[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Where do you care?. - Page 3 - Carers UK Forum

Where do you care?.

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
Yes,Susieq,you raise the fact that the extended family,where younger family members look after older and infirm ones,were the norm.Where theres no free NHS the extended family does exist.Treading on very dangerous ground,and I know it too,I do get the sence that in so-called "Christian" or "Religous" nations,be they christian or not,the extended family still is very much in evidence.yes,the culture,fragmented family life does have an impact i feel. Image
And your evidence is .. ?
As I see it the first societies to introduce universal social welfare were the secular and liberal societies: Scandinavia, New Zealand.
There's precious little religion in our family: none at all where my parents are concerned, yet they were always closer and more supportive than Gill's highly religious and church going family who we could never get support from when we needed it. I haven't noticed any bias toward religion in the more caring families I've worked with, as opposed to those with less support.

One example of the support we got from Gill's dad was a book about exorcising the ghost of the departed family member causing Mike's autism. Image

As far as I can see it's not about religion, it's about the kind of person you are and the values you hold dear enough to live by. Surprisingly, religion doesn't seem to make any difference to that at all.
As far as caring within southern europeans families is concerned, it has had very little to do with religion but a lot to do with simple economics, especially in more rural communities.

Historically, because land and property were beyond the reach of most young couples, when they wished to marry the norm was to extend one or other of the family homes and for them to move in with one or other set of parents. If the parents were elderly the daughter/daughter-in-law took over the care of the house at this point and with it the care of the parents. Children and other disabled family members would have just been included within the caring as a matter of course and caring within the family became a part of the culture that continues to this day.

The same economic reasons can be applied to those other ethnic societies that also have a strong caring ethic. (Perhaps the poorer a society is the more it cares and vice versa ??).
all im saying excalibur is this country long ago stuck together families are not as close as they used to be if everybody were to slow down a bit and smell the roses maybe things would be better but i know and you know it wont happen everybody is for themselves these days or to busy to bother its funny though but when someone dies in a family maybe someone they havnt seen for a long time people start saying oh if only i was there or i wish i kept in touch etc etc hey wake up what stopped you!!! i dont have an answer excalibur
I live in a small village with a post office come Spar Shop, church, and a nice village hall. Our nearest town (for Dr's, supermarkets etc) is about 3 1/2 miles away.

Jan has a scooter and before we lived hear (we lived in a town just 7 miles away from were we elive now) She could visit friends and clubs, even go to Tesco all on her own. She can get to the post office, but there's no were else to go! She misses that freedom. She cant even go out in the car on her own because our bungalow is down a foot path and the car is parked in the road that leads to it. She can get to the car and get in but then she has a power chair so can't put in the car, can't leave it in the road, cant put it in the garage. These are job I do, willingly but it does impinge on her independence.
Not that long ago, families used to hide away their disabled or out-of-wedlock children, old folk with dementia or adults with mental health problems, out of misplaced shame or economic necessity. Even the Royal Family did this, and it was all kept quiet. By the time the asylum population reached its peak, in the mid 1950's, there were nearly half a million British citizens living in these crumbling, vast institutions, 1% of the entire population, and families were not encouraged to visit.
Much true in what all you folks say.My own Mother was brought-up,one of ten children,on a farm in rural Ireland,Families cared for one another,lived simply,on modest incomes,As the state was small in what it offered,no nhs,no social services,and a hard-headed independant attitude where folks tried to be self-sufficient,with minimal need or want of state aid,such as it was,families.friends etc all helped out each other.it maybe a generalisation,but pooer nations,with a small state,delivering only basic care,at best,tend to have stronger comunities that have a sence of self sufficient domain.ofcourse you may name nations which fail by these criteria too.but i sence affluence,a large state offering free health care etc,may erode family support structures.
It's a sad truth that attitudes were a lot different in times gone by. My Jan's own Grandparents advised her mum to' put into a home and forget about her' Seems uncareing today but in those days was it a common reaction?

Glad to say Jan mum wouldn't hear of it, and she grew up knowing she loved and cherished .
Maybe tis only my wistfull flight of fancy,a dream of a notion.but i do feel that its so true when its said that we cared more for one another years ago.Image