The big difference between this and the past when elderly care as a familial obligation was the norm, it seems to me, are medical advances, particularly of the

The big difference between this and the past when elderly care as a familial obligation was the norm, it seems to me, are medical advances, particularly of the type that makes returns to investment diminish less. 200 years ago, the protagonist's father would have long died, everyone involved would have grieved and moved on; and more generally, if $1000 (in 2023 dollars) didn't keep him alive, then neither would $10000 or $100000. Now, instead, we have the situation that people in his position can be kept (barely) alive for decades - if you are willing to pay the price in time and/or money. Our moral framework, not having yet adapted to this reality, makes it impossible to callously say no to this offer, to sacrifice your whole life and wealth so as to not let your father die, which in the past would not have been available.