Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh Family What were his parents like? The elder Stewart was an Irish politician and prominent Ulster landowner He was created Baron Londonderry in 1789, And his mother? Stewart's mother, who died in childbirth when he was a year old, was Lady Sarah Frances Seymour-Conway, daughter of Francis Seymour-Conway, Did he have other siblings? By Frances Pratt, Stewart's father had ten children who survived to adulthood, How many passed as children? I don't know. Did he marry? In 1794, Stewart married Amelia (Emily) Hobart a daughter of John Hobart, 2nd Earl of Buckinghamshire, a former British Ambassador to Russia Did he father children with her? By all accounts, the two remained devoted to each other to the end, but they had no children. How long were they together? the two remained devoted to each other to the end, Did he have other family? The couple did, however, care for the young Frederick Stewart, while his father, Stewart's half-brother, Charles, was serving in the army.
How long did they care for him?
How long did Robert Stewart and Amerlia Hobart care for the young Frederick Stewart?
Robert Stewart was born in Henry Street, Dublin, Ireland, in 1769 the son of Robert Stewart (1739-1821) of Newtownards and Comber in County Down, with properties in Counties Donegal and Londonderry. The family seat was Mount Stewart, County Down.  The elder Stewart was an Irish politician and prominent Ulster landowner He was created Baron Londonderry in 1789, Viscount Castlereagh in 1795, and Earl of Londonderry in 1796 by King George III. In 1771 he was elected in the Whig interest to the Irish House of Commons, where he was a supporter of Lord Charlemont and his allies who called for greater independence from Britain. From the Act of Union of 1800, however, he sat in the British House of Lords as an Irish representative peer. In 1816 he was created Marquess of Londonderry by the Prince Regent.  Stewart's mother, who died in childbirth when he was a year old, was Lady Sarah Frances Seymour-Conway, daughter of Francis Seymour-Conway, 1st Marquess of Hertford (a former British Ambassador to France (1764-65) and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1765-66)) and Isabella Fitzroy, daughter of Charles FitzRoy, 2nd Duke of Grafton. His father remarried five years later to Lady Frances Pratt, daughter of Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden (1714-94), a leading English jurist and prominent political supporter of both the 1st Earl of Chatham and his son, William Pitt the Younger. Through the elder Stewart's marriages, he linked his family with the upper ranks of English nobility and political elites. The Camden connection was to be especially important for the political careers of both him and his elder son. By Frances Pratt, Stewart's father had ten children who survived to adulthood, including Stewart's half-brother, Charles William Stewart (later Vane), Baron Stewart of Stewart's Court and Ballylawn in County Donegal (1814) and 3rd Marquess of Londonderry (1822).  In 1794, Stewart married Amelia (Emily) Hobart a daughter of John Hobart, 2nd Earl of Buckinghamshire, a former British Ambassador to Russia (1762-65) and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1776-80). Her mother, Caroline Conolly, was the granddaughter of William Conolly, Speaker of the Irish House of Commons in the early 18th century and one of the wealthiest landowners in Ireland. Caroline's brother, Thomas Conolly, was married to Louisa Lennox, sister of Emily FitzGerald, Duchess of Leinster, whose son and Emily's cousin-by-marriage, the aristocratic rebel Lord Edward FitzGerald, was a leader of the United Irishmen and one of their martyrs in the early stages of the Irish Rebellion of 1798.  Emily Stewart was well known as a hostess for her husband in both Ireland and London and during some of his most important diplomatic missions. In later years she was a leader of Regency London high society as one of the Lady Patronesses of Almack's. She is noted in contemporary accounts for her attractiveness, volubility and eccentricities. By all accounts, the two remained devoted to each other to the end, but they had no children. The couple did, however, care for the young Frederick Stewart, while his father, Stewart's half-brother, Charles, was serving in the army. CANNOTANSWER
while his father, Stewart's half-brother, Charles, was serving in the army.
Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry,  (18 June 1769 – 12 August 1822), usually known as Lord Castlereagh, derived from the courtesy title Viscount Castlereagh ( ) by which he was styled from 1796 to 1821, was an Anglo-Irish politician and statesman. As secretary to the Viceroy of Ireland, he worked to suppress the Rebellion of 1798 and to secure passage in 1800 of the Irish Act of Union. As the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom from 1812, he was central to the management of the coalition that defeated Napoleon, and was British plenipotentiary at the Congress of Vienna. In the post-war government of Lord Liverpool, Castlereagh was seen to support harsh measures against agitation for reform. Taking his own life, he died in office in 1822.

Early in his career in Ireland, and following a visit to revolutionary France, Castlereagh recoiled from the democratic politics of his Presbyterian constituents in Ulster. Crossing the floor of the Irish Commons in support of the government, he took a leading role in detaining members of the republican conspiracy, the United Irishmen, his former political associates among them. After the 1798 Rebellion, as Chief Secretary for Ireland he pushed the Act of Union through the Irish Parliament. But it was without the Catholic Emancipation that both he and British Prime Minister William Pitt believed should have accompanied the creation of a United Kingdom.

From 1804 Castlereagh served under Pitt and then the Duke of Portland as Secretary of State for War. In 1809 he was obliged to resign after fighting a duel with the Foreign Secretary, George Canning, in a dispute over the Walcheren Expedition. In 1812 Castlereagh returned to government serving Lord Liverpool as Foreign Secretary and as Leader of the House of Commons.

Castlereagh organised and financed the alliance that defeated Napoleon, bringing the powers together at the Treaty of Chaumont in 1814. After Napoleon's second abdication in 1815, Castlereagh worked with the European courts represented at the Congress of Vienna to frame the territorial, and broadly conservative, continental order that was to hold until mid century. He blocked harsh terms against France believing that a treaty based on vengeance and retaliation would upset a necessary balance of powers. France was restored to the frontiers of 1791, and her British-occupied colonies were returned. In 1820 Castlereagh enunciated a policy of non-intervention, proposing that Britain hold herself aloof from continental affairs.

After 1815, at home Castlereagh supported repressive measures that linked him in public opinion to the Peterloo Massacre of 1819. Widely reviled in both Ireland and Great Britain, overworked, and personally distressed, Castlereagh committed suicide in 1822.

His biographer John Bew writes:
No British statesman of the 19th century reached the same level of international influence....But very few have been so maligned by their own countrymen and so abused in history. This shy and handsome Ulsterman is perhaps the most hated domestic political figure in both modern British and Irish political history.

Early life and career in Ireland 
Robert was born on 18 June 1769 in 28 Henry Street, in Dublin's Northside. He was the second and only surviving child of Robert Stewart (the elder) and his wife Sarah Frances Seymour-Conway. His parents married in 1766.

The Stewarts
The Stewarts had been a Scottish family settled in Donegal whose fortunes had been transformed by the marriage of Castlereagh's grandfather Alexander Stewart to an East India Company heiress. The legacy from Robert Cowan, the former Governor of Bombay, allowed for the purchase of extensive properties in north Down including the future family demesne, Mount Stewart, on the shores of Strangford Lough.

As a Presbyterian (a "Dissenter"), rather than a member of the established Anglican Communion (the Church of Ireland), Castlereagh's father, Robert Stewart, had an easy reputation as a friend of reform. In 1771, and again in 1776, he was elected from County Down to the Irish House of Commons. In 1778 he joined the Irish Volunteer movement, raising and armed and drilled company from his estates. In parliament and among the Volunteers, he was a friend and supporter of Lord Charlemont and his policy. This favoured Volunteer agitation for the independence of Ireland's Acendancy parliament, but not for its reform and not for Catholic emancipation.

In 1798, the elder Robert Stewart was created Baron Londonderry in 1789, Viscount Castlereagh in 1795, and Earl of Londonderry in 1796 by King George III, enabling him from the Act of Union of 1800 onwards to sit at Westminster in the House of Lords as an Irish representative peer. In 1816 he was elevated to Marquess of Londonderry

Young Robert's mother died in childbirth when he was a year old.  Lady Sarah Frances Seymour-Conway had been the daughter of Francis Seymour-Conway, 1st Marquess of Hertford and Isabella Fitzroy. Lord Hertford was a former British Ambassador to France (1764–65) and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1765–66). Isabella Fitzroy was a daughter of Charles FitzRoy, 2nd Duke of Grafton.

Five years later his father married Lady Frances Pratt, the independent-minded daughter of Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden (1714–94), a leading English jurist and prominent political supporter of both William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham, and his son, William Pitt the Younger. The marriages of the elder Robert Stewart linked his family with the upper ranks of English nobility and political elites. The Camden connection was to be especially important for the political careers of the older and the younger Robert Stewart. By Frances Pratt, his father's second wife, young Robert had eleven half-siblings, including his half-brother Charles William Stewart (later Vane), Baron Stewart of Stewart's Court and Ballylawn in County Donegal (1814) and 3rd Marquess of Londonderry (1822).

Education 
The younger Robert Stewart suffered from recurring health problems throughout his childhood, and was sent to The Royal School, Armagh, rather than to England for his secondary education. At the encouragement of Charles Pratt, first Earl of Camden, who took a great interest in him and treated him as if he had been a grandson by blood, he later attended St. John's College, Cambridge (1786–87), where he applied himself with greater diligence than expected from an aristocrat and excelled in his first-year examinations. But he then withdrew, pleading an illness that he admitted to Camden was something "which cannot be directly acknowledged before women", i.e. something sexually transmitted.

Independent MP
In the summer of 1790, Stewart was elected as a Member of the Irish Parliament for his family's Down constituency. In county with an exceptionally large number of enfranchised freeholders, his campaign pitted him in a popular contest against the nominees of the county's established Ascendancy families, and on that basis alone he won the sympathy and support of Belfast's Northern Whig Club. But it was his conscious strategy to capitalise on strong Volunteer and reform sentiments.

In a letter to the Belfast Newsletter he declared for parliamentary reform (reform that would have abolished the pocket boroughs that allowed Ascendancy families, in addition to their presence in the House of Lords, to control seats in the Commons). In doing so, he won the support of many who, later despairing of parliamentary "patriots", were to enter the ranks of the United Irishmen.

In the House of Commons Stewart spurned an offer of a place in government and sat as an independent. But otherwise he made little impression and was judged a poor speaker.

Reflections on the Revolution in France

In July 1791, having both read Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burke (a family friend) and learned that in Belfast Irish Volunteers were preparing to celebrate Bastille Day, Stewart decided to judge events in France for himself. In Spa in the Austrian Netherlands he had difficulty in empathising with the wholly reactionary outlook of the French emigres. But after passing into France in November, he conceded that while he did not "like" the government of Ireland, "I prefer it to a revolution".

Stewart was not convinced of Burke's contention that the revolution would produce a French Cromwell, although he recognised that outside Paris the principles of liberty were not as entrenched. As the revolutionary factions, the Jacobins and Girondins, struggled to supremacy in the capital, it was "the nation at large" that would "ultimately decide between them".

In "an early example of [his] scepticism about foreign intervention", Stewart argued it was beyond her neighbours to give government to France. The Austrian Emperor might march his troops to Paris, but unless he was prepared to keep them there the Ancien Régime restored would again collapse.

Stewart returned to the Austrian Netherlands in the autumn of 1792, but was unable to cross the now military frontlines into France. However news of the Jacobin triumph in Paris, and, following her victory at Valmy, the prospect of France carrying defence of the revolution beyond her frontiers, convinced him that "it would not be long before he had to face his own 'Jacobins' in Ireland".

When in 1793 he returned to the parliament in Dublin, Stewart spoke in favour of the Catholic Relief Bill. In doing so he was supporting the policy of British Prime Minister William Pitt.who determined that Catholic opinion be concilated in preparation for the impending war with the new, anti-clericalist, French Republic. Stewart, while calling for the removal of their remaining civil disabilities, did stop short of endorsing the bill's extension to Catholics of the (limited) franchise. However, his loyalty to Pitt now seemed unconditional.

In 1794, partly as a result of the promotion of Stewart's interests by his Camden connections, Stewart was offered the Government-controlled seat of Tregony in Cornwall. In 1796, he transferred to a seat for the Suffolk constituency of Orford, which was in the interest of his mother's family, the Seymour-Conways (Marquess of Hertford). He held these seats simultaneously with his county seat in Ireland.

Marriage 
In 1794, Stewart married Amelia (Emily) Hobart, a daughter of John Hobart, 2nd Earl of Buckinghamshire, a former British Ambassador to Russia (1762–65) and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1776–80). Her mother, Caroline Conolly, was the granddaughter of William Conolly, Speaker of the Irish House of Commons in the early 18th century and one of the wealthiest landowners in Ireland. Caroline's brother, Thomas Conolly, was married to Louisa Lennox, sister of Emily FitzGerald, Duchess of Leinster, whose son and Emily's cousin-by-marriage, Lord Edward FitzGerald was a leader of the United Irishmen and one of their martyrs in the early stages of the Irish Rebellion of 1798.

Emily Stewart was well known as a hostess for her husband in both Ireland and London and during some of his most important diplomatic missions. In later years she was a leader of Regency London high society as one of the Lady Patronesses of Almack's. She is noted in contemporary accounts for her attractiveness, volubility and eccentricities. By all accounts, the two remained devoted to each other to the end, but they had no children. The couple did, however, care for the young Frederick Stewart, while his father, Stewart's half-brother, Charles, was serving in the army.

Chief Secretary for Ireland

Suppression of the United Irishmen 

In 1795, Pitt replaced as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, William Fitzwilliam, who had urged that the emancipation of Catholic be completed with their admission to parliament, with Stewart's uncle, the 2nd Earl Camden. Camden's arrival in Dublin was greeted with riots, and that year Stewart crossed the floor of the Irish House of Commons to join the supporters of the government, the Dublin Castle executive. Stewart became an essential adviser to the inexperienced and unpopular Lord Lieutenant, who was Stewart's senior by only ten years.

In August 1796 Stewart's father was elevated to the title Earl of Londonderry. As his son, Stewart was henceforth styled Viscount Castlereagh.

In September, acting upon evidence of communication with the French, Castlereagh personally led troops in a series of raids in Belfast and its environs (the "Siege of Belfast") that netted leading members of the United Irishmen. Among them were men who had supported him in the election of 1790. Originating in Belfast among Presbyterian celebrants of the American and French revolutions, the republican conspiracy had spread rapidly in Ulster and, in league with the Catholic Defenders across the Irish midlands. In County Down, Castlereagh's father had difficulty in raising a loyalist yoemanry among his tenants and eventually, with all rent withheld, Mount Stewart was placed under armed guard.

In December 1796, a large French expedition to Ireland  failed to effect a landing at Bantry Bay, but due only to contrary winds. As an officer in the militia, Castlereagh was well apprised of lack of preparedness to meet a combination of professional French soldiery and the countrywide insurgency it would likely trigger.

In February 1797, Castlereagh was at last appointed to the Dublin Castle administration as Keeper of the King's Signet for Ireland. Following a declaration of martial law he was made both a Lord of the Treasury and a Member of the Privy Council of Ireland (1797–1800). At the urging of Camden, Castlereagh assumed many of the onerous duties of the often-absent Chief Secretary for Ireland who was responsible for day-to-day administration and asserting the influence of Dublin Castle in the House of Commons. In this capacity, and after March 1798 as Acting Chief Secretary, Castlereagh played a key role in crushing the United Irish rising when it came in May and June 1798.

In November 1798, Castlereagh was formally appointed to the office of Chief Secretary by Camden's successor, Lord Cornwallis.

Executions of William Orr and James Porter 
Castlereagh's general policy was to offer immediate clemency to the rebel rank-and-file (many of whom were then inducted into the yeomanry) while focusing on the politically committed leadership. But already before the rebellion he had begun to earn the sobriquet "Bloody Castlereagh".

In October 1797 his step mother, Lady Frances, had petitioned Camden for the life of William Orr. On a charge of administering the United Irish test to two soldiers, Orr had been named on the same warrant that Castlereagh had used in the roundup of the previous September. The judge reportedly broke down in tears as he read the death sentence which the popular journalist Peter Finnerty credited to Castlereagh's insistence on making an example in the face of the growing French fever. (In 1811, Castlereagh successfully had Finnerty convicted for libel).

After the rebellion (during which Mount Stewart was briefly occupied),  Castlrereagh was content that leading United Irishmen in the Presbyterian north be allowed American exile. Exception was made in the case of the James Porter, executed  (again despite the entreaties of Lady Frances) following a court martial before Castlereagh's father, Lord Londonderry. Porter, who had been his family's Presbyterian minister and, in 1790, his election agent, had become a household name in Ulster as the author of a satire of the county gentry, Billy Bluff, in which Londonderry was serially lampooned as an inarticulate tyrant.

The Act of Union and the promise of Emancipation 
In 1799, in furtherance of both his own political vision and Pitt's policies, Castlereagh began lobbying in the Irish and British Parliaments for a union that would incorporate Ireland with Great Britain in a United Kingdom. In addition to security against the French, Castlereagh saw the principal merit of a bringing Ireland directly under the Crown in the Westminster Parliament as a resolution of what ultimately was the key issue for the governance of the country, the Catholic question. "Linked with England", he reasoned that "the Protestants, feeling less exposed, would be more confident and liberal", while Catholics, reduced to a minority within the larger kingdom, would lower their expectations and moderate their demands.

During the campaign for the Act of Union, both Castlereagh and Cornwallis had, in good faith, forwarded informal assurances they had received from Pitt's Cabinet to the Irish Catholics that they would be allowed to sit in the new United Kingdom Parliament. However, opposition in England, and not least from the King, George III, obliged Castlereagh to defy what he saw as "the very logic of the Union." The Union bill that, with a generous distribution of titles and favours, he helped put through the Irish Parliament omitted the provision for Catholic emancipation. A separate Irish executive in Dublin was retained, but representation, still wholly Protestant, was transferred to Westminster constituted as the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

Pitt had tried to follow through on his commitment, but when it came to light that the King had approached Henry Addington, an opponent of Catholic emancipation, about becoming Prime Minister to replace him, both Castlereagh and Pitt resigned. Castlereagh would long be held personally responsible by many Catholics in Ireland for the breach of promise and the British Government's failure to remove their remaining political disabilities.

Loss of his home constituency

While in Dublin, Castlereagh had been a member of the Kildare Street Club, which was at the heart of the Anglo-Irish Ascendancy. The Ascendancy, however, was not quick to forgive Castlereagh for the loss of their parliament. In 1805 the Dowager Marchioness of Downshire, broke her family's electoral truce with the Stewarts in County Down and forced Castlereagh to defend his (now Westminster) parliamentary seat. Despite the prestige of a new cabinet position in London, Castlereagh was defeated in a campaign marked by repeated aspersions on his failure to father a child, and by the taunts of those who, otherwise no friends of the Downshires, reminded him of the principles on which he had stood in 1790.

On his return to London, the Treasury found him an alternative English seat, Boroughbridge, a government controlled rotten borough. Having conciliated the Downshires and able to ride the victories of Arthur Wellesley (future Duke of Wellington), the reputed Ulsterman he had appointed to command in the Peninsular War, in 1812 Castlereagh avenged his humiliation, and recovered the family seat.

Secretary for War 
In the new Parliament of the United Kingdom the tensions within the ruling Tories over Catholic emancipation abated, and after obtaining his desired cessation of hostilities with France (the Peace of Amiens), Henry Addington brought Castlereagh into the Cabinet as President of the Board of Control. He chief task was to mediate the bitter disputes between the Governor-General of India, Richard Wellesley (the brother of Arthur Wellesley) and the Directors of the East India Company, smoothing quarrels while generally supporting Lord Wellesley's policies.

After the renewal of the war against Napoleon, at the urging of Castlereagh and other long-time supporters, in 1804 Pitt returned as Prime Minister, and Castlereagh was promoted to Secretary of State for War and the Colonies.

As the only other member of Pitt's cabinet in the House of Commons, Castlereagh became Pitt's political deputy, taking on ever more burdens as Pitt's health continued to decline. After Pitt's death in 1806, Castlereagh resigned amid the chaos of the Ministry of All the Talents. When that Government collapsed, Castlereagh again became Secretary of State for War and the Colonies in 1807, this time in the ministry of the Duke of Portland.

The bombardment of Copenhagen in 1807 and in 1809 (with the Dowager Marchioness of Downshire again manoeuvring against him) the debacle of the Walcheren Expedition, subjected Castlereagh to hostile scrutiny.

Duel with Canning 
Foreign Secretary George Canning claimed to have opposed the Walcheren Expedition, to have dismissed the landing on the Dutch coast as an ill-advised, ill-prepared diversion of troops from the Peninsular War. Castlereagh had the support of General Wellesley, and evidence later surfaced that Canning himself had interfered with the plan, selecting the Earl of Chatham to command the expedition. The Portland government became increasingly paralysed by disputes between the two men. Portland was in deteriorating health and gave no lead, until Canning threatened resignation unless Castlereagh was removed. When Castlereagh discovered Canning's terms had been accepted, he challenged the Foreign Secretary to a duel.

The duel was fought on 21 September 1809 on Putney Heath. Canning missed but Castlereagh wounded his opponent in the thigh. There was much outrage that two cabinet ministers had sought to settle their differences in such a manner, and they both felt compelled to resign. Six months later, Canning published a full account of his actions in the affair, but many who had initially rallied to him  became convinced Castlereagh had been betrayed by his cabinet colleague.

Foreign Secretary 

Three years later, in 1812, Castlereagh returned to the government, this time as Foreign Secretary, a role in which he served for the next ten years. He also became leader of the House of Commons in the wake of Spencer Perceval's assassination in 1812.

Treaty of Chaumont 
In his role of Foreign Secretary he was instrumental in negotiating what has become known as the quadruple alliance between Britain, Austria, Russia, and Prussia at Chaumont in March 1814, in the negotiation of the Treaty of Paris that brought peace with France, and at the Congress of Vienna.  The Treaty of Chaumont was part of the final deal offered to Napoleon Bonaparte in 1814. Napoleon rejected it and it never took effect. However, the key terms reaffirmed decisions that had been made already. These decisions were again ratified and put into effect by the Congress of Vienna of 1814–1815. The terms were largely written by Lord Castlereagh, who offered cash subsidies to keep the other armies in the field against Napoleon. Key terms included the establishment of a confederated Germany, the division of Italy into independent states, the restoration of the Bourbon kings of Spain, and the enlargement of the Netherlands to include what in 1830 would become modern Belgium. The treaty of Chaumont became the cornerstone of the European Alliance which formed the balance of power for decades.

Historian G. M. Trevelyan argues:
In 1813 and 1814 Castlereagh played the part that William III and Marlborough had played more than a hundred years before, in holding together an alliance of jealous, selfish, weak-kneed states and princes, by a vigour of character and singleness of purpose that held Metternich, the Czar, and the King of Prussia on the common track until the goal was reached. It is quite possible that, but for the lead taken by Castlereagh in the allied counsels, France would never have been reduced to her ancient limits, nor Napoleon dethroned.

Congress of Vienna 
At the Congress of Vienna, Castlereagh designed and proposed a form of collective and collaborative security for Europe, then called a Congress system. In the Congress system, the main signatory powers met periodically (every two years or so) and collectively managed European affairs. This system was used in an attempt to address the Polish-Saxon crisis at Vienna and the question of Greek independence at Laibach. The following ten years saw five European Congresses where disputes were resolved with a diminishing degree of effectiveness. Finally, by 1822, the whole system had collapsed because of the irreconcilable differences of opinion among Britain, Austria, and Russia, and because of the lack of support for the Congress system in British public opinion.  The Holy Alliance, which Castlereagh opposed, lingered a little longer.  The order created by the Congress of Vienna was a mood that lasted much longer and worked to prevent major European wars until the First World War in 1914. Some scholars and historians have seen the Congress system as a forerunner of the modern collective security, international unity, and cooperative agreements of NATO, the EU, the League of Nations, and the United Nations.

In the years 1812 to 1822, Castlereagh continued to manage Britain's foreign policy, generally pursuing a policy of continental engagement uncharacteristic of British foreign policy in the nineteenth century. Castlereagh was not an effective public speaker and his diplomatic presentation style was at times abstruse. Henry Kissinger says he developed a reputation for integrity, consistency, and goodwill, which was perhaps unmatched by any diplomat of that era.

Abolition of the slave trade 

Abolitionist opinion in Britain was  strong enough in 1807 to abolish the slave trade in all British possessions—although slavery itself persisted in the colonies until 1833. Abolitionists after 1807 focused on international agreements to abolish the Atlantic slave trade. Castlereagh switched his position and became a strong supporter of the movement.  Britain arranged treaties with Portugal, Sweden and Denmark, 1810–1814, whereby they agreed to restrict their trading. These were preliminary to the Congress of Vienna negotiations that Castlereagh dominated and which resulted in a general declaration condemning the slave trade. The problem was that the treaties and declarations were hard to enforce, given the very high profits available to private interests. As Foreign Minister, Castlereagh cooperated with senior officials to use the Royal Navy to detect and capture slave ships; the freed slaves were sent to freedom in a new British colony of Sierra Leone. He used diplomacy to conclude search-and-seize agreements with all the countries whose ships were trading.  There was serious friction with the United States, where the southern slave interest was politically powerful. Washington recoiled at British policing of the high seas.  Spain, France and Portugal also relied on the international slave trade to supply their colonial plantations. As more and more diplomatic arrangements were made by Castlereagh, the owners of slave ships started flying false flags of nations that had not agreed, especially the United States. It was illegal under American law for American ships to engage in the slave trade, but the idea of Britain enforcing American laws was unacceptable to Washington. Lord Palmerston continued the Castlereagh policies. Eventually, in 1842 in 1845, an arrangement was reached between London and Washington. With the arrival of a staunchly anti-slavery government in Washington in 1861, the Atlantic slave trade was doomed. In the long run, Castlereagh's strategy on how to stifle the trade proved successful.

Nonintervention in European affairs 
In May 1820 Castlereagh circulated to high officials a major state paper that set the main British policy for the rest of the century. Temperley and Penson call it, "the most famous State Paper in British history and the one of the widest ultimate consequences." Castlereagh called for no British intervention in continental affairs. He argued that the purpose of the Quadruple Alliance was to contain France and put down revolutions. But the Spanish revolt did not threaten European peace nor any of the great powers. Castlereagh said that in actual practice the powers would seldom be able to agree on concerted action, and he pointed out that British public opinion would not support interventions. He admitted that individual states could indeed intervene in affairs in their recognized sphere of interest, such as Austria's intervention in Italy.

Lampooning by Thomas Moore 
As a press, or squib, writer for the Whigs, Thomas Moore, better remembered as Ireland's national bard, mercilessly lampooned Castlereagh. In what were the "verbal equivalents of the political cartoons of the day",Tom Crib's Memorial to Congress (1818) and  "Fables for the Holy Alliance" (1823), Moore savages Castlereagh's pirouetting with Britain's reactionary continental allies.

Widely read, so that Moore eventually produced a sequel, was his verse novel The Fudge Family in Paris (1818). The family of an Irishman working as a propagandist for Castlereagh in Paris, the Fudges are accompanied by an accomplished tutor and classicist, Phelim Connor. An upright but disillusioned Irish Catholic, his letters to a friend reflect Moore's own views. Connor's regular epistolary denunciations of Castlereagh had two recurrent themes. First is Castlereagh as "the embodiment of the sickness with which Ireland had infected British politics as a consequence of the union": "We sent thee Castlereagh--as heaps of dead Have slain their slayers by the pest they spread". The second is that at the time of the Acts of Union Castlereagh's support for Catholic emancipation had been disingenuous. Castlereagh had been master of "that faithless craft" which can "cart the slave, can swear he shall be freed", but then "basely spurns him" when his "point is gain'd."

This imputation that he had betrayed his country, bloodied his hands in 1798 and deliberately deceived Catholics at the time of the Union, reportedly wounded Castlereagh. Moore learned from a mutual connection that Castlereagh had said that "the humorous and laughing things he did not at all mind, but the verses of the Tutor in the Fudge Family were quite another sort of thing, and were in very bad taste indeed". For openly casting the same aspersions against the former Chief Secretary, in 1811 the London-based Irish publisher, and former United Irishman, Peter Finnerty was sentenced to eighteen months for libel.

Decline and death 

Despite his contributions to the defeat of Napoleon and restoration of peace, Castlereagh became extremely unpopular at home. He was attacked in the House of Commons by the Opposition for his support of repressive European governments, while the public resented his role in handling the Commons side of the divorce of George IV and Queen Caroline. He was also condemned for his association with repressive measures of the Home Secretary, Lord Sidmouth (the former Prime Minister Addington). As Leader of the House of Commons for the Liverpool Government, he was often called upon to defend government policy in the House. He had to support the widely reviled measures taken by Sidmouth and the others, including the infamous Six Acts, to remain in cabinet and continue his diplomatic work. For these reasons, Castlereagh appears with other members of Lord Liverpool's Cabinet in Shelley's poem The Masque of Anarchy, which was inspired by, and heavily critical of, the Peterloo Massacre:

I met Murder on the way –
He had a mask like Castlereagh –
Very smooth he looked, yet grim;
Seven bloodhounds followed him.

All were fat; and well they might
Be in admirable plight,
For one by one, and two by two,
He tossed them human hearts to chew
Which from his wide cloak he drew.

After the death of his father in April 1821, which "greatly afflicted him", Castlereagh became the 2nd Marquess of Londonderry. Although ineligible to continue sitting for an Irish constituency, as a non-representative Irish peer he was eligible to sit in the House of Commons for an English seat. Preparations had already been made, and he was able to vacate Down and swiftly win a by-election for his uncle Lord Hertford's borough of Orford (of which he had been an MP between 1796 and 1797). He also stood in good favour with the new King, George IV, who openly proposed to dismiss Lord Liverpool and appoint Castlereagh in his stead. Castlereagh's relations with his colleagues, however, were beginning to break down, possibly under the influence of paranoia. In March 1821, he told his brother he lacked able support on the government benches, and that his parliamentary labours were 'difficult to endure'.

By 1822, he was showing clear signs of a form of paranoia or a nervous breakdown. He was severely overworked with both his responsibilities in leading the government in the House and the never-ending diplomacy required to manage conflicts among the other major powers. His oratory in the House had never been of the highest calibre, but now he was considered to be practically incoherent. He spoke of resigning his office if matters did not improve.

Castlereagh began confessing to what was at the time criminal activity. He had already told his friend Mrs Arbuthnot that he was being blackmailed for an alleged homosexual offence; and at a 9 August meeting with the King, Castlereagh was distracted, said he was being mysteriously watched by a servant, that he had committed all manner of crimes, and remarked, "I am accused of the same crime as the Bishop of Clogher." Percy Jocelyn, who had been the Bishop of Clogher until the previous month, was prosecuted for homosexuality. The King concluded he was unwell, and urged him to rest.

The King then sent a message to Lord Liverpool warning him of Castlereagh's illness; Liverpool initially failed to take the matter seriously and dismissed the message. Later that day, however, Castlereagh met with the Duke of Wellington, his cabinet colleague. Castlereagh behaved much as he had done with the King; Wellington bluntly told Castlereagh he was not in his right mind, advised him to see a doctor, and alerted Castlereagh's personal physician Dr. Charles Bankhead, as well as Castlereagh's friends the Arbuthnots. On the advice of Dr Bankhead, Castlereagh went to his country seat at Woollet Hall in Water Lane, North Cray, Kent, for a weekend stay. He continued to be distressed, ranting wildly about conspiracies and threats to his life, to the concern of his friends and family. No special watch was kept on him, however, his wife saw to it that his pistols and razors were locked away.

Lady Castlereagh wrote to the King informing him that her husband would be unable to continue with official business. The King responded with a note to Castlereagh that his minister did not live to read: "Remember of what importance Your Health is to the Country but above all things to Me".

At about 7:30am on the morning of 12 August 1822 he sent for Bankhead, who found him in a dressing room seconds after he had cut his own throat, using a small knife which had been overlooked. He collapsed when Bankhead entered, and died almost instantly.

Retrospective speculative diagnoses vary. At the time, his brother blamed "the intrigues that were carried on by the women surrounding the king" (the King's mistress, Lady Conyngham, was not on good terms with Castlereagh's wife). George Agar Ellis, on the other hand,  concluded Castlereagh was disillusioned by "the nothingness of human grandeurs... the sad effects which disappointment and chagrin may have on a mind in which religion is not uppermost, for I have no doubt that the sad and apparently irretrievable state of affairs in England was the real cause of ... [his] unfortunate state of mind." Later verdicts attribute the problem to overwork and mental stress, or to "a psychotic depressive illness". Other theories link various instances of (at the time) little explained illness to syphilis, possibly contracted at Cambridge.

Reaction to his death 
An inquest concluded that the act had been committed while insane, avoiding the harsh strictures of a felo de se verdict. The verdict allowed Lady Londonderry to see her husband buried with honour in Westminster Abbey near his mentor, William Pitt. The pallbearers included the Prime Minister Lord Liverpool, the former Prime Minister Lord Sidmouth and two future Prime Ministers, the Duke of Wellington and Frederick Robinson. Some radicals, notably William Cobbett, claimed a "cover-up" within the government and viewed the verdict and Castlereagh's public funeral as a damning indictment of the elitism and privilege of the unreformed electoral system. At his funeral on 20 August, the crowds which lined the funeral route were generally respectful and decorous, but some jeering and insults were heard (although not to the level of unanimity projected in the radical press); and there was cheering when the coffin was taken out of the hearse at the Abbey door.  A funeral monument was not erected until 1850 when his half-brother and successor, Charles Stewart Vane, 3rd Marquess of Londonderry did so.

Some time after Castlereagh's death, Lord Byron wrote a savage quip about his grave:

Posterity will ne'er survey
A nobler grave than this:
Here lie the bones of Castlereagh:
Stop, traveller, and piss.

Some of his opponents were damning in their verdicts. Thomas Creevy defied "any human being to discover a single feature of his character that can stand a moment’s criticism. By experience, good manners and great courage, he managed a corrupt House of Commons pretty well, with some address. This is the whole of his intellectual merit. He had a limited understanding and no knowledge, and his whole life was spent in an avowed, cold-blooded contempt of every honest public principle." Sir Robert Wilson believed that there had never been "a greater enemy to civil liberty or a baser slave."

Others of Castlereagh's political opponents were more gracious in their epigrams. Henry Brougham, a Whig politician and later the Lord Chancellor, who had battled frequently with Castlereagh, once almost to the point of calling him out, and had denigrated his skills as Leader, wrote in the week following Castlereagh's death:

Put all their other men together in one scale, and poor Castlereagh in the other – single he plainly weighed them down ... One can't help feeling a little for him, after being pitted against him for several years, pretty regularly. It is like losing a connection suddenly. Also he was a gentleman, and the only one amongst them.

Modern historians stress the success of Castlereagh's career in spite of the hatred and ignominy he suffered. Trevelyan contrasts his positive achievements and his pitiful failures. His diplomacy was applauded by historians. For example, in 1919 diplomatic historians recommended his wise policies of 1814–1815 to the British delegation to the Paris peace conferences that ended the First World War. Historian R. J. White underscores the paradox:

Styles 
Robert Stewart acquired the courtesy title Viscount Castlereagh in 1796 when his father was created Earl of Londonderry in the Irish peerage. Upon his father's death in 1821, he succeeded as 2nd Marquess of Londonderry, a title to which his father had been raised in 1816. His younger half-brother, the soldier, politician and diplomat Charles Stewart (later Vane) succeeded him as 3rd Marquess of Londonderry in 1822.

He was styled through his life as follows:
Robert Stewart, Esquire (1769–1789)
The Honourable Robert Stewart (1789–1796)
Viscount Castlereagh (1796–1797)
The Right Honourable Viscount Castlereagh (1797–1814)
The Right Honourable Viscount Castlereagh, KG (1814–1821)
The Most Honourable Marquess of Londonderry, KG, GCH, PC, PC (Ire) (1821–1822)

Memorials and tributes 
Castlereagh Street in Sydney was named after him in 1810 by Governor Macquarie.
The Sydney suburb locality of Castlereagh was also named after him by Macquarie in 1810.
The Castlereagh River in north-western New South Wales was dedicated to him in 1818 by George Evans and explored by John Oxley.
The New South Wales electoral seat of Castlereagh also carried his name from 1904 until 1991.

See also 
, two ships named for Lord Castlereagh

Notes, citations, and sources

Notes

Citations

Sources 
 – A to C (for hamlet of Castlereagh)

 – L to M (for Londonderry)
 – Scotland and Ireland

 (for timeline)

 – (especially for early years, access to family papers)

Further reading 
Bew, John. Castlereagh: Enlightenment, War and Tyranny, London: Quercus (2011) 
 review essay by Jack Gumpert Wasserman, in The Byron Journal (2013)  Vol. 41, No. 1 online
Cecil, Algernon. British Foreign Secretaries 1807-1916 (1927) pp 1–52.online
Charmley,  John, "Castlereagh and France." Diplomacy and Statecraft 17.4 (2006): 665–673.  
Coburn, Helen. A Gentleman Among Them: The Public and Private Life of Viscount Castlereagh (Cestus 2016). Available as e-book at amazon.com.
Derry, John W. Castlereagh, London: A. Lane (1976)
Goodlad, Graham. "From Castlereagh to Canning: Continuity and Change in British Foreign Policy," History Review (2008) Issue: 62. pp10+ online
Hayes, Paul. Modern British Foreign Policy: The nineteenth century, 1814–80 (1975).

Lawrence, Thomas, and C. J. Bartlett. The Foreign Policy of Castlereagh, 1812–1815, Britain and the European Alliance (1925) online
King, David.  Vienna 1814; How the Conquerors of Napoleon Made Love, War, and Peace at the Congress of Vienna, (Random House, 2008) 
Muir, Rory. Britain and the defeat of Napoleon, 1807–1815, New Haven: Yale University Press (1966) 
Harold Nicolson, The Congress of Vienna, Constable & Co Ltd, UK/Harcourt Brace and Company (1946)online
Perkins, Bradford. Castlereagh and Adams: England and the United States, 1812–1823, Berkeley: University of California Press (1964)
Schroeder, Paul W. The Transformation of European Politics, 1763–1848 (1996), European diplomatic history online

Zamoyski, Adam. Rites of Peace; the Fall of Napoleon and the Congress of Vienna, HarperCollins Publishers (2007)

Primary sources 
Memoirs and Correspondence of Viscount Castlereagh, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry, edited by his brother, Charles William (Stewart) Vane, 3rd Marquess of Londonderry, London: John Murray (1848–53) in 12 volumes
Sir A. Alison., Lives of Lord Castlereagh and Sir Charles Stewart, 3 vols., London: Blackwood (1861)

External links 

A Letter to Lord Viscount Castlereagh, John C. Hobhouse, London: Robert Stodart (1819), on the Peterloo massacre

1769 births
1820s suicides
1822 deaths
Alumni of St John's College, Cambridge
British MPs 1790–1796
British MPs 1796–1800
British people of the Napoleonic Wars
British politicians who committed suicide
British Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs
Burials at Westminster Abbey
Chief Secretaries for Ireland
Commissioners of the Treasury for Ireland
British duellists
Fellows of the Royal Society
History of mental health in the United Kingdom
People with mental disorders
Irish MPs 1790–1797
Irish MPs 1798–1800
Irish politicians who committed suicide
Irish Presbyterians
Knights of the Garter
Leaders of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom
2
Members of the Parliament of Great Britain for constituencies in Cornwall
Members of the Parliament of Ireland (pre-1801) for County Down constituencies
Members of the Parliament of Ireland (pre-1801) for County Londonderry constituencies
Members of the Parliament of the United Kingdom for constituencies in Cornwall
Members of the Parliament of the United Kingdom for County Down constituencies (1801–1922)
Members of the Parliament of the United Kingdom for Plympton Erle
Members of the Privy Council of Great Britain
Members of the Privy Council of Ireland
Politicians from County Dublin
People educated at The Royal School, Armagh
People of the Irish Rebellion of 1798
Political history of Ireland
Stewart
Ulster Scots people
UK MPs 1801–1802
UK MPs 1802–1806
UK MPs 1806–1807
UK MPs 1807–1812
UK MPs 1812–1818
UK MPs 1818–1820
UK MPs 1820–1826
Londonderry, M2
Robert
Hard Promises is a 1992 American romantic comedy film directed by Martin Davidson. It stars Sissy Spacek and William Petersen.

Plot
A man who dislikes stable work environments has been away for too many years when he finds out that his wife had divorced him and is planning to remarry. He comes home to confront her, trying to persuade her not to get married, aided by their daughter, who loves him despite his wandering ways. The couple finds out they still have feelings for each other but must decide how best to handle the contradiction of their lifestyles.

Cast

Critical reception
Vincent Canby of The New York Times did not care for the film but did praise some of the actors:

References

External links

1991 films
1990s romantic comedy films
American films
American romantic comedy films
Columbia Pictures films
English-language films
Films directed by Martin Davidson
Films scored by George S. Clinton
Films set in Texas
Films shot in Texas
1991 comedy films Long-term care insurance (LTC or LTCI) is an insurance product, sold in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada that helps pay for the costs associated with long-term care. Long-term care insurance covers care generally not covered by health insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid.

Individuals who require long-term care are generally not sick in the traditional sense but are unable to perform two of the six activities of daily living (ADLs) such as dressing, bathing, eating, toileting, continence, transferring (getting in and out of a bed or chair), and walking.

Age is not a determining factor in needing long-term care. About 70 percent of individuals over 65 will require at least some type of long-term care services during their lifetime. About 40% of those receiving long-term care today are between 18 and 64. Once a change of health occurs, long-term care insurance may not be available. Early onset (before 65) Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease occur rarely.

Long-term care is an issue because people are living longer. As people age, many times they need help with everyday activities of daily living or require supervision due to severe cognitive impairment. That impacts women even more since they often live longer than men and, by default, become caregivers to others.

Benefits

Long-term care insurance can cover home care, assisted living,  adult daycare, respite care, hospice care, nursing home, Alzheimer's facilities, and home modification to accommodate disabilities. If home care coverage is purchased, long-term care insurance can pay for home care, often from the first day it is needed. It will pay for a visiting or live-in caregiver, companion, housekeeper, therapist or private duty nurse up to seven days a week, 24 hours a day up to the policy benefit maximum. Many experts suggest shopping between the ages of 45 and 55 as part of an overall retirement plan to protect assets from the high costs and burdens of extended health care.

Other benefits of long-term care insurance:

 Many individuals may feel uncomfortable relying on their children or family members for support, and find that long-term care insurance could help cover out-of-pocket expenses. Without long-term care insurance, the cost of providing these services may quickly deplete the savings of the individual and/or their family. The costs of long-term care differ by region. The U.S. government has an interactive map to estimate the costs by state.
 Premiums paid on a long-term care insurance product may be eligible for an income tax deduction. The amount of the deduction depends on the age of the covered person. Benefits paid from a long-term care contract are generally excluded from income. Some states also have deductions or credits and proceeds are always tax-free.
 Business deductions of premiums are determined by the type of business. Generally corporations paying premiums for an employee are 100% deductible if not included in employee's taxable income.

In the United States, Medicaid will provide long-term care services for the poor or those who spend-down assets because of care and exhaust their assets. In most states, you must spend down to $2000. If there is a living spouse/partner they may keep an additional amount.

A welfare program, Medicaid does provide medically necessary services for people with limited resources who "need nursing home care but can stay at home with special community care services."
However, Medicaid generally does not cover long-term care provided in a home setting or for assisted living.  People who need long-term care often prefer care in the home or in a private room in an assisted living facility.

Types of policies

Private long-term care (LTC) insurance is growing in popularity in the United States.  Premiums, however, have risen dramatically in recent years even for existing policyholders. Coverage costs can be expensive, when consumers wait until retirement age to purchase LTC coverage.

As they relate to U.S. policies, two types of long-term care policies offered are:

 Traditional policies are the most common policies offered. Traditional policy premiums, like automobile insurance premiums, are paid on a continual basis.  If unused, no premiums are returned.  However, if the policy has a "return of premium" rider, a death benefit will be paid to a beneficiary if the insured dies at a time when benefits received under the policy are less than the premiums paid to the insurer.  The amount of the benefit is equal to the excess of premiums paid over benefits received.
 Combination or hybrid policies are a combination of life insurance or an annuity with long term care insurance. Several varieties of these combinations exist. 

As they relate to U.S. income tax, two types of long-term care policies offered are:

 Tax qualified (TQ) policies are the most common policies offered. A TQ policy requires that a person 1) be expected to require care for at least 90 days, and be unable to perform 2 or more activities of daily living (eating, dressing, bathing, transferring, toileting, continence) without substantial assistance (hands-on or standby); or 2) for at least 90 days, need substantial assistance due to a severe cognitive impairment.  In either case, a doctor must provide a plan of care. Benefits from a TQ policy are non-taxable.
 Non-tax qualified (NTQ) was formerly called traditional long-term care insurance. It often includes a "trigger" called a "medical necessity" trigger.  This means that the patient's own doctor, or that doctor in conjunction with someone from the insurance company, can state that the patient needs care for any medical reason and the policy will pay. NTQ policies include walking as an activity of daily living and usually only require the inability to perform 1 or more activity of daily living. The Treasury Department has not clarified the status of benefits received under a non-qualified long-term care insurance plan. Therefore, the taxability of these benefits is open to further interpretation. This means that it is possible that individuals who receive benefits under a non-qualified long-term care insurance policy risk facing a large tax bill for these benefits.

Fewer non-tax qualified policies are available for sale.  One reason is that consumers want to be eligible for the tax deductions available when buying a tax-qualified policy. The tax issues can be more complex than the issue of deductions alone, and it is advisable to seek good counsel on all the pros and cons of a tax-qualified policy versus a non-tax-qualified policy, since the benefit triggers on a good non-tax-qualified policy are better. By law, tax-qualified policies carry restrictions on when the policy holder can receive benefits. One survey found that sixty-five percent of purchasers did not know whether or not the policy they bought was tax qualified.

Once a person purchases a policy, the language cannot be changed by the insurance company, and the policy usually is guaranteed renewable for life. It can never be canceled by the insurance company for health reasons, but can be canceled for non-payment.

Most benefits are paid on a reimbursement basis and a few companies offer indemnity-based per-diem benefits at a higher rate. Most policies cover care only in the continental United States. Policies that cover care in select foreign countries usually only cover nursing care and do so at a rated benefit.

Group policies may have provisions for non-restricted or open enrollment periods and underwriting may be required.  Group plans may or may not be guaranteed renewable or tax qualified. Some group plans include language allowing the insurance company to replace the policy with a similar policy and to change the premiums at that time. Some group plans can be canceled by the insurance company. To compensate for the higher insurance risk group plans may have higher deductibles and lower benefits than individual plans. Some group plans have a 3 ADL (activities of daily living) requirement for nursing care.

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) provides certain former employees, retirees, spouses, former spouses, and dependent children the right to temporary continuation of health coverage at group rates.

Retirement systems such as CalPERS may offer long-term care insurance similar to a group plan. These organizations are not regulated by the state insurance departments. They can increase rates and make changes to policies without state scrutiny and approval.

Long-term care insurance rates are determined by six main factors: the person's age, the daily (or monthly) benefit, how long the benefits pay, the elimination period,  inflation protection, and the health rating (preferred, standard, sub-standard). Most companies will offer couples and multi-life discounts on individual policies. Some companies define "couples" not only to spouses, but also to two people who meet criteria for living together in a committed relationship and sharing basic living expenses. The average age of purchasers has dropped from 68 years in 1990 to 61 years in 2005, and the number of purchasers who are under age 65 has increased significantly.

Most companies offer multiple premium payment modes: annual, semi-annual, quarterly, and monthly. Companies may add a percentage for more frequent payment than annual. Options such as spousal survivorship, non-forfeiture, restoration of benefits and return of premium are available with most plans.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 makes Partnership plans available to all states. Partnership provides "lifetime asset protection" from the Medicaid spend-down requirement. As of March 2014,  41 states had active Long Term Care Insurance Partnership programs.

Benefit eligibility and deductibles

Most policies pay benefits when the policyholder needs help with two or more of six ADLs or when a cognitive impairment is present. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services all tax-qualified long-term care insurance plans have the same trigger.

Most policies have an elimination period or waiting period similar to a deductible. This is the period of time that you pay for care before your benefits are paid. Elimination days may be from 30 to 120 days after a long-term care incident, such as a fall or illness. Some policies require intended claimants to provide proof of 30 to 120 service days of paid care before any benefits will be paid. In some cases, the option may be available to select zero elimination days when covered services are provided in the home in accordance with a Plan of Care. A policyholder can select a maximum daily or monthly benefit. This is the maximum the insurance company will pay toward care on either a daily or monthly basis

LTC riders in Canada

LTC Insurance riders generally available in Canadian policies include:

 ROPD – Return of premium on death.  Your premiums are returned to your estate.
 Protection from inflation – Policy benefit grows at a set rate of return.

LTCi in Germany

In Germany there are two different kinds of care insurance: mandatory care insurance and voluntary, private care insurance. The German laws oblige the people to have a basic care insurance. It is one of five mandatory insurances, the others are health, accident, unemployment and pension insurance. As usual in the German public insurance system costs are evenly split between employers and employees.

There are three types of private care insurance:

1. The most expensive form of private care insurance is like a life insurance. It pays you a monthly pension when the insured needs to be taken care of, no matter what the care actually costs. When making the contract you can choose how much the insurance pays each month, depending on the care level.

2. Another form of private care insurance pays a certain percentage of the actual cost after the mandatory care insurance has paid. Here you can decide on the percentage that is being paid, depending on the care level. The advantage of this type of insurance is that it pays more money when the care costs more, so the risk of raised prices is lower for the insured.

3. The most common type of private care insurance pays a certain amount of money for each day where the insured is being taken care of.

LTCi in the United States

Some 7 million individuals have some form of long-term care insurance.  The vast majority have what is referred to as traditional, or health-based, LTC insurance.  The opposite is true for new policy sales.  Some 350,000 new policies are sold each year with 84 percent being linked-benefit or life insurance policies that include a LTC benefit.

In the U.S., the nation's long-term care insurance companies paid out a record $11 billion in claims in 2019 to some 310,000 policyholders.

A new study projects that the lifetime chance of long-term care insurance policy usage.  Someone purchasing coverage at age 65 has a 50% likelihood of using their policy benefits, especially when there is no elimination period for home care benefits.

See also
Activities of daily living
CLASS Act
Continuing Care Retirement Community
Health insurance in the United States
Long Term Care Benefit Plan

References

External links

 What to look for in a LTC policy from Consumer Reports (February 2011)
 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Long Term Care information
 American Association for Long Term Care Insurance - AALTCI
 National Institute on Health
 National Association of Insurance Commissions LTC Section
 US Department of Health & Human Services Aging, Caregiving & LTC
 Medicaid Eligibility

Caregiving
Elderly care
Health insurance
Medicare and Medicaid (United States)