Aussie's rented rooms to boarders 100 years ago but would it work now?
A joint research study is looking at the viability of home owners renting a spare bedroom to people at risk of homelessness, though some say it opens the door for elder abuse.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare are surveying people nationwide to see if intergenerational share housing could be considered a safe and beneficial practice.
Dr Anna McKinley, from the university's School of Law and Society, told The Senior the survey aims to give insight to combat Australia's housing affordability crisis, with researchers hoping present recommendations to policy-makers.
Read more from The Senior:
"There's lots of people in the community with spare bedrooms that could help minimise the housing crisis if some of these rooms were utilised as share opportunities," Dr McKinley said.
"Is that an option? Is that a possibility? What would that mean? What would people want before they would be able to do that?"
By finding out directly from homeowners, it is hoped specific requirements will be revealed and discussed, potentially covering topics like safety, legal implications and social impacts.
Dr McKinley said there were many people facing housing insecurity "for no fault of their own" and could benefit from a rent-a-room scheme - but the homeowner could also have a positive experience.
"It's the people who own a house but are socially poor, or who are cash poor, who could benefit from having a housemate," she said.
"And one group of people is the elderly, who are starting to age, but are not at that point yet of needing help.
"But to have somebody living with them when they were reaching that stage would be really beneficial."
The report would provide a framework on how Anglicare, Southern Queensland, could set up a support service. They then hope to run those support services as a pilot in the next couple of years.
Far from being a new concept, Dr McKinley said Australians have rented rooms before.
"It's previously worked. If we go back to the 30s, 40s, 50s - last time there was a major housing issue, people did rent out spare rooms, families had a boarder," she said.
Dr McKinley admitted that "any system is open to abuse" and the project was keen to see how the risks can be minimised.
Housing for the Aged Action Group's (HAAG) new report has shown a clear link between housing and elder abuse.
The report looks at older Australians suspected to be victims of abuse who were experiencing housing issues between 2020-2024 and who approached the group for help.
The findings revealed elder abuse happened in close family relationships - but also in shared living arrangements. The report stated that "secure and stable housing" is a "critical pathway out of abuse".
HAAG's Executive Officer, Fiona York, said the report's "deep dive" reveal many older Australians are living with people who are harming them - but in many cases they had no choice but to stay in the situation.
"Rising costs and limited availability of affordable housing leaves many people trapped in cycles of abuse," Ms York said.
"Integrating housing support within the broader context of elder abuse and family violence will also be critical to improving outcomes for older people facing abuse and mistreatment."
Worryingly, the report also found "older Australians of any age" were at risk of abuse and were likely to be living with the people causing them harm.
A lack of knowledge on what constitutes elder abuse among victims was uncovered adding another challenge for older Australians to face - recognising when they were in harms way.
It follows comments from a Queensland University of Technology (QUT) economist proposed in April 2025 that homeowners should be incentivised to rent their spare room to a homeless person, as the housing issue is not due to ease until "2029".
Dr Lyndall Bryant, from the QUT Centre for Justice and School of Economics and Finance said there were 13 million unused bedrooms in existing housing stock in Australia.
"Millions of empty bedrooms exist and yet many older homeowners live in poverty rather than risk losing their pension or paying taxes by renting out a spare bedroom", she previously told The Senior.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare survey can be found on this link.
Share your thoughts in the comments below, or send a Letter to the Editor by CLICKING HERE.
A joint research study is looking at the viability of home owners renting a spare bedroom to people at risk of homelessness, though some say it opens the door for elder abuse.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare are surveying people nationwide to see if intergenerational share housing could be considered a safe and beneficial practice.
Dr Anna McKinley, from the university's School of Law and Society, told The Senior the survey aims to give insight to combat Australia's housing affordability crisis, with researchers hoping present recommendations to policy-makers.
Read more from The Senior:
"There's lots of people in the community with spare bedrooms that could help minimise the housing crisis if some of these rooms were utilised as share opportunities," Dr McKinley said.
"Is that an option? Is that a possibility? What would that mean? What would people want before they would be able to do that?"
By finding out directly from homeowners, it is hoped specific requirements will be revealed and discussed, potentially covering topics like safety, legal implications and social impacts.
Dr McKinley said there were many people facing housing insecurity "for no fault of their own" and could benefit from a rent-a-room scheme - but the homeowner could also have a positive experience.
"It's the people who own a house but are socially poor, or who are cash poor, who could benefit from having a housemate," she said.
"And one group of people is the elderly, who are starting to age, but are not at that point yet of needing help.
"But to have somebody living with them when they were reaching that stage would be really beneficial."
The report would provide a framework on how Anglicare, Southern Queensland, could set up a support service. They then hope to run those support services as a pilot in the next couple of years.
Far from being a new concept, Dr McKinley said Australians have rented rooms before.
"It's previously worked. If we go back to the 30s, 40s, 50s - last time there was a major housing issue, people did rent out spare rooms, families had a boarder," she said.
Dr McKinley admitted that "any system is open to abuse" and the project was keen to see how the risks can be minimised.
Housing for the Aged Action Group's (HAAG) new report has shown a clear link between housing and elder abuse.
The report looks at older Australians suspected to be victims of abuse who were experiencing housing issues between 2020-2024 and who approached the group for help.
The findings revealed elder abuse happened in close family relationships - but also in shared living arrangements. The report stated that "secure and stable housing" is a "critical pathway out of abuse".
HAAG's Executive Officer, Fiona York, said the report's "deep dive" reveal many older Australians are living with people who are harming them - but in many cases they had no choice but to stay in the situation.
"Rising costs and limited availability of affordable housing leaves many people trapped in cycles of abuse," Ms York said.
"Integrating housing support within the broader context of elder abuse and family violence will also be critical to improving outcomes for older people facing abuse and mistreatment."
Worryingly, the report also found "older Australians of any age" were at risk of abuse and were likely to be living with the people causing them harm.
A lack of knowledge on what constitutes elder abuse among victims was uncovered adding another challenge for older Australians to face - recognising when they were in harms way.
It follows comments from a Queensland University of Technology (QUT) economist proposed in April 2025 that homeowners should be incentivised to rent their spare room to a homeless person, as the housing issue is not due to ease until "2029".
Dr Lyndall Bryant, from the QUT Centre for Justice and School of Economics and Finance said there were 13 million unused bedrooms in existing housing stock in Australia.
"Millions of empty bedrooms exist and yet many older homeowners live in poverty rather than risk losing their pension or paying taxes by renting out a spare bedroom", she previously told The Senior.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare survey can be found on this link.
Share your thoughts in the comments below, or send a Letter to the Editor by CLICKING HERE.
A joint research study is looking at the viability of home owners renting a spare bedroom to people at risk of homelessness, though some say it opens the door for elder abuse.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare are surveying people nationwide to see if intergenerational share housing could be considered a safe and beneficial practice.
Dr Anna McKinley, from the university's School of Law and Society, told The Senior the survey aims to give insight to combat Australia's housing affordability crisis, with researchers hoping present recommendations to policy-makers.
Read more from The Senior:
"There's lots of people in the community with spare bedrooms that could help minimise the housing crisis if some of these rooms were utilised as share opportunities," Dr McKinley said.
"Is that an option? Is that a possibility? What would that mean? What would people want before they would be able to do that?"
By finding out directly from homeowners, it is hoped specific requirements will be revealed and discussed, potentially covering topics like safety, legal implications and social impacts.
Dr McKinley said there were many people facing housing insecurity "for no fault of their own" and could benefit from a rent-a-room scheme - but the homeowner could also have a positive experience.
"It's the people who own a house but are socially poor, or who are cash poor, who could benefit from having a housemate," she said.
"And one group of people is the elderly, who are starting to age, but are not at that point yet of needing help.
"But to have somebody living with them when they were reaching that stage would be really beneficial."
The report would provide a framework on how Anglicare, Southern Queensland, could set up a support service. They then hope to run those support services as a pilot in the next couple of years.
Far from being a new concept, Dr McKinley said Australians have rented rooms before.
"It's previously worked. If we go back to the 30s, 40s, 50s - last time there was a major housing issue, people did rent out spare rooms, families had a boarder," she said.
Dr McKinley admitted that "any system is open to abuse" and the project was keen to see how the risks can be minimised.
Housing for the Aged Action Group's (HAAG) new report has shown a clear link between housing and elder abuse.
The report looks at older Australians suspected to be victims of abuse who were experiencing housing issues between 2020-2024 and who approached the group for help.
The findings revealed elder abuse happened in close family relationships - but also in shared living arrangements. The report stated that "secure and stable housing" is a "critical pathway out of abuse".
HAAG's Executive Officer, Fiona York, said the report's "deep dive" reveal many older Australians are living with people who are harming them - but in many cases they had no choice but to stay in the situation.
"Rising costs and limited availability of affordable housing leaves many people trapped in cycles of abuse," Ms York said.
"Integrating housing support within the broader context of elder abuse and family violence will also be critical to improving outcomes for older people facing abuse and mistreatment."
Worryingly, the report also found "older Australians of any age" were at risk of abuse and were likely to be living with the people causing them harm.
A lack of knowledge on what constitutes elder abuse among victims was uncovered adding another challenge for older Australians to face - recognising when they were in harms way.
It follows comments from a Queensland University of Technology (QUT) economist proposed in April 2025 that homeowners should be incentivised to rent their spare room to a homeless person, as the housing issue is not due to ease until "2029".
Dr Lyndall Bryant, from the QUT Centre for Justice and School of Economics and Finance said there were 13 million unused bedrooms in existing housing stock in Australia.
"Millions of empty bedrooms exist and yet many older homeowners live in poverty rather than risk losing their pension or paying taxes by renting out a spare bedroom", she previously told The Senior.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare survey can be found on this link.
Share your thoughts in the comments below, or send a Letter to the Editor by CLICKING HERE.
A joint research study is looking at the viability of home owners renting a spare bedroom to people at risk of homelessness, though some say it opens the door for elder abuse.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare are surveying people nationwide to see if intergenerational share housing could be considered a safe and beneficial practice.
Dr Anna McKinley, from the university's School of Law and Society, told The Senior the survey aims to give insight to combat Australia's housing affordability crisis, with researchers hoping present recommendations to policy-makers.
Read more from The Senior:
"There's lots of people in the community with spare bedrooms that could help minimise the housing crisis if some of these rooms were utilised as share opportunities," Dr McKinley said.
"Is that an option? Is that a possibility? What would that mean? What would people want before they would be able to do that?"
By finding out directly from homeowners, it is hoped specific requirements will be revealed and discussed, potentially covering topics like safety, legal implications and social impacts.
Dr McKinley said there were many people facing housing insecurity "for no fault of their own" and could benefit from a rent-a-room scheme - but the homeowner could also have a positive experience.
"It's the people who own a house but are socially poor, or who are cash poor, who could benefit from having a housemate," she said.
"And one group of people is the elderly, who are starting to age, but are not at that point yet of needing help.
"But to have somebody living with them when they were reaching that stage would be really beneficial."
The report would provide a framework on how Anglicare, Southern Queensland, could set up a support service. They then hope to run those support services as a pilot in the next couple of years.
Far from being a new concept, Dr McKinley said Australians have rented rooms before.
"It's previously worked. If we go back to the 30s, 40s, 50s - last time there was a major housing issue, people did rent out spare rooms, families had a boarder," she said.
Dr McKinley admitted that "any system is open to abuse" and the project was keen to see how the risks can be minimised.
Housing for the Aged Action Group's (HAAG) new report has shown a clear link between housing and elder abuse.
The report looks at older Australians suspected to be victims of abuse who were experiencing housing issues between 2020-2024 and who approached the group for help.
The findings revealed elder abuse happened in close family relationships - but also in shared living arrangements. The report stated that "secure and stable housing" is a "critical pathway out of abuse".
HAAG's Executive Officer, Fiona York, said the report's "deep dive" reveal many older Australians are living with people who are harming them - but in many cases they had no choice but to stay in the situation.
"Rising costs and limited availability of affordable housing leaves many people trapped in cycles of abuse," Ms York said.
"Integrating housing support within the broader context of elder abuse and family violence will also be critical to improving outcomes for older people facing abuse and mistreatment."
Worryingly, the report also found "older Australians of any age" were at risk of abuse and were likely to be living with the people causing them harm.
A lack of knowledge on what constitutes elder abuse among victims was uncovered adding another challenge for older Australians to face - recognising when they were in harms way.
It follows comments from a Queensland University of Technology (QUT) economist proposed in April 2025 that homeowners should be incentivised to rent their spare room to a homeless person, as the housing issue is not due to ease until "2029".
Dr Lyndall Bryant, from the QUT Centre for Justice and School of Economics and Finance said there were 13 million unused bedrooms in existing housing stock in Australia.
"Millions of empty bedrooms exist and yet many older homeowners live in poverty rather than risk losing their pension or paying taxes by renting out a spare bedroom", she previously told The Senior.
The University of Sunshine Coast and Anglicare survey can be found on this link.
Share your thoughts in the comments below, or send a Letter to the Editor by CLICKING HERE.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
16 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Gen Z urged to not neglect dental care once they leave home
As house prices and cost-of-living pressures delay young Australians from moving out, a growing number of parents are left with the burden of covering the essentials - including dental care - for much longer than expected. Parents need to keep dental care on the radar even after their children turn 18, especially when those children are still living at home. As a dentist, I see far too many young adults fall through the cracks once they leave high school. Regular dental visits, once booked by parents, paid for, and prioritised, suddenly disappear from the calendar. At a time when young people are navigating new independence, study stress, and tighter budgets, oral health often becomes an afterthought. But it shouldn't be. Dental care must be treated like any other essential, right alongside GP check-ups, mental health support, and nutrition. MORE OPINION: How different would Australians feel if the system was behind them? The consequences of neglect are often invisible at first, but they build slowly - decay, gum disease, jaw issues, and costly emergencies that could have been prevented with a simple clean and check-up. Before kids move out, parents should make sure that dental health is part of the transition plan. Book that last appointment. Start the conversation. Help them understand that just because their teeth look fine doesn't mean they are fine. Of course, the transition to adulthood doesn't come with perfect hygiene habits but you often see adults in their forties present with problems that could've been prevented in their teens. A University of Melbourne study published in March revealed once people reach the age of 15 to 20, a significant drop in dental visits occurred. Researchers tracked more than 11,000 people over several years and found many patients didn't return once they became independent, and often for years. The pattern seen here in Australia isn't isolated. A previous study from New Zealand reported a similar drop in regular dental visits among young working-age adults. These findings are consistent with patterns commonly seen in this age group, shaped by time pressures, financial stress and the false belief that you only need a dentist when something hurts. There's a belief that healthy-looking teeth don't need attention, which means too many people are missing the potential early signs of decay and gum disease. Changes in daily routines - moving out of the family home, taking on study and full-time work often marks the beginning of the decline in dental care. Once children are out on their own, and in charge of their own health insurance, the health safety net can disappear. If you're a young adult reading this, remember, your health isn't on hold just because life got busier. By the time pain shows up, treatment can be complex and more expensive. The solution? Reconnecting oral health with the broader wellness narrative Gen Z already embraces. We talk a lot about mental fitness, skin care, and gut health - teeth need to be part of that conversation. As house prices and cost-of-living pressures delay young Australians from moving out, a growing number of parents are left with the burden of covering the essentials - including dental care - for much longer than expected. Parents need to keep dental care on the radar even after their children turn 18, especially when those children are still living at home. As a dentist, I see far too many young adults fall through the cracks once they leave high school. Regular dental visits, once booked by parents, paid for, and prioritised, suddenly disappear from the calendar. At a time when young people are navigating new independence, study stress, and tighter budgets, oral health often becomes an afterthought. But it shouldn't be. Dental care must be treated like any other essential, right alongside GP check-ups, mental health support, and nutrition. MORE OPINION: How different would Australians feel if the system was behind them? The consequences of neglect are often invisible at first, but they build slowly - decay, gum disease, jaw issues, and costly emergencies that could have been prevented with a simple clean and check-up. Before kids move out, parents should make sure that dental health is part of the transition plan. Book that last appointment. Start the conversation. Help them understand that just because their teeth look fine doesn't mean they are fine. Of course, the transition to adulthood doesn't come with perfect hygiene habits but you often see adults in their forties present with problems that could've been prevented in their teens. A University of Melbourne study published in March revealed once people reach the age of 15 to 20, a significant drop in dental visits occurred. Researchers tracked more than 11,000 people over several years and found many patients didn't return once they became independent, and often for years. The pattern seen here in Australia isn't isolated. A previous study from New Zealand reported a similar drop in regular dental visits among young working-age adults. These findings are consistent with patterns commonly seen in this age group, shaped by time pressures, financial stress and the false belief that you only need a dentist when something hurts. There's a belief that healthy-looking teeth don't need attention, which means too many people are missing the potential early signs of decay and gum disease. Changes in daily routines - moving out of the family home, taking on study and full-time work often marks the beginning of the decline in dental care. Once children are out on their own, and in charge of their own health insurance, the health safety net can disappear. If you're a young adult reading this, remember, your health isn't on hold just because life got busier. By the time pain shows up, treatment can be complex and more expensive. The solution? Reconnecting oral health with the broader wellness narrative Gen Z already embraces. We talk a lot about mental fitness, skin care, and gut health - teeth need to be part of that conversation. As house prices and cost-of-living pressures delay young Australians from moving out, a growing number of parents are left with the burden of covering the essentials - including dental care - for much longer than expected. Parents need to keep dental care on the radar even after their children turn 18, especially when those children are still living at home. As a dentist, I see far too many young adults fall through the cracks once they leave high school. Regular dental visits, once booked by parents, paid for, and prioritised, suddenly disappear from the calendar. At a time when young people are navigating new independence, study stress, and tighter budgets, oral health often becomes an afterthought. But it shouldn't be. Dental care must be treated like any other essential, right alongside GP check-ups, mental health support, and nutrition. MORE OPINION: How different would Australians feel if the system was behind them? The consequences of neglect are often invisible at first, but they build slowly - decay, gum disease, jaw issues, and costly emergencies that could have been prevented with a simple clean and check-up. Before kids move out, parents should make sure that dental health is part of the transition plan. Book that last appointment. Start the conversation. Help them understand that just because their teeth look fine doesn't mean they are fine. Of course, the transition to adulthood doesn't come with perfect hygiene habits but you often see adults in their forties present with problems that could've been prevented in their teens. A University of Melbourne study published in March revealed once people reach the age of 15 to 20, a significant drop in dental visits occurred. Researchers tracked more than 11,000 people over several years and found many patients didn't return once they became independent, and often for years. The pattern seen here in Australia isn't isolated. A previous study from New Zealand reported a similar drop in regular dental visits among young working-age adults. These findings are consistent with patterns commonly seen in this age group, shaped by time pressures, financial stress and the false belief that you only need a dentist when something hurts. There's a belief that healthy-looking teeth don't need attention, which means too many people are missing the potential early signs of decay and gum disease. Changes in daily routines - moving out of the family home, taking on study and full-time work often marks the beginning of the decline in dental care. Once children are out on their own, and in charge of their own health insurance, the health safety net can disappear. If you're a young adult reading this, remember, your health isn't on hold just because life got busier. By the time pain shows up, treatment can be complex and more expensive. The solution? Reconnecting oral health with the broader wellness narrative Gen Z already embraces. We talk a lot about mental fitness, skin care, and gut health - teeth need to be part of that conversation. As house prices and cost-of-living pressures delay young Australians from moving out, a growing number of parents are left with the burden of covering the essentials - including dental care - for much longer than expected. Parents need to keep dental care on the radar even after their children turn 18, especially when those children are still living at home. As a dentist, I see far too many young adults fall through the cracks once they leave high school. Regular dental visits, once booked by parents, paid for, and prioritised, suddenly disappear from the calendar. At a time when young people are navigating new independence, study stress, and tighter budgets, oral health often becomes an afterthought. But it shouldn't be. Dental care must be treated like any other essential, right alongside GP check-ups, mental health support, and nutrition. MORE OPINION: How different would Australians feel if the system was behind them? The consequences of neglect are often invisible at first, but they build slowly - decay, gum disease, jaw issues, and costly emergencies that could have been prevented with a simple clean and check-up. Before kids move out, parents should make sure that dental health is part of the transition plan. Book that last appointment. Start the conversation. Help them understand that just because their teeth look fine doesn't mean they are fine. Of course, the transition to adulthood doesn't come with perfect hygiene habits but you often see adults in their forties present with problems that could've been prevented in their teens. A University of Melbourne study published in March revealed once people reach the age of 15 to 20, a significant drop in dental visits occurred. Researchers tracked more than 11,000 people over several years and found many patients didn't return once they became independent, and often for years. The pattern seen here in Australia isn't isolated. A previous study from New Zealand reported a similar drop in regular dental visits among young working-age adults. These findings are consistent with patterns commonly seen in this age group, shaped by time pressures, financial stress and the false belief that you only need a dentist when something hurts. There's a belief that healthy-looking teeth don't need attention, which means too many people are missing the potential early signs of decay and gum disease. Changes in daily routines - moving out of the family home, taking on study and full-time work often marks the beginning of the decline in dental care. Once children are out on their own, and in charge of their own health insurance, the health safety net can disappear. If you're a young adult reading this, remember, your health isn't on hold just because life got busier. By the time pain shows up, treatment can be complex and more expensive. The solution? Reconnecting oral health with the broader wellness narrative Gen Z already embraces. We talk a lot about mental fitness, skin care, and gut health - teeth need to be part of that conversation.
The Advertiser
20 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Too many of us are not as lucky as me. And that's extremely risky
My GP bulk bills me. My status has been grandmothered. It's a bloody miracle and I'm grateful. I'd personally like to thank former prime minister Gough Whitlam. Medibank, the forerunner to Medicare, was his brainchild. It began in July 1975. But after the Whitlam government was dismissed, the Fraser government buggered it up. Levies on incomes unless you were privately insured. Nine years later, former prime minister Bob Hawke (the National Museum of Australia calls him Robert. Way too formal) established Medicare. He said: "With this historic initiative, all Australians now have a new, simpler and fairer health insurance system." Well, kind of. Stephen Duckett, the absolute full-bottle on Medicare over decades, tells me that bulk-billing is crucial. We had a peak five years ago and it's been downhill from there. "There are good grounds not to have out-of-pocket payments for GPs. And right now, it's a lottery," he says. Duckett's right. When you front up at your GP, you don't automatically know whether you will be in the lucky group to be bulk billed. "You might be asking when you front up," he says. But it's the uncertainty, the possible embarrassment of signing up to pay money you don't have. He commends any government's attempt to get practices to be 100 per cent bulk-billing because then patients get 100 per cent certainty. And getting that 100 per cent certainty about your healthcare matters. Too many of us are not that lucky. News this week that Canberrans are now paying out an average of just over $62 in out-of-pocket fees to see their GPs is unnerving. If you don't have the sixty-odd bucks, you don't go. And that's extremely risky. British research shows us (and Australian research backs it up) that continuity of care is associated with higher life expectancy. If you don't get that care, you die. Well, we all die - but without regular contact with a regular GP, you have a shorter life expectancy. Good access, lower cost, the necessary number of GPs per head of population - these are all associated with longer lives. The cost of visiting the GP is putting many of us off from getting essential health care. Late last year, the ABS reported a rise in the number of people who reported not visiting the GP because of cost-of-living pressures. In the financial year ending June 22, 3.5 per cent of people either put off or didn't see a GP when they needed to because of the cost. Three years later, that number had risen to 8.8 per cent. In February, the gentle warming-up period of the election before everyone got stroppy and out of control, Labor pledged $8.5 billion for Medicare, so all of us would have access to bulk billing by 2030. The plan, according to Labor, would produce patient savings of up to $859 million a year by 2030. It's Medicare's 41st birthday and this investment, if the bulk billing strategy works, is a huge birthday gift to those of us who benefit from universal health care. That is, all of us. In 1984, the annual GP bulk-billing rate was 51 per cent. It hit a 40-year high of 94 per cent in April 2020, under a Coalition government. Of course, some of that was due to special COVID items. Don't want to go back there if COVID is what it takes. But what can we do to make sure our GPs are protected too? They need to be properly remunerated for what is often grinding work with long hours. Good thing I never ended up as a GP. Imagine having to be patient with patients for hours at a time. Having to be kind to the miserable. Just doing that with your own kids is quite enough, let alone with anyone else's. Now we also have to get to work on specialist fees. I've written elsewhere about the insanity of those fees. This week, the Grattan Institute revealed more than one in five Australians who saw a specialist in 2023 was charged an extreme fee at least once. It also said one in 10 Australians who saw a psychiatrist ended up paying $400 in out-of-pocket costs for their initial consultation alone. It also had a list of recommendations. My vengeful self enjoyed some of those, such as stripping Medicare rebates from specialists charging excessive fees, more than others. And I love the idea of the Medical Cost Finder website, designed so people can compare out-of-pocket fees doctors charge for specialist procedures. But last year it was revealed that five years after the site launched, just 20 doctors out of the 36,000 specialists nationwide provided their fees for listing. MORE JENNA PRICE: There are some useful bits, though. For example, your first specialist appointment will see you pay just under $200, and on average, $117 out of pocket. The rest is paid by Medicare. That's across the country. The most expensive is the ACT where the typical specialist fee is $285. Patients will find themselves two hundred bucks out of pocket. I am not entirely sure how the government will sort this out but we urgently need an overhaul of what we pay for our health. Jim Chalmers is talking tax reform and maybe we need some kind of a sliding scale for people whose super balances are above $3 million, more than he's proposing right now. Universities have a part to play too. Maybe they should let more students into medical schools. Maybe free tuition but then bond students to rural and regional areas for 10 years? Are specialist colleges acting in the best interests of Australians? Or in their own financial best interest? I dunno. But whatever we are doing isn't working. May the government's plans work - and once GPs are sorted, let's start working on the rest of the health industry. My GP bulk bills me. My status has been grandmothered. It's a bloody miracle and I'm grateful. I'd personally like to thank former prime minister Gough Whitlam. Medibank, the forerunner to Medicare, was his brainchild. It began in July 1975. But after the Whitlam government was dismissed, the Fraser government buggered it up. Levies on incomes unless you were privately insured. Nine years later, former prime minister Bob Hawke (the National Museum of Australia calls him Robert. Way too formal) established Medicare. He said: "With this historic initiative, all Australians now have a new, simpler and fairer health insurance system." Well, kind of. Stephen Duckett, the absolute full-bottle on Medicare over decades, tells me that bulk-billing is crucial. We had a peak five years ago and it's been downhill from there. "There are good grounds not to have out-of-pocket payments for GPs. And right now, it's a lottery," he says. Duckett's right. When you front up at your GP, you don't automatically know whether you will be in the lucky group to be bulk billed. "You might be asking when you front up," he says. But it's the uncertainty, the possible embarrassment of signing up to pay money you don't have. He commends any government's attempt to get practices to be 100 per cent bulk-billing because then patients get 100 per cent certainty. And getting that 100 per cent certainty about your healthcare matters. Too many of us are not that lucky. News this week that Canberrans are now paying out an average of just over $62 in out-of-pocket fees to see their GPs is unnerving. If you don't have the sixty-odd bucks, you don't go. And that's extremely risky. British research shows us (and Australian research backs it up) that continuity of care is associated with higher life expectancy. If you don't get that care, you die. Well, we all die - but without regular contact with a regular GP, you have a shorter life expectancy. Good access, lower cost, the necessary number of GPs per head of population - these are all associated with longer lives. The cost of visiting the GP is putting many of us off from getting essential health care. Late last year, the ABS reported a rise in the number of people who reported not visiting the GP because of cost-of-living pressures. In the financial year ending June 22, 3.5 per cent of people either put off or didn't see a GP when they needed to because of the cost. Three years later, that number had risen to 8.8 per cent. In February, the gentle warming-up period of the election before everyone got stroppy and out of control, Labor pledged $8.5 billion for Medicare, so all of us would have access to bulk billing by 2030. The plan, according to Labor, would produce patient savings of up to $859 million a year by 2030. It's Medicare's 41st birthday and this investment, if the bulk billing strategy works, is a huge birthday gift to those of us who benefit from universal health care. That is, all of us. In 1984, the annual GP bulk-billing rate was 51 per cent. It hit a 40-year high of 94 per cent in April 2020, under a Coalition government. Of course, some of that was due to special COVID items. Don't want to go back there if COVID is what it takes. But what can we do to make sure our GPs are protected too? They need to be properly remunerated for what is often grinding work with long hours. Good thing I never ended up as a GP. Imagine having to be patient with patients for hours at a time. Having to be kind to the miserable. Just doing that with your own kids is quite enough, let alone with anyone else's. Now we also have to get to work on specialist fees. I've written elsewhere about the insanity of those fees. This week, the Grattan Institute revealed more than one in five Australians who saw a specialist in 2023 was charged an extreme fee at least once. It also said one in 10 Australians who saw a psychiatrist ended up paying $400 in out-of-pocket costs for their initial consultation alone. It also had a list of recommendations. My vengeful self enjoyed some of those, such as stripping Medicare rebates from specialists charging excessive fees, more than others. And I love the idea of the Medical Cost Finder website, designed so people can compare out-of-pocket fees doctors charge for specialist procedures. But last year it was revealed that five years after the site launched, just 20 doctors out of the 36,000 specialists nationwide provided their fees for listing. MORE JENNA PRICE: There are some useful bits, though. For example, your first specialist appointment will see you pay just under $200, and on average, $117 out of pocket. The rest is paid by Medicare. That's across the country. The most expensive is the ACT where the typical specialist fee is $285. Patients will find themselves two hundred bucks out of pocket. I am not entirely sure how the government will sort this out but we urgently need an overhaul of what we pay for our health. Jim Chalmers is talking tax reform and maybe we need some kind of a sliding scale for people whose super balances are above $3 million, more than he's proposing right now. Universities have a part to play too. Maybe they should let more students into medical schools. Maybe free tuition but then bond students to rural and regional areas for 10 years? Are specialist colleges acting in the best interests of Australians? Or in their own financial best interest? I dunno. But whatever we are doing isn't working. May the government's plans work - and once GPs are sorted, let's start working on the rest of the health industry. My GP bulk bills me. My status has been grandmothered. It's a bloody miracle and I'm grateful. I'd personally like to thank former prime minister Gough Whitlam. Medibank, the forerunner to Medicare, was his brainchild. It began in July 1975. But after the Whitlam government was dismissed, the Fraser government buggered it up. Levies on incomes unless you were privately insured. Nine years later, former prime minister Bob Hawke (the National Museum of Australia calls him Robert. Way too formal) established Medicare. He said: "With this historic initiative, all Australians now have a new, simpler and fairer health insurance system." Well, kind of. Stephen Duckett, the absolute full-bottle on Medicare over decades, tells me that bulk-billing is crucial. We had a peak five years ago and it's been downhill from there. "There are good grounds not to have out-of-pocket payments for GPs. And right now, it's a lottery," he says. Duckett's right. When you front up at your GP, you don't automatically know whether you will be in the lucky group to be bulk billed. "You might be asking when you front up," he says. But it's the uncertainty, the possible embarrassment of signing up to pay money you don't have. He commends any government's attempt to get practices to be 100 per cent bulk-billing because then patients get 100 per cent certainty. And getting that 100 per cent certainty about your healthcare matters. Too many of us are not that lucky. News this week that Canberrans are now paying out an average of just over $62 in out-of-pocket fees to see their GPs is unnerving. If you don't have the sixty-odd bucks, you don't go. And that's extremely risky. British research shows us (and Australian research backs it up) that continuity of care is associated with higher life expectancy. If you don't get that care, you die. Well, we all die - but without regular contact with a regular GP, you have a shorter life expectancy. Good access, lower cost, the necessary number of GPs per head of population - these are all associated with longer lives. The cost of visiting the GP is putting many of us off from getting essential health care. Late last year, the ABS reported a rise in the number of people who reported not visiting the GP because of cost-of-living pressures. In the financial year ending June 22, 3.5 per cent of people either put off or didn't see a GP when they needed to because of the cost. Three years later, that number had risen to 8.8 per cent. In February, the gentle warming-up period of the election before everyone got stroppy and out of control, Labor pledged $8.5 billion for Medicare, so all of us would have access to bulk billing by 2030. The plan, according to Labor, would produce patient savings of up to $859 million a year by 2030. It's Medicare's 41st birthday and this investment, if the bulk billing strategy works, is a huge birthday gift to those of us who benefit from universal health care. That is, all of us. In 1984, the annual GP bulk-billing rate was 51 per cent. It hit a 40-year high of 94 per cent in April 2020, under a Coalition government. Of course, some of that was due to special COVID items. Don't want to go back there if COVID is what it takes. But what can we do to make sure our GPs are protected too? They need to be properly remunerated for what is often grinding work with long hours. Good thing I never ended up as a GP. Imagine having to be patient with patients for hours at a time. Having to be kind to the miserable. Just doing that with your own kids is quite enough, let alone with anyone else's. Now we also have to get to work on specialist fees. I've written elsewhere about the insanity of those fees. This week, the Grattan Institute revealed more than one in five Australians who saw a specialist in 2023 was charged an extreme fee at least once. It also said one in 10 Australians who saw a psychiatrist ended up paying $400 in out-of-pocket costs for their initial consultation alone. It also had a list of recommendations. My vengeful self enjoyed some of those, such as stripping Medicare rebates from specialists charging excessive fees, more than others. And I love the idea of the Medical Cost Finder website, designed so people can compare out-of-pocket fees doctors charge for specialist procedures. But last year it was revealed that five years after the site launched, just 20 doctors out of the 36,000 specialists nationwide provided their fees for listing. MORE JENNA PRICE: There are some useful bits, though. For example, your first specialist appointment will see you pay just under $200, and on average, $117 out of pocket. The rest is paid by Medicare. That's across the country. The most expensive is the ACT where the typical specialist fee is $285. Patients will find themselves two hundred bucks out of pocket. I am not entirely sure how the government will sort this out but we urgently need an overhaul of what we pay for our health. Jim Chalmers is talking tax reform and maybe we need some kind of a sliding scale for people whose super balances are above $3 million, more than he's proposing right now. Universities have a part to play too. Maybe they should let more students into medical schools. Maybe free tuition but then bond students to rural and regional areas for 10 years? Are specialist colleges acting in the best interests of Australians? Or in their own financial best interest? I dunno. But whatever we are doing isn't working. May the government's plans work - and once GPs are sorted, let's start working on the rest of the health industry. My GP bulk bills me. My status has been grandmothered. It's a bloody miracle and I'm grateful. I'd personally like to thank former prime minister Gough Whitlam. Medibank, the forerunner to Medicare, was his brainchild. It began in July 1975. But after the Whitlam government was dismissed, the Fraser government buggered it up. Levies on incomes unless you were privately insured. Nine years later, former prime minister Bob Hawke (the National Museum of Australia calls him Robert. Way too formal) established Medicare. He said: "With this historic initiative, all Australians now have a new, simpler and fairer health insurance system." Well, kind of. Stephen Duckett, the absolute full-bottle on Medicare over decades, tells me that bulk-billing is crucial. We had a peak five years ago and it's been downhill from there. "There are good grounds not to have out-of-pocket payments for GPs. And right now, it's a lottery," he says. Duckett's right. When you front up at your GP, you don't automatically know whether you will be in the lucky group to be bulk billed. "You might be asking when you front up," he says. But it's the uncertainty, the possible embarrassment of signing up to pay money you don't have. He commends any government's attempt to get practices to be 100 per cent bulk-billing because then patients get 100 per cent certainty. And getting that 100 per cent certainty about your healthcare matters. Too many of us are not that lucky. News this week that Canberrans are now paying out an average of just over $62 in out-of-pocket fees to see their GPs is unnerving. If you don't have the sixty-odd bucks, you don't go. And that's extremely risky. British research shows us (and Australian research backs it up) that continuity of care is associated with higher life expectancy. If you don't get that care, you die. Well, we all die - but without regular contact with a regular GP, you have a shorter life expectancy. Good access, lower cost, the necessary number of GPs per head of population - these are all associated with longer lives. The cost of visiting the GP is putting many of us off from getting essential health care. Late last year, the ABS reported a rise in the number of people who reported not visiting the GP because of cost-of-living pressures. In the financial year ending June 22, 3.5 per cent of people either put off or didn't see a GP when they needed to because of the cost. Three years later, that number had risen to 8.8 per cent. In February, the gentle warming-up period of the election before everyone got stroppy and out of control, Labor pledged $8.5 billion for Medicare, so all of us would have access to bulk billing by 2030. The plan, according to Labor, would produce patient savings of up to $859 million a year by 2030. It's Medicare's 41st birthday and this investment, if the bulk billing strategy works, is a huge birthday gift to those of us who benefit from universal health care. That is, all of us. In 1984, the annual GP bulk-billing rate was 51 per cent. It hit a 40-year high of 94 per cent in April 2020, under a Coalition government. Of course, some of that was due to special COVID items. Don't want to go back there if COVID is what it takes. But what can we do to make sure our GPs are protected too? They need to be properly remunerated for what is often grinding work with long hours. Good thing I never ended up as a GP. Imagine having to be patient with patients for hours at a time. Having to be kind to the miserable. Just doing that with your own kids is quite enough, let alone with anyone else's. Now we also have to get to work on specialist fees. I've written elsewhere about the insanity of those fees. This week, the Grattan Institute revealed more than one in five Australians who saw a specialist in 2023 was charged an extreme fee at least once. It also said one in 10 Australians who saw a psychiatrist ended up paying $400 in out-of-pocket costs for their initial consultation alone. It also had a list of recommendations. My vengeful self enjoyed some of those, such as stripping Medicare rebates from specialists charging excessive fees, more than others. And I love the idea of the Medical Cost Finder website, designed so people can compare out-of-pocket fees doctors charge for specialist procedures. But last year it was revealed that five years after the site launched, just 20 doctors out of the 36,000 specialists nationwide provided their fees for listing. MORE JENNA PRICE: There are some useful bits, though. For example, your first specialist appointment will see you pay just under $200, and on average, $117 out of pocket. The rest is paid by Medicare. That's across the country. The most expensive is the ACT where the typical specialist fee is $285. Patients will find themselves two hundred bucks out of pocket. I am not entirely sure how the government will sort this out but we urgently need an overhaul of what we pay for our health. Jim Chalmers is talking tax reform and maybe we need some kind of a sliding scale for people whose super balances are above $3 million, more than he's proposing right now. Universities have a part to play too. Maybe they should let more students into medical schools. Maybe free tuition but then bond students to rural and regional areas for 10 years? Are specialist colleges acting in the best interests of Australians? Or in their own financial best interest? I dunno. But whatever we are doing isn't working. May the government's plans work - and once GPs are sorted, let's start working on the rest of the health industry.
The Age
a day ago
- The Age
‘I thought my life would change': Overcoming an invisible disease to get back into sport
Two years ago, 15-year-old Sienna Warren was diagnosed with severe Crohn's disease. She has also had colitis, or inflammation of the large intestine. The diagnosis has meant months away from school and a slowing down of the active life she led before. 'I still get pretty bad brain fog that interferes with school, and fatigue which interferes with activities I want to do,' Sienna says. 'I love crafts, I love singing, I love dancing, I would love to do drama, but I just can't. And it's hard to do sport in school.' There are two main types of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD): Crohn's disease and colitis. The main symptoms and complications include fatigue, abdominal pain, diarrhoea and vomiting. An estimated 180,000 Australians live with IBD, about 5240 of whom are children and 21,590 are young adults aged 19 to 29. The disease can hinder or prevent people from doing things many of us take for granted, like dating or attending school or work. It can also make it difficult for people, like Sienna, to play sport. According to the latest State of the Nation Report, published by Crohn's & Colitis Australia earlier this year, 21 per cent of adults and 18 per cent of children with IBD had severe problems with, or were unable to participate in, sport. Invisible disease Sienna says IBD is an 'invisible disease', and that more education is needed to help the public better understand its impact. 'We're looking at disabilities in school, but all the disabilities they're looking at are visible disabilities and visible impairments. It's not enough,' she says.
