Different families face different life constraints, and therefore make different decisions. Whatever the situation is, the key point is simple: make the best possible decision based on the constraints faced. As long as the option chosen is the best one realistically available to the family, that is already a good outcome.

If a family can afford to do more, then do more. Hopefully, such actions naturally become examples for others. The best-case situation is having three generations within a family. While the middle generation is busy securing resources, the younger generation is already old enough to accompany and support the elder generation.

If a family cannot afford more, then do what you can within your limit. Why listen to public opinion without first considering your own family constraints? One stranger gives one opinion, two strangers give two opinions, ten strangers give ten opinions. Are we really going to follow these different views while ignoring the reality of our own family situation? Is maintaining a good image in public more important than making the best decision based on the options actually available?

Single Child

If the next generation is a single child, then decisions must be made based on real life constraints.

If time is needed to look for resources, and you can afford to hire caregivers or use a nursing centre, then choose that option.

If you have time but cannot afford such services, then do what you can — but make sure you take care of yourself first. If you fall ill, the elderly parents will suffer as well. Survival comes before responsibility, otherwise the responsibility cannot last.

If a person has both time and money but chooses to do nothing, then this reflects a failure in upbringing as well as personal decision-making. In such cases, 50% of the responsibility lies with the previous generation, and 50% lies with the individual. This is not about blaming, but about recognising cause and consequence. Such cases become lessons for society.

Multiple Children

If the next generation consists of multiple children, the same principle applies — act within your life constraints.

Among siblings, there will naturally be differences. Some have more time, some have less. Some have more resources, some have less. Those who can contribute resources should contribute resources. Those who can contribute time should contribute time.

If you cannot contribute time, then do not complain about those who do. Contributing time carries a heavy burden. Contributing money, while important, is relatively easier. Time requires presence, endurance, and long-term commitment.

If all siblings have time but lack financial means, then again, survival comes first. Take care of yourself so that you can continue taking care of the elderly. If you collapse, the burden only becomes heavier for everyone else.

If all siblings have money but lack time, then pool resources to hire caregivers or arrange professional care.

If siblings have both time and money but still choose to do nothing, then once again, responsibility is shared. Part of it lies in how they were raised, and part lies in their own choices. This becomes a lesson not just for the family, but for society.

*
Care is not measured by how it looks to others, but by whether it can be sustained. The best decision is not the one that sounds noble in public, but the one that allows a family to continue without breaking. As long as the decision is made honestly, within real limits, and carried through responsibly, it already has value.