"She never complains, and her brothers and sisters don't complain," Amy says. "But I sit back and wonder when my mom will run herself down. She's 67; she has her own retirement to deal with. I worry that she's going to hurt herself trying to help (Grandfather). Sometimes I wonder if this is what my grandfather would have really wanted had he known it would be like this. I wonder if everyone's quality of time together would be better in a different situation.
Jeff Opdyke's Love & Money column "A Parent Ages, and a Promise is Kept" in today's Wall Street Journal Sunday section of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel raises hard questions about aging in place--and the human cost to relatives and loved ones.
Opdyke's mother-in-law struggles to manage two households, with the help of four siblings and occasional aides who care for their 94-year-old father. His wife, Amy, a nurse, believes assisted living for her grandfather would be best for everyone. But her aunts and uncles believe that the highest good is to honor a promise made long ago, when the world was different.
This Friday, the Milwaukee Aging Consortium's Expanding Housing Options Summit will explore what it takes to let people age in place--or in community. We probably won't engage in those wrenching personal dilemmas. But we will be able to consider existing and future places and services for improving the lives of elderly people and their caregivers.
Some time ago I heard about a Canadian plan that made no-interest loans to families for building "mother-in-law" additions to their houses. Sounds like a win-win situation. Everyone gets to live in one household, and the younger family increases its net worth through increasing the value of its house.
What are your dreams/wishes/ideas for housing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment