Some people claim that adult children have a duty to look after their elderly parents and that this should not be left to the state. I largely agree with the first part of this statement, but I think the state must still play a role.
There are strong moral reasons for children to care for their parents. Parents spend years raising their children, providing food, education and emotional support, and it seems fair that children return this care when their parents become frail. In many cultures, such as those of East Asia, this duty is deeply respected. Caring for parents at home also gives older people dignity and emotional comfort, as they remain in familiar surroundings with those who love them. Furthermore, it reduces the burden on public services, allowing governments to spend money elsewhere.
Nevertheless, it would be unrealistic and unfair to leave elderly care entirely to families. Many adults live far from their parents because of work, or have their own children and financial commitments to manage. Looking after a parent with serious illness, such as dementia, can be physically and emotionally exhausting and requires specialised training that most people lack. Some carers are forced to give up their careers, which leads to financial hardship and stress. There are also older people who have no children or who have lost contact with them, and they should not be left without help.
For these reasons, I believe the best system is shared responsibility. Children should offer emotional support and practical help where they can, while the state provides pensions, healthcare and professional care services so that nobody is left alone or overburdened.
In conclusion, adult children have a moral duty towards their parents, but the state must also provide reliable support.