The Instigator
Tetyana101
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
vasarta
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Should there be more elderly homes?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
vasarta
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/28/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 345 times Debate No: 81704
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Tetyana101

Pro

There should be more homes for the elderly because offspring will have an easier time visiting their parents and relatives. If there is a certain area a person wants to be (to check in on their house or going to the store) they will have a quick trasport. People will have more choices to choose from instead of settling for a poor maintenace home with bad service. We want what's best for our elders, so why not give them an easier time with things?
vasarta

Con

I accept this argument and hereby declare myself the con of this round as I do not think there should be more old folk's homes.
Debate Round No. 1
Tetyana101

Pro

Elderly homes will help everyone and especially benefit older people.
vasarta

Con

Elderly homes are not only a cop out for children who don't want to take care of their own parents, they are dangerous too.

All too often they abuse, neglect or ignore their residents. Sometimes they are down right abusive and cruel.
If a person can afford to send their parent to a nursing home which can cost around 6.2k a month at the cheapest. 7k if they want a privet room. If you can afford that, you can afford to just have a house with an extra room and pay a professional home nurse. In fact, it would probably just be cheaper to pay a house nurse. The people in many homes are often times miserable. I have seen it first hand. I have seen a large fat man who can't talk because of a stroke express a lot of emotional pain because his son couldn't visit him on his birthday or just refused too. A lot of them hate it there. I know, because they told me.
Debate Round No. 2
Tetyana101

Pro

Correct, many elders are neglected in elderly homes and are very poorly treated, but with more elderly homes there will be more options to choose from. Maybe possibly people could start inspecting the homes for poor treatment and bad living conditions.
Elderly homes may cost a lot of money, but with more homes there will be more choices (just like I already said). More homes, more options.
vasarta

Con

It doesn't really matter how many options there are. Currently there are a little over 15,000 of these homes in america. Almost all of them have the same common problems and many as I stated before, have abusive staff. You don't have any control over who that place hires, who takes care of your parents. There is no connection between knowing anything about the people who are taking care of the elderly and the person who sends the elderly there. So, there is absolutely no telling what kind of person could be taking care of them, or how much they actually care about the people there. Often times, the residents hate the staff greatly.

http://www.ltlmagazine.com...

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://www.canhr.org...

In fact, the only reason as stated in my second link that elderly homes even exist is to free up hospital beds for younger people. Elderly homes are just a way of keeping them out of the hospitals, not taking care of them and making sure they have a great life.
Debate Round No. 3
Tetyana101

Pro

Tetyana101 forfeited this round.
vasarta

Con

Not sure what else I can say actually, I will wrap up with a final thought on this.

I just think that instead of old people homes, that a parent should be taken care of by their kid or another family member when a time comes when they are mentally and physically unable to take care of themselves with the paid help of a medical professional. If they can afford the home, they can afford the much cheaper medical care professional to come by their home for a few hours a day and administer medical treatments, bath, etc. And then go.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by vasarta 1 year ago
vasarta
Seriously? You put the fuc**** voting period to half a fuc**** year?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
Tetyana101vasartaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
Tetyana101vasartaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited the final round, which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. S&G - Tie. Both sides had some minor grammatical errors, thus negating these points for either side. Arguments - Con. Pro had the BOP to show that there should be more elderly homes. She did this by arguing that more elderly homes would help relatives keep in touch easier, Pro strengthens this in further rounds by claiming that more homes will mean more options. This was due to Con's arguement that elderly homes have several issues such as abuse and cheaper alternatives such as home care. However, Pro never rebutted Con's counter that options don't matter as abuse occurs across the board. At this point, Pro forfeited the remainder of the debate, dropping all of Con's points. Con, on the other hand, was able to refute each claim made by Pro. For this, Con wins arguments. Sources - Con. Pro failed to utilize sources whereas Con provided 3 which served to support his abuse claims.