More than three-quarters of seniors claim they want to age in place, living out the remainder of their life in their own home. This includes when they become too infirm to clean, bathe, cook and maintain their property. Running a household when you cannot do chores yourself can get expensive. Some houses do not lend themselves to senior living. This from the from the Wall Street Journal:
Often those homes have stairs and narrow doorways, and need modifications. As people age, they may need help from adult kids or require paid in-home care, which can be more expensive than people think and generally isn’t covered by Medicare.“You have to consider the variables when you grow older,” including a home’s size and safety, says Ken Dychtwald, 74 years old, co-founder and chief executive of Age Wave, a California-based consulting firm specializing in aging-related issues. “We think about child-proofing a home. How do you age-proof a home?”
Adapting homes to allow aging in place often requires expensive modifications. A family member spent $11,000 on a tub shower modification and that was only one item. Stair railings, elevators, swings to get in and out of bed, the obstacles are endless.
Less than half of adults ages 65 to 79 lived in single-floor homes with a no-step entry, according to a 2023 Harvard University study. Steps can be a hazard. One-fourth of Americans 65 and older fall each year. Home elevators are an option but can cost between $20,000 and $100,000.
One bright point is new technology that facilitates close monitoring and lets seniors perform more tasks themselves.
Smart-home technology, including security doorbells and fall-detection sensors, can help people live at home longer and provide peace of mind to adult kids who live far away, says Andy Miller, who started AARP’s AgeTech Collaborative, a group of businesses developing aging-related technology. His parents, who live in Florida, can control lights and other devices with their voice.
There is a lot more to aging in place than Alexa. Someone must mow the grass, clean the house and prepare meals. As seniors need help with activities of daily living the costs rise.
The median national cost for round-the-clock in-home care is about $24,000 a month, according to Genworth, a long-term-care insurance company, with higher costs in states like California, where monthly median costs are close to $27,000.
An article in the New York Times that appeared years ago suggested several people live together and share the cost of around the clock homecare. That sounds like a better idea than eating the entire cost for one person.
Some homes are not safe for seniors. Even those that are often no longer meet the needs of the owner and would be costly to adapt. It could also be more difficult to later sell the house with all manner of handicapped adaptations. An aging in place community of senior homes may better meet the needs of aging seniors. Instead of living in a family home in a residential neighborhood of children and working adults, there are neighborhoods of homes built specifically for aging in place. Home care would be easier and possibly cheaper if the clients are clustered more closely together.
Many of the existing retirement communities that I have seen require infirm seniors to move out or move into skilled nursing homes at some point. I have also seen assisted living communities where residents are required to buy their living space at outrageous prices and ownership of their unit reverts to the investors upon death. The arrangement is a type of annuity where you prepaid for assisted living/long term care in advance. There are a variety of aging in place strategies. They are all worth exploring.