4 ms·

Can relate to TFA. Cost near the end of life are eye-popping the in the US, but the alternative is murky too. Just let elder relatives live in your home? Likely

Can relate to TFA. Cost near the end of life are eye-popping the in the US, but the alternative is murky too. Just let elder relatives live in your home? Likely won't last 3-4 days, its hard. Cost of these facilities is astronomical and ironically the staff is usually underpaid and overstressed. Assisted death will get a lot of callout as its becoming popular but its not 100% the answer either. Legitimately wondering how older generations dealt with this problem. Did old people just die randomly and then they were buried and that was that?

lettergram 4y ago
> Did old people just die randomly and then they were buried and that was that? In most places on earth the elderly live with their children. The children care for them, then yes they die. They’ll often be buried in the yard if they have land or in a plot designated (graveyard). Alternatively, they’ll have some sort of cremation ceremony. Pretty much been that way forever. The last 70 years in the US has gotten exceptionally weird, looking through a historical lens. Frankly, it looks like we hate our elders.
- kickout 4y ago
  Agreed, and having watched the older generations go through heartbreaking experiences to squeeze out 2-3 months of 'living' has solidified me in insisting on never putting my family through that. My hope is multi-generational households become more prevalent in the US (I thin they are still common in Latino and Asian communities in the US). Leads to interesting debates/arguments on what is living versus simply being alive
- seti0Cha 4y ago
  We don't hate the elderly, we just don't value family. We expect our kids to leave home as soon as they are able and we don't bat an eye when they move a few thousand miles away. Marriage rates have been declining for a few decades and something like half of marriages end in divorce. I have an aging mother and mother-in-law that both live alone because they "value their independence." Neither has the slightest interest in living with my wife and I, although we are fairly close. The norm is living independently and anything else is an imposition or a failure in our society. edit: Wouldn't have thought any of that was terribly controversial. I'd be interested if those having a negative reaction would post some response so I know what makes that opinion problematic. No need to get into an argument, I'm just genuinely curious.
lotsofpulp 4y ago
From the article: >unless they have family members who are willing to give up their own lives to be caregivers Where my ancestors are from, this is what happened. 99% of the time, this responsibility fell on women, because they had no option. I have no interest in seeing my wife or daughter or sister (or son) suffer the same fate, so suicide (preferably assisted) is the answer in my view.
ejb999 4y ago
family used to provide a lot of that care, and saw it as part of their responsibility, and was made easier when one parent was at home and not working. Now, for the most part, both spouses work and neither has any interest, or ability in providing that care because their own living expenses are such that they can't just forgo one salary to be an at home caretaker.
- kickout 4y ago
  Correct, society has definitely changed with women now in the workforce and the velocity(?) of people moving from where they grew up. I know my family has scattered after high school and had no intentions of returning home. Difficult for parents to relocate to children after living life in one community all their life.
BobbyJo 4y ago
People tended not to linger as long, and had tons of children and grandchildren to look after them. My grandfather had a heart attack and bypass fifteen years ago. He's been pretty much bedridden for the last two of those, needing my mother to look after him full time. My grandmother passed away after 6+ months of needing more and more oxygen. The last three months she needed full time care. 100 years ago they both wouldn't have lasted more than 2-3 months, and would have needed very little care for most of that time.

lettergram 4y ago

> Did old people just die randomly and then they were buried and that was that? In most places on earth the elderly live with their children. The children care for them, then yes they die. They’ll often be buried in the yard if they have land or in a plot designated (graveyard). Alternatively, they’ll have some sort of cremation ceremony. Pretty much been that way forever. The last 70 years in the US has gotten exceptionally weird, looking through a historical lens. Frankly, it looks like we hate our elders.

kickout 4y ago
Agreed, and having watched the older generations go through heartbreaking experiences to squeeze out 2-3 months of 'living' has solidified me in insisting on never putting my family through that. My hope is multi-generational households become more prevalent in the US (I thin they are still common in Latino and Asian communities in the US). Leads to interesting debates/arguments on what is living versus simply being alive
seti0Cha 4y ago
We don't hate the elderly, we just don't value family. We expect our kids to leave home as soon as they are able and we don't bat an eye when they move a few thousand miles away. Marriage rates have been declining for a few decades and something like half of marriages end in divorce. I have an aging mother and mother-in-law that both live alone because they "value their independence." Neither has the slightest interest in living with my wife and I, although we are fairly close. The norm is living independently and anything else is an imposition or a failure in our society. edit: Wouldn't have thought any of that was terribly controversial. I'd be interested if those having a negative reaction would post some response so I know what makes that opinion problematic. No need to get into an argument, I'm just genuinely curious.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

From the article: >unless they have family members who are willing to give up their own lives to be caregivers Where my ancestors are from, this is what happened. 99% of the time, this responsibility fell on women, because they had no option. I have no interest in seeing my wife or daughter or sister (or son) suffer the same fate, so suicide (preferably assisted) is the answer in my view.

ejb999 4y ago

family used to provide a lot of that care, and saw it as part of their responsibility, and was made easier when one parent was at home and not working. Now, for the most part, both spouses work and neither has any interest, or ability in providing that care because their own living expenses are such that they can't just forgo one salary to be an at home caretaker.

kickout 4y ago
Correct, society has definitely changed with women now in the workforce and the velocity(?) of people moving from where they grew up. I know my family has scattered after high school and had no intentions of returning home. Difficult for parents to relocate to children after living life in one community all their life.

BobbyJo 4y ago

People tended not to linger as long, and had tons of children and grandchildren to look after them. My grandfather had a heart attack and bypass fifteen years ago. He's been pretty much bedridden for the last two of those, needing my mother to look after him full time. My grandmother passed away after 6+ months of needing more and more oxygen. The last three months she needed full time care. 100 years ago they both wouldn't have lasted more than 2-3 months, and would have needed very little care for most of that time.