<The private alternatives that took care of the medical needs of most of the elderly before, have since been systematically destroyed.

Good morning, Tom!

Would you please point out:

-when these private alternatives were in place (a year range will do);

-what kinds of services and treatments they comprised;

-how many elderly they served;

-at what age people tended to die during the time these elderly were served;

-whether there have been any pharmeceutical or other medical advances since then, resulting in lengthening of life and improved quality of life for those with access to these improvements, which might have affected the costs of private alternatives;

-how many elderly were not served by private arrangements, and what happened to them;

-what kind of quality control there was on the private arrangements;

and last,

-why, if this system was so efficient, the public supported the development of a government program to fund medical care of the elderly?

People tend to leave a thing alone if it's not malfunctioning in some way.

I notice that Mr. Reagan's private care is quite extensive. Although I feel bad for Nancy, my compassion is tempered by the knowledge that she has 24-hour professionals available for her Alzheimer's afflicted husband, as well as the best treatment money can buy. After a while, because we couldn't afford the expense and it was dangerous to have him wandering without 24-hour care, we had to put my grandfather into the state hospital. Nursing homes were unregulated messes at the time. I never saw him again, because visits were severely limited: the only place they could put him was the mental ward. And we had a doctor in the family, so we at least had a break on some of the medical bills.

I remember elder care alternatives. Do you?

Regards--
Mary Anne