Years after a ground-breaking television report that prompted a heartbreaking royal commission, and following nursing home horror stories during the pandemic, the aged-care system is still not fit for purpose.
This is despite fulsome promises by both Coalition and Labor governments.
The current crisis involves nightmare scenarios detailed by Jackie French, the former 2015 Senior Australian of the Year.
In a recent article published by Australian Community Media, Ms French writes of the thousands of elderly Australians currently languishing in public hospitals because authorities cannot arrange home care or secure available nursing home beds.
Her observation that suicide is seen by some as preferable to nursing home care is borne out by recent tragic murder-suicide cases across the country.
Families face impossible choices. Ms French makes the observation that while many aged-care homes are superficially attractive and presentable, a deeper dive by friends and family can expose soiled bedding with people lying in their own waste, untreated bed sores, malnutrition and the types of neglect the royal commission recommendations were designed to eliminate.
Facilities still sedate residents to manage staff shortages, leaving vulnerable individuals to suffer.
Unsurprisingly, the preferred option for most older Australians is to "age in place". Consider the example of Valerie Brown who, like Jackie French, is to be commended for having the courage to share her experiences of the aged-care system - both good and bad - with the public.
At 95, Ms Brown relies on government support through the Support at Home program to remain in her familiar residence.
She chooses how to allocate her funding for essential domestic help, such as gardening and basic maintenance, allowing her to stay surrounded by decades of cherished memories.
However, Ms Brown highlights the complexity of the funding system, which dictates different rates and rigid limits for clinical care, non-clinical care, and everyday living expenses.
Navigating these bureaucratic hurdles requires assistance, often placing a heavy burden on family members.
Furthermore, the home care sector faces its own crisis. While mechanisms are in place to deliver the funding for essential services for those on home care packages often the infrastructure itself is not. Citizens receive government packages but cannot find providers to deliver the necessary services.
Ms French, who lives in rural NSW, said the government website lists dozens of agencies in regional areas that either refuse new clients or have no local staff at all.
Her observation that some "service providers" exist on a business model of charging front-line workers in the sector for the certification to obtain government funding but doing nothing themselves is eerily similar to allegations of rorting within the National Disability Insurance Scheme.
The only word to describe somebody who indulges in this type of bureaucratic exploitation is "parasite". They drain public resources while adding nothing of value in return.
Jackie French's conclusion that the system is broken and in urgent need of overhaul is incontestable.
Bureaucrats should be verifying that providers can actually deliver care before listing them on registries. Those same authorities should also be prosecuting those who rort the system.
Ms French's call for service provision to be handed over to local hospitals has merit. Given the wide range of services required and the interjurisdictional complexities, this needs further investigation.
