Taking care of an aging parent is likely more difficult than caring for a newborn, both physically and emotionally, as the baby would gradually become more self-sufficient, while the parent only gets worse.
The government offers subsidies to babysitters who are a child’s relatives within three degrees of kinship and it makes sense that legislators last week suggested that a similar subsidy be offered to people who take care of their elderly relatives.
Taiwan is to become a hyper-aged society in less than 10 years, meaning that more than 20 percent of the population is to be over 65 years old.
Taiwanese are not inclined to send their parents to nursing homes — only 8 percent of elderly people who need long-term care are institutionalized — but this often results in family conflict and someone unwillingly taking on the task due to pressure and the societal burden of filial piety, while those who are willing likely have no training. Many end up quitting their jobs, turning caregiving into a full-time endeavor.
Hiring a caregiver is not always an option, as Taiwan is reportedly short by about 40,000 caregivers.
Why do relatives get paid to care for babies, while taking care of elderly people is seen as a responsibility?
It is noble of someone to want to take care of their parents, but it is a difficult and often thankless job, and filial piety can only go so far — especially if those who are being taken care of have dementia or other illnesses.
Of course, subsidies should only be offered to people who undergo proper training, otherwise the system could be abused.
Even with the subsidy, people should weigh their options and see if it is something they are capable of doing — some often end up immensely frustrated and suffer from depression, and in worst-case scenarios end up abusing the person they are taking care of.
Even those with good intentions can end up awry, especially young people who were raised in well-off small families, and never had to take on much of a family burden and are used to thinking of their own priorities first.
They know that they could one day have to take care of their parents, but they dread the day, because they most likely are not ready to handle it.
Classes or workshops for non-professionals would go a long way in helping people prepare and assess their options. Taking care of an old person is not just about physical care — people should also know about keeping the person’s mind active and maintain a healthy amount of socialization.
It is not a shame to be stressed out or fall into despair, and people should not feel like they are not fulfilling their responsibility and should not hesitate to reach out for help.
The government last year rolled out its Long-term Care Services Program 2.0, but it is also up to the public to help fill in the gaps.
The 20 percent elderly population mark will arrive sooner than people realize, and more programs and institutions, as well as incentives, are needed for people to become professional caregivers. Increased competition would also reduce alleged abuse or neglect by care centers.
The government can only come up with one plan, no matter how comprehensive, but the public can experiment and get creative to make sure that the super-aged population enjoys the best final years they can.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers