[meric]

In the beginning the elderly among us lived in homes, taken care of by family members, and often, offering wisdom in return to their grandchildren.

Then, in the name of economic growth and labor specialization, we push the elderly among us into nursing "homes", to let people who are more "efficient" take care of them.

Finally we realize efficiency can mean inhumane treatment, and in a bid to restore "dignity", put them back in homes. Without us living with them, of course.

Oh, the irony.

[galfarragem]

Playing devil's advocate:

- we have nowadays a life expectancy of 85+. 50 years ago was much less - meaning that we depended on family much less time;

- lower classes don't have a significative better purchasing power than back in the day - meaning that affording to stay at home is not always even a choice;

- elders caring was backed by staying at home women - roles and families have changed;

- elders have less and less children - meaning more work 'per child'. Nowadays, in the globalised world, if there are more than one child is improbable that all live nearby or even in the same country/state.

Reciting poetry is not an efficient way of solving problems. And hard ones by the way..

[galfarragem]

Disclaimer: my mum is the only child, a compulsory staying at home woman, taking care of her father and mother in law (88 and 89) with my help for already 15 years. I'm also the only child, already in mid 30's and without children yet. That's why I know that this is a big problem nowadays and a capital one in the future specially among the lower income classes.