The Long-term Care Plan was originally one of the most important aspects of the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) social welfare agenda. Its original intention was well-meaning — to provide care for the elderly population, reduce the burden on families and make society as a whole more compassionate.
However, after having been implemented for several years, the public response to the plan did not meet expectations — it has caused resentment even on the front lines. The most direct example of this is that home care workers, who were supposed to be the policy’s greatest beneficiaries and promoters, have publicly expressed an unwillingness to support the DPP during elections. This alarming gap highlights a major disconnect between the policy and public opinion. So what exactly is the problem?
Home care workers earn low wages, despite their long working hours, and generally lack respect in society. While the government keeps touting long-term care as a social responsibility, the actual assurances provided for those in the field are insufficient, and frontline caregivers feel that they have been exploited as a result.
On top of this, families that employ home care services typically have negative experiences. Many complain about overly cumbersome application procedures, long waiting times and a lack of resources, leaving families with no real care services. Over time, the long-term care policy has become one that sounds ideal on the surface, but is entirely disconnected from reality.
This is one of the main reasons why the DPP has continued to see a decline in votes in the past three elections. The DPP suffered a devastating loss in the 2018 local elections, where the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) won a majority of city, county and municipal governments. The party suffered yet another blow during the 2022 local elections. Although President William Lai (賴清德) won last year’s presidential election, his vote share dropped to just 40.05 percent and the DPP became the minority in the Legislative Yuan.
These warning signs cannot be blamed on voters “not understanding policy,” but rather on the ruling party for turning a blind eye to the true feelings of citizens. Policy is more than just briefs and reports — it requires a humane approach that focuses on the concrete experiences of peoples’ daily lives.
For the public, long-term care is not some flowery slogan, but a real need: “My elderly family member needs immediate help,” “I can afford the costs,” and “I trust that they will receive quality care.” Regardless of how well-designed a policy is, if the public’s needs are not met, it is nothing but an empty promise.
Thus, the DPP should devise a plan for concrete improvement. First, it should improve the salary system for home care workers by incorporating caregiving into a semi-public protection framework to ensure that wages at least match the average labor market salary. It should also expand opportunities for further education and promotion in the caregiving field.
Next, it should simplify the application process for families seeking care by introducing a single-window and digital system, allowing families to access care services quickly instead of being overwhelmed by paperwork.
Third, it should implement measures to improve quality control of care services to ensure consistency with service standards and avoid regional disparities, and further establish complaint and real-time assistance mechanisms.
Finally, it should promote a community care model that encourages cooperation between local clinics, community centers and volunteers, so that care is more closely connected with daily life.
At its core, politics is about more than just governance — it is about possessing empathy for citizens. If long-term care becomes a more severe policy dilemma, it could lead to another major defeat for the DPP government.
Hsiao Hsi-huei is retired.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more