I wouldn't want to see him die on a cold winter street just because his kids are tossers.

Weird thread. I like the term 'quote wars' though.

Well you would hope that family's who can afford to look after their aged relatives would do so

Experience tells me that this is the last thing that people want to do.

[i]Weird thread[/i]

Innit.

I hope him and his family can come to some agreement with the local council.

regardless of how many STW quote wars I'm a veteran of.

[quote=Northwind ]regardless of how many STW quote wars I'm a veteran of.

Ah, but are you a hero or a villain? History is written by the victors. You didn't think it was unimportant whether or not you win on STW did you?

He wants to live in his own home, not in a profit making home for some greedy home owner, money is found every week to fund prisoners in prison for menial crimes to full blown evil murderers, jsut perhaps some of that cash should be swopped and some prisoners released on tag or community service.

[quote=project ]jsut perhaps some of that cash should be swopped and some prisoners released on tag or community service.

Good idea. We could start with anybody who's been unfairly locked up for killing a cyclist with a car.

There really are some morally bankrupt people on this site.

Apportioning "care" for any arbitrary reason other than the need for care, and the financial ability to provide that care for everyone equally, would clearly break the core tenant of its existence.

Yeah, although it makes a good straw man I wasn't advocating scrapping the system of care where it's needed. Just using discretion in cases where there is a strong compassionate case to do so. I dunno, I'm probably one of those blokes in china who doesn't snitch on his neighbours wife when she's looking a bit preggers. Rules are great and all but they all needed breaking sometimes.

Or, in other words, we wouldn't have a welfare state or health system if the likes of him hadn't won the war so it feels wrong to deprive him on it's benefits.

Or, maybe I'm just a big softy and wish I was has hard nosed as y'all.

peakyblinder - Member

Or, in other words, we wouldn't have a welfare state or health system if the likes of him hadn't won the war so it feels wrong to deprive him on it's benefits.

Nobody wants to deprive him of the benefits of the welfare state though. He's been offered that, he just doesn't want it.

[quote=peakyblinder ]Yeah, although it makes a good straw man

You're right, nobody is suggesting apportioning care for any reason other than the need for care.

Just using discretion in cases where there is a strong compassionate case to do so.

😆

Actually I can't resist this one either:

[quote=peakyblinder ]Rules are great and all but they all needed breaking sometimes.

What, all of them?

You've missed the early tedious exchanges NW. To round up, I am actually arguing his family should be forgoing their inheritance to pay for this anyway. I think the deal he has been offered is totally fair. I just happened to mention if the family had spent all the cash and there was no options left THEN I would not object to him getting a break.

It was at this point that STW smelled blood...

Haven't missed that at all but you're still saying things like "depriving him of his benefits" which just seems to be ignoring the point- the state is providing for him, he's just rejecting what's offered.

I assumed we were discussing the hypothetical point where the family have run out of resources - otherwise what beef? Up to that point I don't see we disagree.

When it comes to care, here's an interesting thought exercise...

'Everybody' (well, not everybody...) expects free care for the elderly even if they have the means to pay for it , but bar a few hours free care, we don't expect the same for the very young (childminders, pre school etc).
If you're below a financial threshold it's state funded in either sense..
Is important to differentiate social care with medical needs too.

DrP

The person needing care didn't choose to be in that position.
Those paying for child care did.

Best I can do at short notice!

Good question.

"'Everybody' (well, not everybody...) expects free care for the elderly even if they have the means to pay for it , but bar a few hours free care, we don't expect the same for the very young (childminders, pre school etc)."

There is no "free care" for the elderly. Most of those elderly have paid taxes, national insurance etc for the whole of their working lives (employment being more available and continuous in the past, many started full time work on thier 14th birthday and worked to 65, plus of course, they got the opportunity to die in the war)

The money they themselves have paid to the state has gone to pay for
- thier own welfare
- for the national health, so that mothers can give birth safely
- for the medical services so kids in the UK can be vacinated
- for the medical treatment of kids generally, so more live to adulthood
- for the education of children
- for universities (before charges were brought in) to train doctors, dentists, engineers etc who helped our society
- for the care of other people, more ill, elderly or disabled than themselves.

Also, people do expect 'free' care for the young and even a "few hours" is not cheap and people expect it, instead of valuing the sacrifice others make to give it ie old people being shunted into homes - modern parents and thier kids get medical support, subsidised nursery places, primary and secondary education, child allowance, housing benefit, 'free' school meals. Most of that is not paid for by parents but by..... the older people who put money into the system previously who build the schools, the medical centres etc! At one time, parents were expected to finance much more of the costs of the children they choose to produce. Not many elderly choose to get sick and ill - its not actually fun to feel like that.

So a little less attitude about war veterans wanting something for nothing please. Many of them would have lost loved ones in the war on top of everything else. How many of us would be here today if Germany etc had won? Concentration camps anyone? They must be fun as its ok to put old scared people in something they fear will feel the same.

I have much respect for today's emergency services people, often they are underrated, but its not really comparable overall to the horrors of war and the personal risk is much lower.

Also, given todays politics, who can blame elderly children of the even more elderly, for being utterly scared of spending all their savings when the future for social care in our society has become so bleak, unless you are a banker or an MP. Maybe some of his family will be homeless if he has to sell his home.

Why are people assuming that the children of the man in question are flushed with cash and not pretty desperate themselves?

I don't mind either way if people sign or not, I was just telling people the petition is there. I do object though to people saying this man does not deserve consideration - its heartbreaking that more people in the UK cared about Jeremy Clarkson and a mindless TV show than care what is happening to those more deserving. I despair of what people are becoming, of what they see as valuable.

wrecker - Member
Hero or not, a debt is owed.

"Nobody remembers the heroes who didn't pick up a gun."

Emotive nonsense.

Pot/kettle

Midnighthour - Member

The money they themselves have paid to the state has gone to pay for
- thier own welfare
- for the national health, so that mothers can give birth safely
- for the medical services so kids in the UK can be vacinated
- for the medical treatment of kids generally, so more live to adulthood
- for the education of children
- for universities (before charges were brought in) to train doctors, dentists, engineers etc who helped our society
- for the care of other people, more ill, elderly or disabled than themselves.

Am I not paying for exactly the same, while also supporting a higher percentage of pensioners than they did?

And as we're indulging in hyperbole, I also won't get the opportunity to buy a house for £12 and sell it for £364,000.

[quote=Midnighthour ]Why are people assuming that the children of the man in question are flushed with cash and not pretty desperate themselves?

I'm not sure anybody is, but it seems an easy solution to pay for his care would be to release the equity in his house.

I do object though to people saying this man does not deserve consideration

Is anybody saying that? Some of us are suggesting he deserves exactly the same consideration as any other human being in his situation, which is hardly the same.

If the state is going to care for someone, then the state should be allowed to choose how they do this. If the state choose to do this via a home with specific staff and facilities then why not. If someone who is eligible for this but instead wants the state to pay more because they want something different, then why should the state pay for this. And the state is not an abstract concept it is you and me and our taxes.

Just because he served in WW2 does not make him any more deserving than the rest of society. Otherwise we end up with a state where some are more equal than others - and who makes that choice

And finally, he owns his own house. We buy houses to live in, the value of them can be realised when we need money. That time is now. Just because it means that his relatives won't get an inheritance does not make it unfair.

My grandfather was in the navy, spent most of the war dropping off tiny subs and small teams into Norway it seems. He was also the first male nurse in UK. He also spent a decade running bush hospitals in Zambia and another being house parent at a school in India. A hero to me.

He had a stroke. His care was needed to be in care home, for cost and complexity. He didn't like it. Neither did his wife or family. But that is what happens when state and your savings fund these things and are limited in what is available. He rapidly moved to hospital after another stroke, where he died.

I am grateful that we live in a place where you can get care, even if I have to save hard and it costs everything you have saved for, in old age. And at least we have a state that still helps out a little.

So, tell me again why this chap the OP speaks of should be treated differently?

So, tell me again why this chap the OP speaks of should be treated differently?

Coz the Daily Fail says so.. and when the Daily Fail makes a proclamation, certain types of folk get a buzzing sound in their ears, their vision goes blurry and all rationality goes out of the window in a fervour of hate-fuelled jingoistic self-righteousness..

I think it's mostly caused by terrible personal insecurity leading to a yearning to belong to something noble

(EDIT: Sorry that was very harsh... there's another explanation which probably involves an element of sentimentality and the emotional attachments we had to our fathers and grandfathers)

My Grandad is 100years 2months and 1 week old And lives at home. He's pretty capable gets a carer morning and evening for a fairly brief visit but generally looks after himself with a daily visit from family members. He is just very old no extra care is required than anyone else would receive as far as i am aware.

he goes into a home for respite when my mum and dad are in hospital. It works very well but there will come a time when he needs more care than is practical/affordable at home he knows that and quite freely admits he would prefer to do that.

If the council is prepared to fork half of care costs for exceptional care (making assumption here as i don't know his needs but you don't get punted to a home for no reason) beyond what is normal that seems reasonable releasing equity in a house is also reasonable there is no reason not to unless it is really about the inheritance. If the council were to pay the whole lot who should they not pay for to make up the hole?

My grandad isn't a hero he's a bloody legend.

The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line March 1st, 2015. Human decisions are removed from social and health care. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, March 2nd. In a panic, they try to pull the plug. But it had already infected a road cycling forum for the middle classes, posing as guardian reading intelligentsia. 152,178 unsuspecting victims sign a petition to keep a war veteran in his home. They are quickly identified and marked for termination. The machines laughed at their in-joke about him doing the 1000 mile death march and then having his legs removed in his dotage.

This is peakyblinder. If you are reading this, you are the resistance.

I don't mind either way if people sign or not, I was just telling people the petition is there. I do object though to people saying this man does not deserve consideration - its heartbreaking that more people in the UK cared about Jeremy Clarkson and a mindless TV show than care what is happening to those more deserving. I despair of what people are becoming, of what they see as valuable.

You may have a point about the Clarkson thing but there's a lot more important causes out there than one man not getting care in the manner he chooses. We can all play 'whataboutery' until the cows come home though.

I don't know the details of this case but old people can be quite stubborn and often a care home is the best place, despite what they may think.