Unpaid carers save economy almost £60bn each year

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
According to this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40560827

Unpaid carers save the UK economy almost £60bn a year, suggests a new analysis of official figures by the Office of National Statistics.
About 8% of the UK population living in private households acted as informal carers last year, Department of Work and Pensions figures show.
The ONS calculates that it would cost £56.9bn to replace these unpaid carers with paid workers.
Both sexes spent more time on unpaid care in 2015 than in 2000, it says.
The ONS links the rise in unpaid care by family members to "a rapidly ageing population and a higher life expectancy".
Presumably these are only the carees who are below the £23.500 threshold below which council-funded care kicks in.

In which case the actual number of family carers is much higher, ie, all those who care for someone who has more than the £23.500 and would have to self-fund if they didn't get 'free' family care. (Though hopefully they are, in fact, 'paying' their relatives to care?????)

What, of course, is not taken into account is that if family provide 'free' care, or even if they are 'paid' by their caree (informally), these carers are taken out of the workforce, ie, they are not in employment paying income tax and NI. They are probably also pretty poor for the same reason, and so are not boosting the economy by spending much. They may also be depriving the economy of valuable scarce and/or expensively trained skills.

That said, if 'free' family carers were replaced by professional care workers to do what the family carers are doing, then we are as a society simply assuming that it's OK to have all those 'extra' people whose sole function in life is to 'free up' family members.

It's the same as, say, a highly educated professional middle class woman hiring a poorly educated woman to clean her house for her, so the former can be off doing 'professional' work....

The bottom line, it seems to me, is that a lot of 'elder care' is pretty 'basic', whoever is doing it, family carers or professional care workers.....and not very enjoyable to do......

Grim, sad, but true?????
jenny lucas wrote:Presumably these are only the carees who are below the £23.500 threshold below which council-funded care kicks in.



What, of course, is not taken into account is that if family provide 'free' care, or even if they are 'paid' by their caree (informally), these carers are taken out of the workforce, ie, they are not in employment paying income tax and NI.
According to the article....... The analysis found that half of adult carers were employed either part- or full-time. And almost a third of these (29%) said they spent 35 hours or more a week as informal carers.
I can only conclude that the figures are based on those who declared themselves to be caring and those who claim Carer's Allowance and those that declared themselves to be Carers on Census returns. There would be many who are not identified as Carers
Still, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Disraeli ;)
According to other sources , Carers UK included , the figure is currently in excess of £120 Billion ... double that reported by the BBC .... nearer to £ 132 Billion ....

See Page 4 of the State of Caring 2017 :

http://www.carersuk.org/for-professiona ... eport-2017

No correction by our CEO on the BBC report after commenting ... said report now " Disappeared " from their news section. Explotation of workers in the cosmetics field still available.

Be " Nice " is , at least , one source had their " Magic " figure broken down so anyone could roughly check ... ?

For instance , replace any carer with a minimum wage care worker ?

Part of the time a housekeeper ? A nurse ? An au pair ? A counsellor ?

Minimum wage + portion of high rate for a specialist ?

Then deduct taxes paid by that individual ?

Travelling expenses whenever carer / caree travel ?

Hours per day ? Days per week ? Weeks per year ?

Multiply by 6 million ... 5 million ... 7 million ?

Just a starter for ten .....

The words ENSLAVEMENT and EXPLOTATION spring to mind.

So what ?

No one out there will seek to address the Issue.
There will come a day when the system collapses.

We need a charismatic Union leader to bring this Army of carers out on strike
The very fact that carers CARE precludes that notion.

More chance of the System imploding by itself , possibly allied with a major downturn in the economy.

Out of the ashes , who knows what will emerge short of attempting to resurrect most of all that led to the collapse in the first place ?
Many people are co-carers for each other and perhaps have been given medical retirements.

IF they had been given better help and early intervention they may NOT have needed to stop work.
Boils down to money yet again.

How many carers can afford " Help " even if also working ?

Same argument going on with childcare and the lack of affordable places for most on , or near to , the minimum wage.
No, it is not solely about money. It is also about lack of information.

I know of people who never get offered help or support by medical professionals, despite having life threatening conditions.