Long term care

Preparing for life after work. RRSPs, RRIFs, TFSAs, annuities and meeting future financial and psychological needs.
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Long term care

Post by bones1 »

[Split from http://www.financialwisdomforum.org/for ... ?f=30&t=61]
ghariton wrote:Yes. On the other hand, 40 years ago many more of the elderly stayed in their homes and were cared for by family and friends. That seems to have vanished, except possibly among immigrant families, where family ties are still of paramount importance. I'm not at all sure that is an improvement, but yes, I'll grant you that care in old age has become more expensive much more quickly than CPI.
I'm not sure it has gotten more expensive. Long-term care is generally around $1500-$2500 per month, now. (Depending on if you want a private room.) But, if you're broke, the government picks up the cost (they reduce your OAS and GIS to about $200 per month to allow for personal expenses).

So basically, long-term care is free, if you're broke. You get the same care as the person shelling out $2000 per month. IOW, I'm not sure it's worth saving a pile of cash for late in life.

The above is for registered nursing homes. If you're talking about "retirement residences" (those private apartments that offer a bit of care but you pay through the nose for it), then that may have indeed gone up way faster than inflation. I'm not sure they existed 20 years ago. But now, you'll pay $4000-$5000 (or more) per month for a small bachelor apartment that includes about 1 hour of services per day.
Last edited by Peculiar_Investor on 07 Feb 2014 07:04, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: replace old domain name with www.financialwisdomforum.org to reflect new domain name effective 19-Jan-2014
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33399
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by AltaRed »

bones1 wrote:If you're talking about "retirement residences" (those private apartments that offer a bit of care but you pay through the nose for it), then that may have indeed gone up way faster than inflation. I'm not sure they existed 20 years ago. But now, you'll pay $4000-$5000 (or more) per month for a small bachelor apartment that includes about 1 hour of services per day.
My 92 yr old mother will be moving into a 848 sq ft. 2 bed, 2 bath apartment (with a good sized kitchen) shortly complete with one evening meal (at least 2 choices) a day plus weekly maid service plus 24 hr med alert with a number of other features* for less than $2200/month. I have no idea why people would have to pay anywhere close to what you are suggesting -- a little over the top, no?

* library, media/computer room, games room, shuttle service, entertainment nights, organized activities, etc, etc.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by kcowan »

AltaRed wrote:I have no idea why people would have to pay anywhere close to what you are suggesting -- a little over the top, no?

* library, media/computer room, games room, shuttle service, entertainment nights, organized activities, etc, etc.
When I shopped around for my brother, the best price was $1850/mo but the average was more like $3300/mo. There was no appreciable difference in quality but neighborhood accessibility was different. IOW he had to leave his neighborhood to get the lower costs.

(Amica gets a big premium for their facilities.)
For the fun of it...Keith
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by Bylo Selhi »

Retirement homes, as opposed to long term care ("nursing") homes, is privately run. What they offer and what they charge for it varies all over the map, just like conventional rental apartments.

LTC facilities are provincially regulated and, at least in ON, the monthly cost is fixed even though what you get for that money varies wildly. Effective July 1, 2010:
$1,619.08 - basic (ward)
$1,862.41 - semi-private
$2,166.58 - private
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by bones1 »

Bylo Selhi wrote:Retirement homes, as opposed to long term care ("nursing") homes, is privately run. What they offer and what they charge for it varies all over the map, just like conventional rental apartments.

LTC facilities are provincially regulated and, at least in ON, the monthly cost is fixed even though what you get for that money varies wildly. Effective July 1, 2010:
$1,619.08 - basic (ward)
$1,862.41 - semi-private
$2,166.58 - private
Okay, I know what you're saying, but just to nit-pick, many LTC facilities are privately owned and operated too. The difference between them and what I call a "retirement residence" is that LTC costs are set by the government (as you note). And, those are the costs you pay if you have money to pay it.

If you're broke, you only pay whatever your income allows (but you still get to keep a little bit for personal expenses). If you're broke, you only have the option for a basic ward (although most LTC facilities no longer have wards... they have semi-private and private... so you'll get a semi-private).

Rich or poor, you still get the same level of care. Maybe that will change in the future if governments are forced to slash services because of debt problems, but a lot of things could change in the future.

There's not much point in planning for changes in the future, because there's no way you could know what those changes will be or how they will impact you. Some changes could be negative, some could be positive.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by Bylo Selhi »

bones1 wrote:many LTC facilities are privately owned and operated too. The difference between them and what I call a "retirement residence" is that LTC costs are set by the government (as you note).
To be clear: retirement homes != LTC facilities

The former are essentially apartment buildings designed for use by active seniors who are generally able to look after themselves but who need some help, e.g. no stairs, provision for rollators, wheelchairs, etc. They may also offer a wide range of other services, including meals, transportation, medical, etc. They're free to charge whatever the market will bear. If you're a senior, you're generally in good health and you have the money, you can move to any retirement home that will have you.

LTCs offer a different range of services. They're intended for those with special needs who generally can't look after themselves. That includes seniors with significant mobility issues who can't feed, clothe, medicate, etc. themselves as well as those with specific conditions like Alzheimer's. They may be privately run or run by non-profits, charitable organizations, etc. They're all regulated heavily by the province. You can't move into any of them without a clear medical need and the blessing of CCAC (in Ontario.)
Rich or poor, you still get the same level of care.
This is very important: While the province regulates the level of services, controls access and determines how much you pay (if you can't afford the amounts I listed) the quality of care that you will actually receive varies widely. Generally the for-profits provide the lowest quality of care because, after all, they have to make a profit. Generally the charities provide the highest quality of care because (a) there's no profit motive and (b) they can get additional funding as a charity (and subsidized indirectly by federal and provincial charitable donation tax credits.)

While you can (and should!) indicate to CCAC which LTCs you'd prefer should the need arise, ultimately, as that famous philosopher Jagger once noted, you can't always get what you want. This is especially true if you've just been hospitalized and can't go back to your house or retirement residence. See e.g. today's Auditor’s report: A remedy for ailing hospitals. There are a lot of people in acute ward rooms who can't leave the hospital to go to LTC because there are no rooms available there. So when a room in LTC opens up you go there regardless of how well you regard that facility and what level of quality of care they provide. The AG's report notes that this logjam works its way back to ERs. These issues are all interconnected.

Anyway, we're digressing. I just wanted to clarify some distinctions between the two types of facilities. As for retirement planning, seniors usually live for many years in retirement homes. By the time their health has deteriorated to the point where they'd qualify for LTC their life expectancy is only about a couple of years. For planning purposes, you need a lot more money for the former compared to the latter.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
flywaysuzy
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1224
Joined: 23 Feb 2005 10:04

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by flywaysuzy »

I think the LTC stays are averaging around 15-18 months and I would think that as these spots become more sought after, that stay would become shorter as folks will have to be more decrepit in order to qualify for a spot. We're going to have to become more and more creative about ways to keep seniors in their own homes and I wouldn't be surprised to see the export of seniors to countries where it is cheaper to care for them. (think warmer? Pick me!) Cuba would be a good spot-lots of doctors there. Phillipines, lots of caregivers. Mexico, it's close...and they have avacadoes.
suzy
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by bones1 »

Bylo Selhi wrote: As for retirement planning, seniors usually live for many years in retirement homes. By the time their health has deteriorated to the point where they'd qualify for LTC their life expectancy is only about a couple of years. For planning purposes, you need a lot more money for the former compared to the latter.
I don't think you need money for a retirement home, at all. It's an option, to make life easy and convenient for seniors, but it's far cheaper to stay in your home or apartment and buy a similar level of care through things like meals-on-wheels and maid service.

Many people think of retirement homes as a transition between complete independence of home ownership, and complete dependence in a LTC centre. But I think that's just industry marketing. I don't recall many "retirement homes" 20 or 30 years ago. They are perhaps an example of "increased standard of living", for those that have the financial means.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by Bylo Selhi »

bones1 wrote:I don't think you need money for a retirement home, at all. It's an option, to make life easy and convenient for seniors, but it's far cheaper to stay in your home or apartment and buy a similar level of care through things like meals-on-wheels and maid service.
WADR, tell that to someone:
• with mobility challenges who can't climb stairs
• who's confined to a wheelchair and thus needs a home that's wheelchair accessible
• who can no longer drive a car and whose home is far from basic services and/or public transit
• who needs assistance in dressing and/or bathing themselves
• who can't remember when to take their medications
• who wants to remain as independent as possible but can no longer deal with all the responsibilities of home ownership
...
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
NOVICE99
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 444
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 21:45

Re: Long term care

Post by NOVICE99 »

A PSW providing similar care as in an LTC home charges $25-28/hr in Toronto (as per CCAC). For 24-hr care, this amounts to $219,000 per year! And one still has to pay property taxes, and other home maintenance fees on top of this amount. That's $250k minimal per year if an elderly disabled/bedridden person could not get a room at a LTC home - and I believe the wait list can be 2-4 years for some homes.

So much for retiring with $1Million unless the province builds more LTC homes. So I get sick and can only afford 4 years with a 7x24 PSW, what happens after that? Do I ask to be euthanised or will the govt pay for my care? Makes LTC insurance seem quite attractive now, doesn't it?

Perhaps I should indulge in my favourite foods and die suddenly of a heart attack :-)
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Re: Long term care

Post by tedster »

Bylo wrote
There are a lot of people in acute ward rooms who can't leave the hospital to go to LTC because there are no rooms available there.
My mother was in this situation. IIRC she had been in the acute care, geriatric ward for over 10 weeks with no improvement. The Dr. finally called a meeting and told me that she would have to be moved to a LTC facility. Home with help was a NONO. So I told her that and that I was going to activate the LTC place with whom I had been talking. Her eaction was very negative. (She was totally lucid at 89. :roll: ) and then the Dr and then the Social worker and then the Head nurse all told her the same. I guess they did not trust me. Anyhow, sometime during the night, she must have "turned herself off" They called me at 5 am to tell me she had died.
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by bones1 »

Bylo Selhi wrote:
bones1 wrote:I don't think you need money for a retirement home, at all. It's an option, to make life easy and convenient for seniors, but it's far cheaper to stay in your home or apartment and buy a similar level of care through things like meals-on-wheels and maid service.
WADR, tell that to someone:
• with mobility challenges who can't climb stairs
Move to an apartment.
• who's confined to a wheelchair and thus needs a home that's wheelchair accessible
Move to an apartment.
• who can no longer drive a car and whose home is far from basic services and/or public transit
Move to a town or city with handicapped transpo.
• who needs assistance in dressing and/or bathing themselves
Shouldn't this person be in LTC?
• who can't remember when to take their medications
Shouldn't this person be in LTC?
• who wants to remain as independent as possible but can no longer deal with all the responsibilities of home ownership
...
Move to an apartment.

Hey, nobody said getting old was fun, and that it didn't require changes. Life sucks, and then you die. Sometimes the sucking part requires you to move somewhere else. A retirement home would serve that purpose, but it's more expensive than an apartment or condo.
NOVICE99 wrote:A PSW providing similar care as in an LTC home charges $25-28/hr in Toronto (as per CCAC). For 24-hr care, this amounts to $219,000 per year! And one still has to pay property taxes, and other home maintenance fees on top of this amount. That's $250k minimal per year if an elderly disabled/bedridden person could not get a room at a LTC home - and I believe the wait list can be 2-4 years for some homes.

So much for retiring with $1Million unless the province builds more LTC homes. So I get sick and can only afford 4 years with a 7x24 PSW, what happens after that? Do I ask to be euthanised or will the govt pay for my care?
That may indeed be an option that we as a society need to consider. Rising costs, rising government debt, and aging baby-boomers will certainly result in strained resources. Personally, I'd like the option of euthanasia if the alternative is rotting away in old age, stripped of all dignity. Why stay alive for the worst year or two of your life?
Makes LTC insurance seem quite attractive now, doesn't it?
Not really, if the waiting list is 2-4 years as you claim. You'll be dead before the LTC insurance can be used.
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33399
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: Long term care

Post by AltaRed »

There are a lot of graduated situations that are neither a house, an apartment, or LTC. It isn't nearly as cut and dry as bones1 suggests. Heaven forbid my sons ever seeing it that way.

Again as an example, the place where my mother is going is essentially 55+ with a range of services, some free (such as one meal a day and weekly maid service), and some at extra cost (such as meds management, grooming, bathing, tray service and laundry) depending on a tenant's capability/desire. The place is designed to handle tenants up to the point of LTC/nursing home. Thank goodness the private sector has become creative in its offerings.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by Bylo Selhi »

bones1 wrote:Move to an apartment.... A retirement home would serve that purpose, but it's more expensive than an apartment or condo.
WADR you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

( Apartment | condo ) != ( retirement home | assisted living ) != long term care

AltaRed and I cross-posted. Read what he has to say.
Personally, I'd like the option of euthanasia if the alternative is rotting away in old age, stripped of all dignity. Why stay alive for the worst year or two of your life?
As I was saying... :roll:

The reason why some people move into a retirement home and possibly later into LTC is to maintain as much dignity as possible for as long as possible. Euthanasia may be an option for you under such circumstances, however it's not for the vast majority of Canadians who are more optimistic about life than you seem to be.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Long term care

Post by kcowan »

tedster wrote:My mother was in this situation. IIRC she had been in the acute care, geriatric ward for over 10 weeks with no improvement. The Dr. finally called a meeting and told me that she would have to be moved to a LTC facility. Home with help was a NONO. So I told her that and that I was going to activate the LTC place with whom I had been talking. Her reaction was very negative. (She was totally lucid at 89. :roll: ) and then the Dr and then the Social worker and then the Head nurse all told her the same. I guess they did not trust me. Anyhow, sometime during the night, she must have "turned herself off" They called me at 5 am to tell me she had died.
Same thing with MIL only her choice was a hospice for lung cancer. She lasted two days in the hospice...she was 93 and sharp as a tack.
For the fun of it...Keith
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by bones1 »

Bylo Selhi wrote:
( Apartment | condo ) != ( retirement home | assisted living ) != long term care
Why are you stating the obvious? Have I ever claimed the above were the same?
The reason why some people move into a retirement home and possibly later into LTC is to maintain as much dignity as possible for as long as possible. Euthanasia may be an option for you under such circumstances, however it's not for the vast majority of Canadians who are more optimistic about life than you seem to be.
I never claimed that government should force old people to be euthanized. That would be ridiculous. Why don't you slow down and read what I actually wrote?

And why are you making such unsupported assumptions about what Canadians want and whether I'm optimistic about life or not? Choosing death, at an appropriate time, has nothing to do with how much one has enjoyed their life up to that point. IMO, hanging on to life, no matter how miserable it may be, has more to do with one's fear of death than one's love of life.

People like you are why the government is afraid to have a debate on the issue of euthanasia. People shouldn't force their views onto others.

Unless our younger generation is willing to accept higher and higher taxes to support an older generation, then it may have to be an option that we allow. Currently, euthanasia is illegal, and will get a doctor convicted of murder for helping a patient. What is rational about that? The younger generation has no obligation to fund health care for older people. We do it only because we can afford to do it for now. In 20 years, that may not be the case.

If even a small portion of people opt for euthanasia, rather than undignified decay, then that may help shorten the LTC wait for other people than choose a different option. Why do you object to this?

BTW, have you ever been in a LTC ward? There's very little dignity about it. (At least, how I define dignity. Others may have a different definition and/or tolerance.) The workers are great, but the stuff they have to do for patients certainly isn't dignified.

I'm curious as to why someone would want to live in that condition? I'm referring to the last few months of one's life (sometimes years if they have Alzheimers), when they're basically a vegetable. There's no hope of ever getting better, so why would you want to live in that condition? I understand the religious argument, so I'm more interested in a secular argument.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by Bylo Selhi »

bones1 wrote:Why are you stating the obvious? Have I ever claimed the above were the same?
Well you seem to think that most people who live in their own home now would be well served in either an apartment/condo or LTC. That's clearly not the case in the real world where retirement homes, some with assisted living options, meet a significant demand for an intermediate level of care. Perhaps I misunderstood your points above.
I never claimed that government should force old people to be euthanized.
And I never claimed that you did.
People like you are why the government is afraid to have a debate on the issue of euthanasia. People shouldn't force their views onto others.
You don't know my views on euthanasia. You might actually find them not that dissimilar from yours, including the part I bolded.
Currently, euthanasia is illegal, and will get a doctor convicted of murder for helping a patient.
I'm not a medical professional but as I understand it, this is a grey area. For instance, at what point does the administration of morphine morph from palliative care to murder?
The younger generation has no obligation to fund health care for older people.
That's one reason why some people, especially seniors, are scared shitless about legalizing euthanasia.
If even a small portion of people opt for euthanasia, rather than undignified decay, then that may help shorten the LTC wait for other people than choose a different option. Why do you object to this?
Primarily out of concern that the people doing the opting may not be the people to which that option is applied. We have to be very careful to ensure that those who opt for it, do so without pressure and with full informed consent. I'll be the first to acknowledge that I need to do more research and contemplation about how best to ensure that.
BTW, have you ever been in a LTC ward? There's very little dignity about it.
Yes. And I generally agree. However, I've seen some LTC wards where that's not the case. Not everyone in LTC is in or near a vegetative state. And as I already said, if you can, choose wisely.
I understand the religious argument, so I'm more interested in a secular argument.
[/quote][/quote]
I don't profess to understand the religious argument ;) but let's not digress.

As for the secular arguments, both of my parents are/were determined to live life as long as possible regardless of the impediments to their dignity with which they are/were presented. Fortunately neither is/was in a vegetative state. Most people die before that point so I assume their concerns about loss of dignity apply to intermediate states where they have cognition and can make up their own minds if/when the time comes.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
StuBee
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2944
Joined: 21 Sep 2010 11:08
Location: SW Quebec

Re: Long term care

Post by StuBee »

bones1 wrote:The reason why some people move into a retire I understand the religious argument, so I'm more interested in a secular argument.
The religious arguments involve absolutes and i'm afraid basically trumps any secular argument :wink:

As a part of my professional responsibilities, I have been working in LTC for over 20 years. I have signed hundred's of death certificates. I have never expressly hastened death. I have thought about this... I do know what I am talking about...

What is dignity? Even if you or I could define it, do we have the right to define it. Do we even have the right to define it for our own selves! Dignity cannot be distinguished from quality of life nor can it be separated from life itself. Who apart from the Author of life can answer such questions as these. Job after losing everything including his health said: "He gives and He takes away still I shall say blessed be His name".

Now, I am way off topic here so I will stop!

StuBee
"The term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning."-C.S.Lewis, The Last Battle
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by bones1 »

Bylo Selhi wrote:
bones1 wrote: The younger generation has no obligation to fund health care for older people.
That's one reason why some people, especially seniors, are scared shitless about legalizing euthanasia.
And I guess this argument comes full-circle back to how much does someone have to save for retirement.

Clearly, if one is determined to live to the very last minute of natural life (and often beyond), regardless of how expensive it is, and irrespective of whether or not they enjoy it, then life may get very expensive in the last few years of life. If taxpayers won't fund it, then you'd better have a pile of cash saved up. The taxpayers may not intentionally kill old people, but they may make them live in squalor or have them die on the street.

But, my take is that I'd rather skip the last year of my life (assuming I am vegetative or something like that), if it significantly improves the years of life before that. That is, I'd rather enjoy life while I'm physically and mentally capable of enjoying it, rather than pay to have my life extended well beyond its expiration date.

That's a choice for each person to make for him or her self. Unfortunately, the government has outlawed that choice.
couponstrip
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 552
Joined: 14 Jan 2007 15:20

Re: Long term care

Post by couponstrip »

bones1 wrote:But, my take is that I'd rather skip the last year of my life (assuming I am vegetative or something like that), if it significantly improves the years of life before that. That is, I'd rather enjoy life while I'm physically and mentally capable of enjoying it, rather than pay to have my life extended well beyond its expiration date.
Perhaps this is where there is a disconnect. You assume that the last year of your life will be the time period when the quality of life will be much less than it was previously. You also assume, at that point in time, you will feel the same about it as you do now. Generally, deterioration in quality of life is not a sudden change in the second to last year of life. Quality of life deteriorates steadily for many years augmented by distinct events when accelerate the process. However, an elderly citizen can lose significant mobility after an orthopedic problem, yet live for 20 years or more (and often do) and still have many wonderful years of life, although wonderful in a different way than it was defined in their youth.

Second, it is easy to be smug about health when you are healthy and assume you will just either die or live in poverty when you experience disability.....until you are the disabled one. I can assure you that it is quite a rare individual that concludes "this is exactly how I wanted it to happen in my old age" when they get there without any money to afford the expensive comforts required for disability. In my experience, the majority of people get caught between the enormous chasm of meeting requirements for LTC facility and desperately requiring some assisted living/caregiving/driver etc at some point (and often for many years, not just one or two), and the ones who have little or no money are the most bitter.

For what it's worth.
MaxFax
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 383
Joined: 07 Jul 2006 11:34

Re: Long term care

Post by MaxFax »

tedster wrote: .. sometime during the night, she must have "turned herself off".
I cannot decide if that is an incredibly sad story, or whether that is "exactly the way I want to go".
bones1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 317
Joined: 23 Apr 2009 19:17

Re: Long term care

Post by bones1 »

couponstrip wrote: Perhaps this is where there is a disconnect. You assume that the last year of your life will be the time period when the quality of life will be much less than it was previously.
That will not be the case for many (perhaps most) people, but for the sake of this discussion, I'm assuming that the last year or so of life will be "not worth living". (e.g., So far mentally gone, that there is not enough brain power to enjoy anything, or in such bad physical condition that pain is constant.)

I'm only assuming that for this discussion, because for everyone else then there is not much difference in their living requirements. i.e, Their expenses stay roughly the same. So there's no point in them deciding when to die, because their life never deteriorates to that level.

So to be clear, I'm not bashing old people and assuming they will all be horrible drains on society and all deserve to die. I'm simply saying that for those in really bad condition, it would be nice if the government would allow them a dignified death when they are no longer capable of enjoying life (if the individual chooses it).

Anyone can kill themselves when they're still physically and mentally capable of doing so. The problem is that most don't want to kill themselves in that condition. They want to die when they are well beyond that state. But by then, the government won't let them. In essence, we become prisoners of the state in old age. Locked up, and left in a cell to die.
You also assume, at that point in time, you will feel the same about it as you do now. Generally, deterioration in quality of life is not a sudden change in the second to last year of life. Quality of life deteriorates steadily for many years augmented by distinct events when accelerate the process. However, an elderly citizen can lose significant mobility after an orthopedic problem, yet live for 20 years or more (and often do) and still have many wonderful years of life, although wonderful in a different way than it was defined in their youth.
Yes, but I'm not referring to someone that has many years of happy life left. I'm referring to someone that is mentally "gone". e.g., An Alzheimer's patient that no longer knows who they are and just sits and drools all day. If I ever get to that state, I'd want someone to put an end to it.

Might I change my mind if I get to that point? Well, I doubt it, because I won't have much of a mind left to change. The human part of me will have already checked out; I just want the body to do the same.
Second, it is easy to be smug about health when you are healthy and assume you will just either die or live in poverty when you experience disability.....until you are the disabled one. In my experience, the majority of people get caught between the enormous chasm of meeting requirements for LTC facility and desperately requiring some assisted living/caregiving/driver etc at some point (and often for many years, not just one or two), and the ones who have little or no money are the most bitter.
Okay, that's fine, then they shouldn't choose to die. But who do you want to pay for them? I don't think the taxpayer owes anything to them, and a future generation may just decide to let them starve in the street.

I admit there's a grey zone between my example of a drooling Alzheimer's patient and your example of someone that just has mobility issues. So, how much do you want to sacrifice some your current lifestyle in order to fund a possible medical problem in your old age? IMO, it's worth planning for some disability, but not worth planning for very expensive disabilities. The trade-off just isn't worth it, because I'd never be able to retire. I'd rather throw myself at the mercy of the state, and if they choose to deny me care, THEN I'd like to have an alternative option of painless death (rather than starve in the street).

That doesn't affect any choice you make. So why would you deny me the right to a painless death?
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Re: Long term care

Post by tedster »

MaxFax wrote
I cannot decide if that is an incredibly sad story, or whether that is "exactly the way I want to go".
Well FWIW I am of the opinion that is was the way to go. She was not happy with her stay in the hospital. She was bedridden. My Dad went more or less the same way. i.e he "turned himself off". I am certain. He had a leaking tumour in his lung. His lungs were filling with liquid needing draining every 2 or 3 days. He too was bedridden and would not stay in the hospital and did not want to go into palliative care. After about 2 weeks at his home, with my mother and I taking 12 hour shifts, he refused to have any staff in to help us. So I told him on a friday or sat'y that I was going to call his MD on Monday as we could not cope. He said (and he was totally lucid) "don't worry about it. He also died after midnight. I am certain he "turned himself" off. Much better than being all doped up, lying bed waiting for someone to answer the bell! :(
vince2
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 504
Joined: 14 Sep 2008 11:25

Re: Sustainable Withdrawal Rates

Post by vince2 »

AltaRed wrote: My 92 yr old mother will be moving into a 848 sq ft. 2 bed, 2 bath apartment (with a good sized kitchen) shortly complete with one evening meal (at least 2 choices) a day plus weekly maid service plus 24 hr med alert with a number of other features* for less than $2200/month. I have no idea why people would have to pay anywhere close to what you are suggesting -- a little over the top, no?

* library, media/computer room, games room, shuttle service, entertainment nights, organized activities, etc, etc.
Are there retirement residences that also offer LTC - my FIL was mentally active ( used to do crossword puzzles for enjoyment) and physically able to do most things at the age of 83yrs but MIL developed Alzheimers and the facility could accomodate both my FIL in his 500 sq ft apartment and MIL in a LTC ward in different areas of the same facility - there is no way he would have been able to cope on his own with MIL. At least he could visit her on a regular basis and go to the shopping center on the facility bus knowing that she was being cared for.

So when he had a CVA 5 years later, he also moved into LTC - he was utterly miserable and looking forward to the day when I came to visit him from up country, confident that I would put him out of his misery - the stroke had robbed him of his speech. He passed away 7 months later.

One of the sadder things I have seen was an 80 yr old wife looking after her husband with Parkinsons ( he was virtually helpless) - she was exhausted most of the time despite part time help.
'A slow death to those who become slaves of habit, who repeat the same track every day, who do not change pace, who do not risk and change the colour of their clothes, who do not talk and who do not learn.'
Pablo Neruda
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Re: Long term care

Post by tedster »

AltaRed wrote
My 92 yr old mother will be moving into a 848 sq ft. 2 bed, 2 bath apartment (with a good sized kitchen) shortly complete with one evening meal (at least 2 choices) a day plus weekly maid service plus 24 hr med alert with a number of other features* for less than $2200/month.
That is very reasonable. However, why does she need two beds?
Post Reply