Readers have responded to Polly Toynbee's article on the new prime minister's commitment to a fair social care system, with many highlighting widespread misunderstandings about who uses care and how it should be funded.
Misconceptions about social care
Dr Louise Lawson, a lecturer in social policy at the University of Glasgow, argues that social care is too often equated with care homes and dementia services for older people. While these are vital, they are one part of a wider system. Demand has grown fastest among working-age disabled adults, who are largely missing from the public and political narrative.
She asserts that Polly Toynbee's claim that "the old must pay for the old" is incorrect, as social care is relied on by people of all ages. Public debate also overlooks what social care makes possible: enabling people to live independently, sustain relationships, take part in education and employment, and contribute to their communities.
Barriers to reform
Alan Walker, professor of social policy and social gerontology at the University of Sheffield, identifies two main reasons for the current state of the system. First, care provision has been regarded by governments as a domestic responsibility, overwhelmingly women's work. This patriarchal assumption was built into the welfare state from birth, and research, including his own, has shown that the state's belief that providing support risks the family giving up caring is entirely false.
Second, we live in a deeply ageist society, which "others" older people and diminishes their worth, allowing the endless annual toll of cold-related and now heat-related deaths to persist. He notes that there is now a prime minister who appears to understand why social care is so important and why it is in such a parlous state.
Personal concerns
Janet Touhey from Newark, Nottinghamshire, expresses her concern about being able to pay for care she may need in her 70s. She lives in a modest house with small savings, which could soon run out if she needed care later in life. She would love the peace of mind of knowing she would get care, even if it meant paying a percentage of her estate on death or increased taxes.
She notes that it would salve many worries for people who don't want to be a burden on their children and to know they can pass on some inheritance. She hopes Andy Burnham gets this sorted, as it's currently unfair that care depends on wealth, where you live, and the type of illness you have.
