Debate on Familia Piety and Government Responsibility for Aged Care in Australia

This debate discusses whether families should be responsible for bearing the burden of care for their elderly relatives and not rely on government services to prevent escalating costs of aged care. The affirmative arguments focus on the rising costs of aged care, the burden on the government, and how Familia Piety can help better the societal fabric of Australia. The negative arguments focus on aged care being a governmental responsibility, aged care being an imprint part of public administration and democratic governance, and families being incapable of affording critical healthcare in a damaged economy.

Introduction

Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION
The financial burden which the government globally subject themselves to in order to take
care of all the senior citizens of their country which are left for good or are estranged from their
children is becoming repeatedly expensive over the last few decades (Harris and Sharma, 2018).
The recent data which has been presented by the government and has been reported by economic
experts also provide credence to this line of thought as the period of 2020-21 saw the Australian
government spend $23.6 Billion on aged care which is a major expenditure which might not be
justifiable in the modern post pandemic economic scenario which has left the government and
the nation reeling. The main topic of this debate is that “families should be responsible for
bearing the burden of care for their elderly relatives and not rely on government services
to prevent escalating costs of aged care. Familia piety is a value of Asian cultures that
should be espoused in Australia more widely to prevent the overuse of in-home care and
aged care facility services”.
One of the most important concepts of the Confucian school of thought is the value of Filial
Piety which means out of respect for parents and it highlights the love that people should have
towards their parents in all aspects and routines of life irrespective of their personal conditions.
Asian cultures in comparison to Australian culture are much more focused on taking care of their
elderly as a part of family responsibility and hence are much less dependent on government
sponsored elderly aid. The core essence of argument on the basis of which this debate will be
constructed is whether or not the responsibility of taking care of the aged population should fall
on the government or on the families and whether or not adoption of Asian values is a worthy
undertaking for Australia to reduce costs of aged care. The affirmative arguments in this debate
will focus on the rising costs of aged care, the burden on the government as a result and how
Familia Piety can help better the societal fabric of Australia as a nation. The negative arguments
on the other hand will focus on aged care being a governmental responsibility, aged care being
an imprint part of public administration and democratic governance and families being incapable
of affording critical healthcare in a damage economy.
The major point which goes very far in affirming the topic of the debate is that indeed,
the costs of aged care have been escalating at a very high pace to the point where it has become a
burden on the Australian government. The cost of residential aged care in particular is becoming
quite taxing as $14.1 Billion was spent by the government from 2020-21 and the interest rates in
1

this sector are quickly rising and prices of beds are also increasing at a fast pace especially due to
the mayhem brought by the COVID-19 pandemic (The cost of residential aged care just went up,
2022). In order to give the government some relief in this regard, espousing Asian values of
taking care of the elderly and making aged care a family responsibility seems like a useful
endeavour to undertake for long term economic benefits. Another major affirmative argument for
making the families responsible for aged care by preaching Asian values of parental respect is
that it can help reduce the escalating cost of health care by removing some of the governmental
burden which should provide immediate short term financial relief to the government.
On the other hand, there are many arguments which go into the negative stance on the
given debate topic as giving the charge of providing aged care to family members and relatives
by their own families can have disastrous consequences. There are many critical diseases which
are developed on the onset of old age and there are many people who need professional treatment
and care even at the basic stage of common diseases as the scope of them to escalate further and
become deadly is high in the hands of their families at home who provide amateurish care at
best. Espousing the thought of Familia piety all over Australia to raise awareness among families
can also backfire as this will deprive many aged people to receiving the critical care they need.
The responsibility of providing aged care going solely to the families will also prove disastrous
for the UK economy in the long run as the aged care industry even with escalating costs provide
a very healthy contribution to the Australian GDP.
2

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Harris, A. and Sharma, A., 2018. Estimating the future health and aged care expenditure in
Australia with changes in morbidity. PloS one, 13(8), p.e0201697.
Online referencing
The cost of residential aged care just went up, 2022 [online] available through
https://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-retirement/the-cost-of-residential-aged-care-just-
went-up-20220715-p5b1za.html
3

4

5