Articles (scroll down to see all):
***Click here to start a discussion on any of these articles***
Tesco Launches Over 50s Life Cover
By: Samantha Shaw (Source: click here)
Tesco is launching a life insurance plan for the over 50s.
The supermarket giant says the policy will allow customers to leave loved ones a guarantee tax-free cash lump sum.
Customers buying the plan before June 26 will receive a free £20 gift card.
Those aged between 50 and 75 will not have to have a medical and can apply for cover online or over the phone. They will stop paying when they reach 90 but their cover will continue until death.
Tesco Life Insurance head Jeremy Sutton says: "Increasingly, people are living longer than in previous generations. Customers have been telling us that they want a product that meets their needs for leaving something for their loved ones. We are confident that our prices are the best value cover in the market."
By: Samantha Shaw (Source: click here)
Asda's Over 50s Life Cover caps premiums
By: Samantha Shaw (Source: click here)
Asda is to launch a new protection policy with its Over 50s Life Cover which promises to never have customers pay in more than they get out.
The supermarket, which has been growing its presence in the financial services sector over the last 18 months, says fair life cover for the over 50s is long overdue.
It says many over 50s wind up paying in more than they would ever receive due to high premiums.
The exclusive product, backed by AIG Life, guarantees customers will only pay premiums until their chosen sum assured is reached, after this point their premiums stop but their cover continues for the rest of their lives.
If customers are between 50 and 75 they can apply without the need to fill in a medical questionnaire and premiums can start at £6.95 a month.
Other benefits are first month free, fixed monthly premiums and a £30 Asda gift card with the first policy.
Asda head of insurance Gideon Ingham says: "For too long, thousands of Over 50s Life Cover policy holders have been penalised for living longer by having to pay much more in premiums than is paid out.
"Asda has a long standing reputation as a consumer champion and will go that extra mile to identify policies which do not unfairly penalise customers. Our new cover is going to ruffle a few feathers, but it’s high time that this customer group was treated fairly – so we think that all over 50s life policies should put a cap on premium payments."
A £1 pill to give us all a perky old age? It's good news - but there ARE risks
From: The Dail Mail online (Source: click here)
Sometimes, it seems, there really might be such a thing as a free lunch.
Imagine, for instance, taking a little pill every day which would in one fell swoop reduce your chances of dying of a heart attack by nearly 90 per cent, and your risk of getting a stroke by 80 per cent.
Give the pill — which, by the way, costs less than £1 a day — to everyone in Britain aged 50 and more, and see a sudden, dramatic increase in life expectancy of several years.
This isn't some science-fiction wonderdrug but a reality.
It's called the polypill, and has been developed by a team of British doctors.
Its backers, which now include the Government, say it could transform the health of vast numbers of people.
Indeed, it could be the biggest public-health advance since the advent of antibiotics.
Can this really be the case? Could simply taking a capsule containing a combination of chemicals to lower cholesterol and blood pressure really have such a profound effect on the nation's well-being?
And if so, do we want to go down the road of mass-medication — a road about which many people are profoundly uneasy?
The Government's medical advisers, including heart disease "czar" Professor Roger Boyle, are known now to be keen to introduce one of the biggest mass-medication programmes since vaccination. There is little doubt that the polypill would be clinically effective.
The formulation, designed by Professor Nick Wald of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, contains a mixture of drugs and vitamins — including statins (which lower cholesterol), aspirin, beta-blockers and thiazide to lower blood pressure, and folic acid.
Formulated by Japanese scientists in the 1970s, statins really do deserve the soubriquet "wonder drug".
Not only do they inhibit the production of enzymes that in turn lead to the production of "bad" cholesterol, they also act as anti-inflammatories, providing a double-whammy against cardiovascular disease.
There have even been studies linking statins to a lowering of the incidence of Alzheimer's Disease.
The proposed ingredients of the polypill are all hugely safe, effective drugs which militate against some of the greatest threats to life and well-being known to medical science.
If given to everyone in the UK over 50 it would cost the NHS about £6bn a year — but save £14bn treating the victims of cardiovascular disease (which cause a third of all deaths in the UK) and prevent 200,000 deaths a year.
The truth is that, in cost-benefit terms, there is little doubt that the polypill would be worth it.
It could create another leap forward in life expectancy for the over-50s, which is already increasing at an unprecedented rate.
A fit and healthy 60-year- old today can, with a fair degree of confidence, expect to live another quarter of a century or more.
Adding the polypill would probably be another leap forward.
It is possible that the benefits have been exaggerated by its proponents but there is no doubt that rolling out the polypill would save lives and the health of the population would improve.
Countless children would see their mother or father live to a healthy old age rather than succumbing prematurely to the ravages of heart disease in their 50s and 60s.
But there are objections, both practical and philosophical.
In practical terms, the polypill actually amounts to a very cheap lunch, but not quite a free one.
Yes, if you were to give this pill to everyone over 50, say, then you would save lives.
But some people would also die as a result.
No drugs are entirely free of side-effects and the chemicals in the polypill are no exception. Some statins have been linked to psychological disturbances.
Even aspirin, the almost magical wonder- drug, can cause severe gastrointestinal problems in a minority of people.
It would be hard, if not impossible, for some future doctor to point specifically to the many people still alive who would otherwise have died had the polypill not have been prescribed.
But it would be all too easy to point to the very few that have died as a result of taking these drugs.
Inevitably, this would cause massive public disquiet.
There are more practical objections. Research shows that vast percentages of people do not take their drugs properly.
Promised a pill which could give them, say, five extra years of life, how many people will take three a day hoping to get 15? How many will get into the hands of children?
And how many people will simply forget to take their polypill for a week or two and then try to make up the dose by taking ten of them in one go?
There is a further danger that some people with undiagnosed extremely high blood pressure and high cholesterol (both are usually symptomless) will, if given a low- dose polypill, simply assume that there is nothing wrong with them and be even less likely to visit their doctor for a checkup.
And some people will be taking drugs which should not be mixed with the polypill.
One good idea, rather than giving the drug to all British over-50s, is to trial it in a more limited population with known high rates of cardiovascular disease.
An obvious choice would be parts of Scotland, where in some urban areas male life expectancies are down to third-world levels.
Then we could get a good idea of its effectiveness "on the ground". Finally, of course, there are large numbers of people who object to anything which smacks of massmedication and taking responsibility for their health away from the people and giving it to the "man in Whitehall who knows best". Campaigns have been mounted to try to stop the addition of fluoride to tap water, a compound proven to reduce tooth decay and yet which, detractors claim, has little-understood side effects.
Of course, unlike fluoridated water, which you have no choice but to drink, no one will force you to take a polypill, but how long before insurance companies make a daily dose a requirement before they award someone a life policy?
Some will detect a whiff of the brave new world about a government prescription for everyone to take a pill every day.
These are considerations that must be fairly weighed before any government decides to play doctor for the good of us all.
That said, while admitting that there are objections to be made against the polypill, they seem to pale in comparison to its benefits. No drug can be 100 per cent safe or effective.
Yes, we may be a little uneasy about mass medication. But the mundanity of stroke and heart disease should not blind us to the reality that is a man or woman keeling over in their prime, nor the misery that is left in the wake of this tragedy.
Proceed with caution, but proceed. From: The Dail Mail online (Source: click here)
Nintendo's Wii a surprise hit with seniors
From msn.com (Source: click here)
Six seniors at the Sedgebrook retirement community gathered in the lounge after dinner last year as the holiday season was getting under way. The center's residents were an unlikely test audience for the season's hottest toys. The plan: determine which toys their grandchildren might like.
The assumption was that they'd give their grandchildren the toys they approved. But it didn't quite turn out that way. The Nintendo Wii was so popular that the residents clamored for their own.
Today, each of the Erickson chain's retirement communities, including Sedgebrook, outside Chicago, owns at least one Wii.
Other retirement communities and municipal senior centers in recent months have followed, many using wellness grants and public funds to pay for the video-game system. The Wii retails for about \$250.
Proponents say the Wii offers a welcome reprieve from a sedentary lifestyle and boosts hand-eye coordination among the over-60 set in a way that bingo and mah-jongg can't.
But it can be a challenge to get residents comfortable with the video games. Many retirement communities are encouraging hesitant seniors with tournaments, trophies and cash prizes. Some centers are placing their Wiis in high-traffic areas where seniors congregate or, for the bashful, behind a movable privacy screen.
Nintendo started pursuing seniors in 2006 with the launch of its Nintendo DS "Brain Age" game, which the company says stimulates cognitive abilities. The idea to reach out to seniors originated in Japan, where the population is aging more rapidly than in the United States, says George Harrison, senior vice president of marketing and corporate communications with Nintendo of America. "We had to approach people who were not previously video-gamers," he says.
Nintendo found that two things had kept seniors from playing video games. First, the games were too complicated. "The other thing was that there really weren't games for these people," Harrison says. That's where the easy-to-use Wii comes in, he says.
Twenty-four percent of Americans over age 50 played video games in 2007, up from 9% in 1999, according to the Entertainment Software Association. People age 55 and older account for less than 10% of Nintendo hardware sales. That's a slight increase from about four years ago, when the previous generation of game consoles peaked, Harrison says. Seniors have "opened up the aperture of people who previously would've not considered themselves to be gamers," he says.
Nintendo has been bolstering its senior-friendly image, partnering with retirement communities, including Erickson, which has received 15 free Wiis.
What to wear in your 50s
By Linda Grant for the Guardian (Source: click here)
For three or four years I have been searching for a leather jacket. The kind I was interested in was neither a coat nor a blazer, but would reach just below the hips; it would definitely be outerwear, the type of casual jacket you put on over a pair of jeans on a cold day. There is something about a leather jacket, some insouciant quality that I like, and my wardrobe has always had one, from the first circa-1978 punk jacket, all zips and straps, to the chocolate-brown MaxMara, which a year ago went to a new owner on eBay because it was a little big and boxy for me.
I had not realised how hard it would be to find my leather jacket; every one I tried on was either the wrong length or the wrong shape. Then, in the look-book for the forthcoming Marks & Spencer's autumn/winter range, I saw my jacket. It was in its Limited Collection range and was one of the season's highlights. As soon as it was in stock I bought it. I wore it for a month until I discovered from veteran fashion writer Sarah Mower in the Daily Telegraph that, in buying my leather jacket, I had unwittingly fallen into the saddest fashion category of all: mutton dressed as lamb. "Everyone past the age of 40 needs a 'mutton monitor'," she wrote. "I belong to a telephonic kaffee klatch that does the job without the slightest risk of false flattery. In the case of black leather biker jackets - this winter's high- street sell-out - there wouldn't be the minutest margin of a doubt. Should one of our number be tempted to revert to Suzi Quatro mode, she'd just have to be stopped. The rock chick mantle must always be passed to those in their 20s, fact. That means it's the property of the likes of Amy Winehouse. Even Kate Moss, moving up into her mid-30s, will be pushing the mutton-button with that one any minute now."
Evidently Theresa May either does not take the Telegraph or doesn't agree, for on Thursday, there she was grilling Harriet Harman, dressed in an enveloping tan-belted leather trench. And many others of our generation do not agree. Only a week before Mower's ominous warnings, I had started a little blog called The Thoughtful Dresser to bring together my two passions, fashion and literature (to me, style and shopping are not the empty-headed pursuits of Paris, Victoria, Coleen et al, but a serious matter that serious women are interested in). So I ventured to mention on my blog that I had just bought a leather jacket and that it had now been tarnished by doubt.
As Mower herself would write, two weeks later, of the response: "Light the blue touch-paper and retreat." Here were some of the many comments on my blog that took issue with her no-leather-jacket rule:
"I take offence because it smacks of 'once you are over 30 (or 40 or 50), you are supposed to disappear into the woodwork'."
"I'm going to be 56 and do not intend to disappear. As a matter of fact, this morning, I had the uncanny feeling that what I should really do is shave my head."
"It's just another example of the way women are manipulated, put down and even isolated from each other. Our whole fashion and beauty industry is based on guilt, shame and viciousness. Buy that leather jacket - and get the whip that goes with it so you can beat any sanctimonious naysayer who says you shouldn't (aren't entitled to) wear it!"
The following withering put-down wound up the debate: "I want to be there when these barely hatched fashionistas lay down the law about who can wear leather to Joan Jett, Debbie Harry and Marianne Faithfull . . . [watching] from a safe distance."
I had, it seemed, touched a raw nerve with my unknown readers. Women who are now in their 50s and 60s were the first to wear mini-skirts, Biba lipstick, tie-dyed T-shirts, hippy dresses made of Indian bedspreads, Laura Ashley sprigged pinafores, and safety pins through our unlined cheeks. Unlike our mothers, who grew up into the New Look, we did not spend our youth in grown-up clothes - no stilettos, pencil skirts or careful maquillage for us. While informality inevitably gave way to the kind of outfits you have to wear to shatter the glass ceiling, we continued to delude ourselves that as baby boomers we are the ones put on earth to be and stay young for ever (being young was part of our unique selling point as a generation). We loathe, and are frightened of, the idea of dressing old, for to dress old is to have someone to take you at face value: that you are old.
Successive episodes of What Not to Wear have shown the propensity of British women unprepared to register what they see in the mirror, who carry on past 40 in denim mini-skirt and with bottle-blond hair. But even the intelligent dresser has been confronted with the past season's trends - the mid-thigh tunic dress, the tottering platforms - which have been a catastrophe for older women. Those with good legs can get away with skirts above the kneecap - even so, it is the horrible contrast between a slim, toned body and a lined face (or one stiffened artificially with Botox) above it that so definitively shouts, "mutton alert!" But what to wear instead?
I often look at those features in magazines in which you are advised how to dress in each decade of your adult life. Coming to my own decade, the 50s, I see a parade of beige women in their invisible neutrals, and know that if I wore them, I would simply disappear. Indeed, I came to think that a lot of clothes sold as suitable for older women were actually designed with the intention of making sure we vanished altogether, for as every menopausal woman knows, invisibility is the social punishment a woman receives if she has the audacity to live on after childbearing.
Looking for role models, there are Catherine Deneuve, Bianca Jagger, Helen Mirren, Isabella Rossellini, yet what all these women have in common, which separates them from the rest of the population, is that they were ravishingly beautiful to start with, and still are. The rest of us must deal with the concealment of a multitude of flaws and the sapping of our self-confidence as those flaws gather more thickly, particularly round the middle. The more you look in the mirror, without which it is impossible to make an objective assessment of how you look, the more depressed you get, the less you care, the less you want to look in the mirror at all, until finally you simply give up dressing well as a bad job. One comment on my blog, however, seemed to address, accurately, what the baby-boom generation must do to ensure that we remain seen: "Dress with attitude." Attitude, the preserve of rap stars, is simply an assertion of the self, a confidence, and an insistence that one is seen. It need not involve gold necklaces.
I asked two fashion editors, each over the age of 50, how we could dress well without looking ridiculous. Alexandra Shulman, editor of Vogue, turned 50 in November. "I didn't do a wardrobe edit the moment I turned 50," she says. "I really believe it's how the individual looks and feels. I happen to think that you are hugely helped if you have great legs as you get older, and if you have a sure sense of style there's no reason to get into a navy suit. The danger is that you have to tread a middle ground between looking boring and a bit tragic. If you don't watch out, you can wind up like the fairy on top of the Christmas tree, but on the other hand you don't want to be in a black shift for the rest of your life."
Colour is important, she says: "I think black is draining and you have to be very rich to wear beige, you have to have honeyed skin, very good jewellery and perfect hair." And if you are going to wear beige, you have to do it right. "Bianca Jagger can wear it because she has incredible lips and wears deep red lipstick. That's not a way to look in your 50s, it's a whole look," Shulman says. "The problem is that when you look in the mirror you don't see yourself as you look now - in fact it's very hard to see yourself at all. There's that ghastly moment when you catch sight of yourself in the mirror and think, 'Who is that old lady?'"
What, if anything, is forbidden, I ask her? What would set off her mutton-meter? "I think you can wear anything - it depends how you look in it," she says. "The only time you possibly shouldn't wear a leather jacket is in your coffin, but you can't wear it with the biker boots. You have to mix classic with modern."
Louise Chunn, 51, a former Guardian women's page editor who has also edited In Style and is now editor of Good Housekeeping, thinks that there are some rules for older women. "You don't want to show too much flesh," she says. "It's just not as firm and luscious as it was. The other day I went to an awards ceremony, a black-tie do and, in spite of my fairly rigorous fitness regime, at 51, my arms are not that hot. I wore a Burberry lamé trenchcoat over a dress and didn't take the coat off. Too much flesh makes you look a bit desperate -like you're not acknowledging that you look older - though decolletage is fine. I'm also not keen on seeing people's knees. A really short skirt with no tights is crazy. Why would you risk it?"
What about the leather jacket question? "I completely disagree," she says. "In fact, at the moment I'm looking for one. I think it can look very good, though it depends on how you wear it and what you're wearing with it. Walking along Bond Street, some of the chicest women wear leather jackets; Nicole Farhi wears a leather blazer and it looks classic. I think floral is quite a problem. Big and wild is OK, but not pretty and little. 'Tea dresses are dead to us now, Louise,' a friend said to me the other day."
But the mutton question, she points out, isn't just a matter of clothes, but the whole appearance: "If your hair is short, like mine, you have got to jazz things up or you look even older than you are."
The more I have thought about how not to trigger someone's mutton-meter, the more it has dawned on me that it is not just a matter of knowing what not to wear, but of having dressed well up to now, of having a well thought-out personal style and then tweaking it as you age. We are subject to so many illusions. When we look in the mirror, Shulman says, we see ourselves as we looked 10 years ago, and if we looked good in something once, it's extremely hard to have the objectivity to make a judgment that we don't look good in it now.
Even people who work in the fashion business are not immune, Chunn says. "Getting old in the fashion world is not a very nice sight. Many of them look a bit tragic, a bit mad-woman-in-the-attic because they want to always be fashionable because they can't bear not to have the latest thing." At the 2003 spring/summer Paris shows, I saw a woman in her late 70s or early 80s, supported on the arm of a young man, possibly her grandson. She was wearing camouflage combats and copper earrings the size of side plates hung from her ears. This was style so outré, so firmly with attitude and so little about what was on the catwalks, that one had to salute her astonishing perseverance and audacity. She had thrown away the rulebooks, not only the book that said what an elderly woman should wear, but what anyone should be able to get away with.
For how do rules get broken without someone first breaking them? How is that half a century ago, a woman reaching 30 cut her hair and stopped wearing trousers, if ever she had worn them at all? And that half a century before that it was impermissible either to cut your hair or wear trousers, at any age? Eternally stylish women find their look and modify it as they grow older; I arrived at the conclusion that to dress well in your 50s and 60s you need to dress more simply, saving the attitude for one item and paring down the rest, so my leather jacket would be worn with jeans and a cashmere sweater, or over a little black dress. Still, out there somewhere are the defiant rule-breakers and I would guess they are within my own generation of baby boomers who have rewritten every rule as it comes along. Such as the American artist I had lunch with in a local restaurant a few years ago who, at 60, was wearing paint-spattered jeans, Converse All Stars, and her hair a wild mop of red and grey curls. You're not allowed to dress like that at 60, I told her. "Who says?" she replied.Source: The Guardian ( http://lifeandhealth.guardian.co.uk/fashion/story/0,,2220971,00.html)
Over-50s 'happier than they have ever been
By Sarah Womack, Daily Telegraph Social Affairs Correspondent (Source: www.telegraph.co.uk/ )
The over-50s in Britain are happier than at any other time in their lives, says a report today.
The Government study suggests 50 is the new 30, with many who have passed their half-century feeling in the prime of life. Often dubbed "Gotys" - Getting Older, Thinking Younger - they are ambitious, financially more secure and less stressed.
Nearly one in six uses social networking websites and internet chatrooms, while emailing is becoming the norm. Having paid off their mortgages and raised their children to independence, many are still enjoying robust good health into their 60s and beyond.
These are the people fuelling a boom in the leisure market.
But the research, conducted as part of the Government's "Generation Xperience" campaign to celebrate ageing, comes as a deluge of age discrimination cases - launched by those ejected from the workplace in their 50s and 60s - threatens to exceed 1,000 per month by next year.
Lawyers say the Employment Tribunals Service is swamped, not just with equal pay claims but with 2,000 ageism cases since the law came into force last year.
Under the new law, employees can work past the age of 65 if granted leave to do so by their employer. Should they be refused then it must be for "objectively justified" reasons.   Critics say employers will miss out on talent if they continue to wait for the European Court of Justice to abolish mandatory retirement ages.
Richard Linskell, the secretary of the Employment Lawyers Association and a partner at London firm Dawsons, predicted that age discrimination would eventually represent one of the most popular forms of claim.
The Government's research is designed to mark the first Older People's Day today, and claimed the over-50s felt more "inspired" than "retired".
Today's over-50s eat more healthily and have better prospects in later life than their parents did.
Close to one in three over-65s have more goals than they did in their 30s.
Nearly two thirds of over-50s say they are happier now than ever before and eight out of 10 say prospects for later life are better than their parents.
Linda Kelsey, the author of Fifty is Not A Four-Letter Word, said: "A wise older woman once said that she didn't mind being regarded as being over the hill because it's only once you're over the hill that you pick up speed."
Mike O'Brien, the pensions minister, said: "UK Older People's Day today is a chance to celebrate the contribution that 20?million people over 50 make to the UK and to tackle outdated stereotypes of what it means to be 'old'."
For people looking ahead to retirement, less than five per cent said later life meant boredom. Asked how they intend to spend their later years, personal goals for pre-retirement respondents include more travel (82 per cent), learning computer skills (60 per cent), taking up a new activity such as painting or yoga (61 per cent) and going back to school (43 per cent).
In financial terms, 60 per cent of over-50s feel they are better off.
|
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk/
***Click here to start a discussion on any of these articles***
Divorce and the over 50s
By: Woolley & Co. Solicitors: http://www.family-lawfirm.co.uk/
Divorces amongst the over 50s are on the increase, with an increase of 8.7% in the 50-59 age group and 8.9% in the 60+ age group. The West Midlands is amongst the areas of Britain with the highest proportion of over 50s divorcees, along with Scotland and the South East.
The triggers can be anything from the children leaving home, to a family crisis or a sudden realisation that the couple has nothing in common. This combined with the fact that women are generally able to have greater financial independence by returning to work after raising a family means that more women are in a position to initiate divorce proceedings.
Divorce and sorting out a financial settlement for the over 50s can sometimes be much more complex than for younger couples who have less invested in their relationship.
Divorce and family lawyer Carol Whereat of Woolley & Co advises older people contemplating divorce to consider the following before making any decisions.
Retirement – pension rights
A pension can often be one of the largest matrimonial assets of a long marriage. If a husband has been the main breadwinner in the family and is a member of an occupational pension scheme, or even been contributing to a private scheme, or both, he is likely to have built up a considerable fund. The over 50’s wife, however, may not have worked for several years and may have been paying the lowest rate of National Insurance contributions. This means that she may not even have sufficient National Insurance contributions to claim a State Pension in her own right but will have to rely on the contributions of her husband. The same applies if the wife has been the major breadwinner and has built up her pension and the husband has little or none.
The family home
At this stage in their lives, the matrimonial home is likely to be mortgage-free and in the present housing market another large matrimonial asset. This means that there is more to divide but it is often the case that there are insufficient funds to purchase properties for both husband and wife. It can be difficult at this stage in their lives for either party to obtain a mortgage and if either the husband or wife is not working then it is important that he/ she is able to purchase a property mortgage-free.
Where the parties are younger and there are dependent children, the needs of those children have to be given first priority in any divorce settlement whereas once the children have flown the nest, the usual division of property is on an equal basis which may cause some inequality. It is important that legal advice is sought at this stage in case there are specific issues which need to be taken into account when considering a divorce settlement. These issues can be such things as earning capacity and any special needs either party may have.
Maintenance
For older couples there may be a large difference in the earning capacity of husband and wife. On separation or divorce, therefore, the lowest earner may have difficulties in making ends meet and the question of maintenance may have to be addressed. Even in the higher income group the standard of living enjoyed whilst a couple are together has a bearing on how much maintenance they should receive. This can be a very complex area and it is important that legal advice is obtained by both parties.
Article written by Carol Whereat, Woolley & Co solicitors, May 2005. Carol has been giving advice on divorce and financial settlements for over 16 years. Contact Carol at: www.family-lawfirm.co.uk
****The Times newspaper needs your help. Click here for more information.****
The Rights of a Grandparent
By: Woolley & Co. Solicitors: www.family-lawfirm.co.uk
The breakdown of a marriage or long term partnership can be upsetting for all concerned. But for grandparents it can be even more so if contact with grandchildren is denied.
Over the years case law has developed to provide a presumption of contact in favour of absent parents (usually the father) but this is not the case with grandparents which is rather a sad fact.
Visits with grandparents are a precious and integral part of a child’s experience. The loving and nurturing relationship between grandparents and a grandchild often provides the child with intangible benefits that cannot be derived from other relationships.
Grandparents influence their grandchildren both directly and indirectly. Direct influence comes from face to face interaction talking to them, taking them on trips etc. When your grandchild has been confronted with a situation a grandparent is able to support them and know that you are on their side. Therefore a grandparent indirectly influences them by emotionally being there. A grandparent is a role model and can be a number of things, stress-buster, a watchdog, arbitrator, family historian and a supporter.
Increasingly, however, grandchildren often the product of broken homes, have been deprived of contact with their grandparent and lose that very special relationship.
So what should a grandparent do if they fear they might lose contact rights?
The first step is to approach the child’s mother or father and explain that no matter what the problems are between the parents you as a grandparent do not intend to take sides but that you only wish to maintain contact with your grandchildren.
If that is not successful you can try mediation. For this to take place both sides have to agree to mediate. It is not a compulsory process although many Courts are now attempting to make it so.
The final resort is an application to the Court. Here grandparents are at a disadvantage compared to parents since there is no presumption of contact and it is necessary to apply for leave to make an application. This is the first hurdle. The parent may object in which case the Court must be persuaded, usually by way of a full hearing, that you had a meaningful and ongoing relationship with your grandchild and that it is in his or her best interests for your relationship with him or her to continue.
If that hurdle is crossed your application will then be considered. More often than not because of allegations being made there will be welfare issues to be determined and the Court will appoint a CAFCASS Officer to prepare a Report which will be presented to the Court. These take from between 12 – 16 weeks to complete. If the report is favourable, the mother may still not agree which will mean a full hearing with both sides having to give evidence.
What happens if the Court makes an order and the mother or father still does not allow contact?
Unfortunately, enforcing contact in the United Kingdom is extremely difficult. The Courts, in the past have been very reluctant to enforce orders, the remedy being to imprison mothers. They are becoming more robust but the situation is far from perfect.
It is important, therefore that when there are problems, legal advice is sought about the options open. Early advice will allow you to understand your options and act in an appropriate way so as not to unsettle what could be a very delicate situation.
Retiring and Living Abroad.
By: Elliott Matthews, WPML SPanish Property. http://www.wpml.co.uk/
The decision to live abroad, whether in Spain or any other country, is an important one, especially for older people.
Many factors have to be considered: will you be able to settle in a different country and culture? Will the climate suit you? Do you need healthcare close by? Will you be homesick? Will you miss your loved ones?
These are questions which everyone considering a move abroad should carefully consider and discuss with their family.
However, once these discussions have taken place and the decision is made, the actual process of finding a home and settling in a new country usually proves to be very straightforward.
Let us focus on Southern Spain, though much of what follows is also relevant for other popular destinations for UK retirees including Portugal, France and other EU member countries.
Living in Spain is relatively trouble-free.
Of course, first you have to find your home in the sun and there is much information and advice on this elsewhere on this website. So let’s assume you have found your property, contacted your Spanish solicitor who is handling your purchase for you, what happens next?
During the buying process, you will discover that there are some other actions you need to take.
First, you have to organise your finances, both for the purchase and for your ongoing income when you are in Spain.
As far as the property purchase is concerned, you need to remember that it will be made in Euros, not pounds. You will need to arrange that your purchase money is available in Euros.
Of course, your high street bank can help here but you should also consider using a specialist currency exchange company. These companies deal day by day, minute by minute in the world’s currencies and are useful because they can often obtain an exchange rate better than high street banks offer, they can arrange secure electronic transfer of your funds when required and can also “buy forward” for you if it is beneficial to do so.
What this means is this: the Euro/Sterling rate changes all the time. If the company advises that the rate is becoming less favourable to you, it can buy the currency for you at the prevailing rate even if the funds are not required for some time. This can save a considerable amount if the exchange rate is not in your favour.
This may not be necessary but the specialist company can advise. Their fees are very modest and they will usually save you a lot more than you pay them.
As both countries are members of the EU, there are reciprocal arrangements between the UK and Spain whereby state pensions can be paid directly into your Spanish bank account. This can be arranged through the Pension Agency in Newcastle-upon-Tyne before you leave the UK.
Similarly, people should arrange with their pension provider for their private pensions to be paid into the Spanish bank account. Advice should also be sought with regard to investment income.
Setting up a Spanish bank account is obligatory and is needed both for receipt of funds from the UK and for payment of such matters as utilities (electricity, water, telephone etc). Help in opening a Spanish bank account will always be given by WPML or its associates.
To open the account you will need to acquire a fiscal number (similar to our National Insurance number). This is a simple matter at a local Spanish police station and again WPML will assist.
The fiscal number will also allow you to register at a local Spanish NHS clinic for medical services which are excellent and free to UK citizens above retirement age. Private healthcare is also freely available in Spain either with Spanish companies or with companies such as BUPA Spain.
Of course, having acquired your Spanish home, you will need to furnish it. Many people bring their furniture from the UK and there are many removal companies which will transport your furniture to your Spanish home.
However, others prefer to buy new furniture, particularly if they are retaining a home in the UK. A wide range of furniture packages are available and WPML will help and advise.
Retirement living in Spain can be a relaxed and enjoyable affair but there are some things worth remembering.
Despite newspaper headlines, crime in Spain is comparatively low but it does happen and you should take normal precautions, particularly after dark.
Obviously living in a retirement community drastically reduces – even eliminates - the chances of being a crime victim in your own home but you do have to venture out and this is when you need to be careful.
Remember, too, that Spain is a hot country for part of the year (that’s why you are going there). But you can get too much sun.
If you are to live in Spain all year round then pay particular attention to how much sun your apartment or villa will get in summer. Blazing summer sun could mean that for much of the day your balcony and your home may be too hot and you may need to have the air conditioning on during daylight hours. This will add to your electricity bill.
If you will mostly be a winter resident then this does not apply and you will seek maximum sunshine on your balcony or terrace.
So positioning is important. It is a natural thing for British people to always seek a south facing property. But be careful, this may not be the best option for you.
The cost of living is much lower in Spain which means your pension will go much further. Fresh fruit and vegetables are plentiful all year and eating out is also much cheaper than the UK.
But do remember that the Spanish take things much easier than North Europeans and enjoy an afternoon siesta.
This means they eat much later than the British – often not until 9pm or 10 pm – stay up much later and take their children with them to restaurants, cafes and bars. It’s easy to wonder why these kids are not in bed. Remember they have probably been asleep all afternoon.
One final tip: do try to learn a little of the language. If you try to speak Spanish, the locals will usually respond with a smile. Even if you make a hash of it.
***Click here to start a discussion on any of these articles***
Over 50 And Changing Careers? You’d Better Have a Plan
By: Kent Johnson
Like it or not, if you’re over 50 and changing careers, you’re going to face some challenges that younger workers aren’t accustomed to. There’s an unspoken bias out there against older workers – at least in many companies - and unless you plan ahead and are prepared to meet that bias head on, you could be in for a long and frustrating job search.
For many employers, “older” workers mean trouble. The perception is that workers over 50 will have more health problems, will miss more work days, will be more forgetful and make more mistakes on the job, and will cost more to insure. There’s also the belief that an employer will have to pay an older worker more, and that they’ll get less for their investment when the worker retires or moves on.
And perhaps the worst bias that older job seekers have to face is the idea that they’re “dinosaurs,” or some kind of museum relic that’s out of touch with the needs of modern business. And what’s surprising is that many of the employers who feel this way are over 50 themselves!
Now an employer isn’t going to come out and tell you that you’re too old for the job – that kind of discrimination is illegal, after all. You’re more likely to hear something like “Your overqualified for the position,” or “We’re looking for an entry-level worker to fill this post.”
And this comes at a time when people are living longer, more productive lives than ever before. A man or woman in good health today can expect to live to be 76 years old. And with the elimination of pension plans in most corporations, and the fall back of the stock market in recent years, many employees will have to work well beyond the traditional retirement age of 65.
So what are older job seekers supposed to do? Well first off, you need to acknowledge the challenge but don’t let it discourage you. Many companies are hiring workers over 50, and some of them actually prefer “mature” employees because of their experience and dependability. So you can still find a job, but it will probably a little longer than you were expecting.
And many older workers are skipping the job search all together in favor of starting their own businesses or moving into freelancing opportunities. Some are turning long-time hobbies into full-time businesses. In fact, a lot of these folks see a career change late in life as an opportunity to explore their passions and do things they’ve always wanted to do.
No matter which path you choose to take, you’ll need to sit down and formulate a plan of action. If you decide that you want to seek a new job instead of starting your own business, here are some tips to help you get started:
- Seek out companies that are actively hiring older workers. One good place to start is on the AARP website -- www.AARP.org --which has links to companies who are seeking workers over 50.
- Look for openings at smaller companies. Smaller firms tend to be more open to hiring older workers, and your experience may be more valuable here than in a larger corporation.
- Network. This is just as important for older job- seekers as it is for younger ones. Spread the word that you’re looking to change jobs or careers. Tell family and friends. And search on the Internet for companies in your area that look promising.
- Work your resume to your advantage. If you have college degrees, list them, but don’t give the date when they were awarded. You only need to go back 15 or 20 years when listing past jobs, and it’s best to only include experience that pertains to the job you’re seeking.
- Be positive during your interview. Highlight your experience and positive attributes. Be sure to tell the interviewer about yo
|
