No, you can always go to a quite spot somewhere and die.

................................................................................

no, not everyone can afford that, financial circumstances need to be considered

no because we put enough in to the system through our contributions, so we should get something back

no - some people can get to a very old age with very little health problems. whereas some people unfortunately suffer for most of their life - if this is something that was to be implemented, they should review this on a case by case basis, and reviewing how much to charge each person... however we pay taxes almost our entire lift into supporting our NHS etc so there should be no need to make this payment once we reach a certain age

No I don't agree that a person who has worked hard their entire lfe should have to sell their homes to fund care costs. I think it should be funded by the government its really sad seeing people loose everything to pay for their care.

no they have paid enough throughout their life already. i don't think everyone be able to pay.

no i feel that they have paid their tax therefore we as a society should look after them

the problem with NO/means testing is that people that can afford to pay are wealthier, and will have actually paid more into the system than someone that is 'poore

No I don't think it should be mandatory as it all depends on a person's financial status. I can understand why the government what to bring out the legislation as many of us are living a lot longer and the government are struggling to fund this. But it needs to be looked at from different angles.

If paying £30,000 was mandatory for care in old age we could have a successful health system. Everyone in theory should receive the same level of healthcare because we would pay the same amount.

However, by the age people are required to pay this the majority will already have paid years of taxes.

It's better that you pay for it than me or society/government.