In Britain, when someone gets old they often go to live in a home with other old people where there are nurses to look after them. Sometimes the government has to pay for this care. Who do you think should pay for this care, the government or the family?

Across the world, the old age population has been considered as burden, be it for the immediate Family or the Government. The debate that who should bear the cost of their living has been going on for quite a few years. Given that the elderly people, when they were young, have paid taxes out of their hard earned salaries, it would seem to be an apt solution. But given that the Government is not a private body which can raise the funds, bearing the cost in totality would become difficult. Hence, the family members can't put the onus completely on the Government. On the other hand, the family members are also equally responsible and can't let their hands off taking care of their old members. In the last stage of their lives, probably more important for them would be love, care and respect. The near ones should also think if the burden is bestowed on the Government, the same amount would be recovered from the citizens of the nation by increasing taxes, surcharges, etc. A recent solution which might help overcome this debate, was experienced by me during my trip to Chennai, India. I personally consider it to be a win-win situation in running and maintaining of an old age house. The ole age people who have decided to live in an old age house have contributed a certain amount and invested in the government securities. They manage their livelihood out of the interest income derived from their investments. Also, they procure and produce hand made products which are sold by them which helps them in survive and maintain a healthy livelihood. All said and done, I feel the cost should be borne by the family members and later the Government should assist the elderly people in becoming self-independent which would result in a win-win situation for everyone in the society.