why are home carers so under valued. carers allowance moan.

[alchal]

What I don't get is the carers get paid minimum to low wages yet the care homes charge an obscene amount of money.

 

[robfosters]

Personally, the means testing for CA is awful. As long as you are officially caring for someone for more than around 25 hours a week, you should be allowed to earn up to £35k or so before being ineligible.

 

[malachi]

What I don't get is the carers get paid minimum to low wages yet the care homes charge an obscene amount of money.

Just like many things in that industry, its a business and they know people will do it regardless.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

@GAC

I'm just going to put this as a warning. Working cash in hand. If you get caught. All your benefits will be removed and you will be fined on top and forced to pay everything back.

I sympathise with your situation and the stress your obviously under. But things could get a lot worse if someone decides to poke their nose in.

I'd be honest and above board personally. It's your decision though but I wouldn't take the consequences of your actions lightly if caught. You could end up losing your home.

Your between a rock and a hard place. I hope you can improve your situation but I would think seriously before doing anything risky.

 

[GAC]

@GAC

I'm just going to put this as a warning. Working cash in hand. If you get caught. All your benefits will be removed and you will be fined on top and forced to pay everything back.

I sympathise with your situation and the stress your obviously under. But things could get a lot worse if someone decides to poke their nose in.

I'd be honest and above board personally. It's your decision though but I wouldn't take the consequences of your actions lightly if caught. You could end up losing your home.

Your between a rock and a hard place. I hope you can improve your situation but I would think seriously before doing anything risky.

exactly why iv not done any as of yet, someone grassed me up years ago when i worked one place local for one 10 hour shift (which i did tell the jobcentre about) but i got a call from the dwp and had a interview at the jobcentre months afterwards due to the idiot at the jobcentre not marking it down correctly.

im nowhere near as bad as some as iv said but this who 35p give and take is a joke, had a neighbour when i first started on this claim "oh you'l be raking it in now" she was under the impression id be clearing £350 a week and thats 4 years ago, another onw who is a employed carer at that place i mentioned after a chat about my mother and how i was caring for her so not working stated "well at least you get a ok income" i asked how much and she came out claiming id be clearing £250 a week, again 4 years ago, when i told both of them how little it was the first one said i must be mistaken and not claiming everything, and the other one couldnt get her head around it due to what they charge for residents.

but for now im just going to have fun with the local conservative mp and councillors and cause misery for them as a way to vent. got to have a hobby.

 

[DanTheMan]

I think there's a presumption by a lot of people that if you're the carer, the person you're caring for tends to be over state pension age.

I know when my mum spent a decade looking after my nanna, she got carers allowance and income support. She also then used my nanna's state pension and disability living allowance for most household items and an extra source of income.

I'm not saying that it's still not a hideously low amount but it all added up. I presume there's an expectation that the person you're caring for also shares their income with you.

 

[Andrew_McP]

She also then used my nanna's state pension and disability living allowance for most household items and an extra source of income.

Carers have to be careful how they spend other people's money and 'paying themselves' from it, because if there's a fall-out in the extended family and the carer is reported (especially where power of attorney is concerned) there can be legal consequences. However, our family agreed early on that I didn't have to worry about chipping into every bill from my CA, because me being here actually saved Mum a small fortune in wasted utilities, food, and duplicate purchases.

So you're right that the overall household position is what matters when it comes to being warm, safe & fed, and between my Carer's Allowance, Mum's pension, Pension Credit, and Attendance Allowance, I have about £290 a week to manage. It's hard to complain about that, even though little of it is 'mine' and a big chunk of that goes towards the carer help I need so I can leave the house sometimes.

 

[dowie]

Surely it is just a bit of cash to help you out etc... Arguably in some situations would it not be better to get a job where you can work from home/have flexible hours etc.. or have more than one person dealing with the carer duties?

I mean if it were the state providing care then in most situations you're either going to get someone popping around for a quick visit to drop off a meal and/or help use the bathroom etc.. or you're talking care homes with one employee perhaps looking after a corridor full of old folks. I'm not sure it is feasible for the state to hand over huge sums employing people to look after their own relatives who they arguably perhaps ought to be helping anyway, it's partly a choice too - if said relative has assets then arguably they ought to be used to pay for professional carers, shouldn't necessarily be down to taxpayers to sort out (especially given the portion of assets controlled by the order generation currently).

 

[GAC]

who said anything about huge sums dowie ? as i said its the simple fact they gave 35p a week with one hand then snatched it straight back with the other. well claiming the 35p raise in carers covers inflation, while totally ignoring the fact il be no better off this year.

and i think you will find the gov is saving thousands a year having me look after my mother than having a care home do it.

as for work from home, sure if i could find a work from home job id be doing it, but as iv never really been a office bod and worked more manual and security jobs its not like i can work any of them sat at home now. also being in a rural area doesn't help with the jobs market to start with, same with getting extra help with the close family all being in their late 70's and 80's, also im a only child so its all on me.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Surely it is just a bit of cash to help you out etc... Arguably in some situations would it not be better to get a job where you can work from home/have flexible hours etc.. or have more than one person dealing with the carer duties?

I mean if it were the state providing care then in most situations you're either going to get someone popping around for a quick visit to drop off a meal and/or help use the bathroom etc.. or you're talking care homes with one employee perhaps looking after a corridor full of old folks. I'm not sure it is feasible for the state to hand over huge sums employing people to look after their own relatives who they arguably perhaps ought to be helping anyway, it's partly a choice too - if said relative has assets then arguably they ought to be used to pay for professional carers, shouldn't necessarily be down to taxpayers to sort out (especially given the portion of assets controlled by the order generation currently).

All of your post has already been covered in the thread.

Also the amount you get is £50 a week last time I checked 15 years ago.

That's for caring for someone for 35+ hours per week.

In our case it was 24/7. You wouldn't get any time to yourself so impossible to do both that and even a part time job from home.

It depends a lot on the person's health and disabilities or illness.

You are then left with putting them in a home to be looked after poorly and living miserably or you looking after them and living miserably yourself. It's a lose/lose situation unless your selfish and only care about yourself

 

[DanTheMan]

Carers have to be careful how they spend other people's money and 'paying themselves' from it, because if there's a fall-out in the extended family and the carer is reported (especially where power of attorney is concerned) there can be legal consequences. However, our family agreed early on that I didn't have to worry about chipping into every bill from my CA, because me being here actually saved Mum a small fortune in wasted utilities, food, and duplicate purchases.

So you're right that the overall household position is what matters when it comes to being warm, safe & fed, and between my Carer's Allowance, Mum's pension, Pension Credit, and Attendance Allowance, I have about £290 a week to manage. It's hard to complain about that, even though little of it is 'mine' and a big chunk of that goes towards the carer help I need so I can leave the house sometimes.

Absolutely, the biggest issue that I remember was an absolute lack of freedom for my mum. No holidays in over a decade and a life spent dedicated to someone else. We often look back and wonder if it really benefitted both my mum and my nanna to have gone on that way so long.

You could have paid £10k in carers allowance but the money meant very little when you have little freedom to enjoy it.

 

[OspreyO]

...
You are then left with putting them in a home to be looked after poorly and living miserably or you looking after them and living miserably yourself. It's a lose/lose situation unless your selfish and only care about yourself

Those care facilities will never look after them to the same level you will.
In fact there's been multiple stories in the news and on TV of serial abusers, etc working in them. Would you risk that on a dear family member?
It's very much a personal choice. Just be glad you have never been put in the position to make the choice.

Many will eventually have to make the choice as they won't have the facilities at home that a nursing home will have. Like 24/7 care, Since you have to sleep sometimes.
Also specialized lifts, beds, bathrooms etc.

Often people will not be supported by siblings. Which obviously destroys relationships in a family.

 

[OspreyO]

Absolutely, the biggest issue that I remember was an absolute lack of freedom for my mum. No holidays in over a decade and a life spent dedicated to someone else. We often look back and wonder if it really benefitted both my mum and my nanna to have gone on that way so long.

You could have paid £10k in carers allowance but the money meant very little when you have little freedom to enjoy it.

This is it entirely. We are our third or forth round of this, with elderly relative/parents. Its been going on about 10yrs.
Really confirmed which siblings are selfish, and narcissist.

 

[dowie]

That's for caring for someone for 35+ hours per week.

In our case it was 24/7. You wouldn't get any time to yourself so impossible to do both that and even a part time job from home.

It depends a lot on the person's health and disabilities or illness.

Well yeah, I mean it seems doubtful that it would actually be 35 hours per week for example, let alone 24/7 in most cases. I get there are exceptions here and it depends on disabilities etc.. but in most cases, there are only so many times someone needs food or needs to go to the bathroom etc...

In the case of one of my relatives, one relative moved in to help her and the deal was that she inherited the house, still had carers come in to visit etc... too. It avoided the need for a care home for a few years save for just the last few weeks of her life where she did move into one for palliative care.

 

[OspreyO]

Well yeah, I mean it seems doubtful that it would actually be 35 hours per week for example, let alone 24/7 in most cases. I get there are exceptions here and it depends on disabilities etc.. but in most cases, there are only so many times someone needs food or needs to go to the bathroom etc...

In the case of one of my relatives, one relative moved in to help her and the deal was that she inherited the house, still had carers come in to visit etc... too. It avoided the need for a care home for a few years save for just the last few weeks of her life where she did move into one for palliative care.

It's more they are a danger to themselves if left unsupervised for long periods of time.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Well yeah, I mean it seems doubtful that it would actually be 35 hours per week for example, let alone 24/7 in most cases. I get there are exceptions here and it depends on disabilities etc.. but in most cases, there are only so many times someone needs food or needs to go to the bathroom etc...

In the case of one of my relatives, one relative moved in to help her and the deal was that she inherited the house, still had carers come in to visit etc... too. It avoided the need for a care home for a few years save for just the last few weeks of her life where she did move into one for palliative care.

There's a massive list of exceptions.

Someone who's blind.
Memory loss (short term).
Paralysed.
Brain damage.
Bad stroke.
The list goes on and on.

There will be plenty of people that require constant care. It's not just a handful across a large population it will be tens of thousands.

Was there not a guy on here who had to care for his partner who was terminally ill and ocuk hooked him up with a grand tour of the building and a few members pooled some money or gave him free parts for his upgrade.

For every person who's mobile there will be another who either isn't or safe to leave alone.

Short term memory I've heard of a story someone walked out the house and was never seen again. He did have his name and address stitched to his jacket and they found the jacket somewhere but never found him.

What if he left the gas on?

Anyone who isn't mobile will require constant care too. Bathroom trips, showers / baths, food, going anywhere and doing anything. Like getting out of bed, sitting up, etc.

For all of that you get £50 a week. No matter how easy or bad the situation is. There are no tiers to being a carer and the allowance.

So are you saying that because some only need 1-2 hours of care a week then it's justifiable everyone gets the same?

 

[dowie]

It's more they are a danger to themselves if left unsupervised for long periods of time.

Yup, I appreciate that - that's perhaps why in some cases simply having a multigenerational household is sufficient, especially if say dad goes out to work and mum looks after the house/kids + grandma for example.

So are you saying that because some only need 1-2 hours of care a week then it's justifiable everyone gets the same?

No I'm just saying that the vast majority of people don't require 1 on 1 care 24/7, I don't have a hard opinion on whether to scale the allowance.

 

[robfosters]

There's a massive list of exceptions.

Someone who's blind.
Memory loss (short term).
Paralysed.
Brain damage.
Bad stroke.
The list goes on and on.

There will be plenty of people that require constant care. It's not just a handful across a large population it will be tens of thousands.

Was there not a guy on here who had to care for his partner who was terminally ill and ocuk hooked him up with a grand tour of the building and a few members pooled some money or gave him free parts for his upgrade.

For every person who's mobile there will be another who either isn't or safe to leave alone.

Short term memory I've heard of a story someone walked out the house and was never seen again. He did have his name and address stitched to his jacket and they found the jacket somewhere but never found him.

What if he left the gas on?

Anyone who isn't mobile will require constant care too. Bathroom trips, showers / baths, food, going anywhere and doing anything. Like getting out of bed, sitting up, etc.

For all of that you get £50 a week. No matter how easy or bad the situation is. There are no tiers to being a carer and the allowance.

So are you saying that because some only need 1-2 hours of care a week then it's justifiable everyone gets the same?

My mum has to cook my meals, clean my room, wash my clothes, supervise me while showering, arrange my meds and more, all while holding down a full time job. Her job only pays £19k a year, but she still can’t get any carers top up for looking after me.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Many will eventually have to make the choice as they won't have the facilities at home that a nursing home will have. Like 24/7 care, Since you have to sleep sometimes.
Also specialized lifts, beds, bathrooms etc.

Often people will not be supported by siblings. Which obviously destroys relationships in a family.

I'm not talking about people who get old and require care. I'm talking about people who are young and need decades of possibly even a lifetime of care.

It's the choice of being in care your whole life practically rather than living to a ripe old age of 90 where the last few years were in care.

We are talking about folk left disabled due to illness rather than old age.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Yup, I appreciate that - that's perhaps why in some cases simply having a multigenerational household is sufficient, especially if say dad goes out to work and mum looks after the house/kids + grandma for example.



No I'm just saying that the vast majority of people don't require 1 on 1 care 24/7, I don't have a hard opinion on whether to scale the allowance.

What if there is no gran and it's the mum who's ill?

Does the dad give up work or do the kids give up school? Or a combination of the two? As in the choice of not being able to go to university because you have caring responsibility and your family cannot afford it either with the financial hit to household income from loss of up to 2 parents income.

Your looking at good scenarios rather than the bad ones.