So I'm wondering how common is it in the current time that most people will have an extended period of years before death where they require caregiving? I know this site is devoted to caregiving so it looks like 100% of the time but this is a self-selected group. A few years ago my insurance agent was trying to talk me into insurance for this, but even their best very expensive policy only covered three years in a nursing home before it gave out - it hardly seemed worth it. Have things changed from how they used to be, say 20-30 years ago? Did the end of life always become this extended lingering situation?
And yes, to some degree, it depends upon what one is dying of, declining from, and over what period of time...and who is around to pitch in, to really help out. Most run for the hills...just "too much" and/or are "too busy" for the elderly, mostly these are parents that brought us into this world and cared for us when we were fraile, sick, crying and needed to be fed...to be cared for.
Is there really a big difference between an elderly child and a young child, except for age? The young child is learning, being taught, surviving, being guided and comforted. The elderly child is trying to remember, trying to in many cases..be a part of a family, fit in, control what they know is becoming uncontrollable, and to maintain their dignity. They have now become dependent, to a greater degree or not...but becoming dependent. Most elderly are sharper than you think, and ultimately is our responsibility to give them every opportunity to feel safe and comfortable...just like when someone provided for you when you were a baby, and perhaps far less cognitive, and much more dependent. We were all in the wilderness when we were born, and dependent upon our parents and/or other providers that looked out for our safety and well being. We were then, a "shell" of what would/could be. Yet today, all this debate about "quality of life" for the elderly...and all the sacrifice that impedes on "our quality of life".
Guess what folks, life is a circle of life events, from the mircle of birth, and the caretaking process... to the elderly state of human life, and the caretaking process. What's the difference between a dependent one year old and a 85 year old dependent parent? It is the cycle of life and love to provide..to be there through the good times, and the rough times. Ultimately, it is your decision and only you can answer the question of "quality of life".
In my opinion, "quality of life" is more on the shoulders of the caregivers for the elderly, and what they are willing to sacrifice to provide a better "quality of life" to the person they are caring for. In my experience, and with my elimination and/or reduction of so many antipsychotic drugs that were perscribed for my Mother, Mom bloomed back like a knew flower. And so, she realized a much better "quality of life" during the last three to four months of her life. She was alive, and not a "shell". It all falls upon the caregiver, and what they believe to be and see to believe, sacrifice for, and trust to enable and provide the best quality of life for whom they are caring for. It is ultimately, the primary caregiver's decision, absent other family assistance..often from remote family members that are not involved...and in most cases, don't want to be involved...because of jepordizing "their quality of life".
It's your decision. Maybe a question should be asked to some of our so many heroes that fought in our many wars. Ask them about "quality of life" and the fortitude it took for them to carry a wounded soldier to safety...not knowing their "quality of life".
Good luck with your decision making process.
Is the question "should I buy Long term care insurance?"
1. Can you afford it? I'm 66, and I pay $2000 a year for a medium-quality policy. It's a lot of money. If you are younger and very healthy it costs less, but it's never cheap. It would be a shame to spend that much for a few years and then discover you can't keep it up, and have to let it lapse. To die at 97 and never have gotten a penny's benefit from it because you're too healthy - that is a "loss" i'd be glad to bear.
2. Do you have assets to protect? If you have less than $200,000 including your house, and you spend years in a NH, it will all go for your care anyway, and you probably can't afford it.
If you are worth $10,000,000, then you have a great money person who can set things up to protect your assets and fund your care for years. I am in between.
3. Do you have young or disabled children you need to provide for? Maybe a life insurance policy or trust would do that better than LTC insurance. Or maybe LTC will make it easier for them to know what to do with you when/if you need care.
4. Do you have a family history of chronic disabling conditions? If so, and if you can afford it, sign up early! The odds are that you will need LTC. Neither of my parents needed a long NH stay, but we are all just one very bad fall from needing a lot of care for years. I tried to get insurance for me and my husband because he has a family history of diabetes, but even at age 60, he wasn't accepted.
5. Do you live in a state that will reward you for having LTCI when they come after your assets for Medicaid? This applies to those of us in the middle, who can self-pay for some time but not forever. I don't remember the details, but it helps.
It is a gamble. I read some statistics. There are more single women over age 85 in NHs than any other group. But. Only 25% of single women over age 85 are in the NH! Hope this was helpful
To get back to your question however.....no one can say how long you or any of us will live. I would say to plan for a long term illness and if you die quickly, you will be lucky. We can all take out these policies and walk outside and get hit by a truck and die or we can acquire a disease such as dementia or alzheimer's and be ill for 5-20 years. Only God knows what is in our future.
I also had a cousin who sufferered from severe epilepsy (12-15 seizures per day, brain surgery, etc). Now, when he was younger he was more mobile and could take care of his personal needs, visit family, etc. He was bedridden for around the same amount of time as my grandmother. Maybe a little longer.
My FIL is 86, diabetic, 2 heart surgeries, mild dementia and has lived in his home up until the last month (he is in rehab) and has pretty much been mobile and able to take care of himself up until around 2 years ago. For the last couple of years it has been my husband and other hired caregivers helping him.
Now the one common thread I have noticed is that in all cases I mentioned every person was taken care of in their or a relatives home. I think it my grandmother or cousin had been in a nursing home, they would have passed away sooner. When I was in my early 20's, I thought that was just wonderful. I am now 20 years older and not so certain that a hasted death would not have been better for them and all involved. My grandmother suffered horribly going from 154 lbs. to 54 lbs. when she died. She could not eat due to an esophagus condition and the pain was so bad at the end that she said she felt like rats were eating her stomach. She kept her mind all the way to the end and requested a closed casket.
My cousin also suffered horribly and in the end could not even speak. It was a horrible situation for his young son to see.
I can think of cases of extended family members who caregived for their parents/grandparents and in most cases they kept them at home as long as they could. The ones who went to nursing homes seemed to not live long. Now is it that they just didn't have long to live anyway and going to a nursing home had nothing to do with it? Or could it be that the direct one on one attention, making certain a person eats, mental stimulation, etc. all would have added a little more time? Is more time a good thing when someone is suffering? And I have read studies where people think only those with cancer, heart failure or other ailments suffer the most but those with dementia/alzheimers have been reported to often be frightened by not recognizing their surroundings, not recognizing family etc. So while their bodies may be healthy, they are suffering. And I have seen mental conditions become worse when patients were taken out of the familiar setting of their home (my grandma was that way).
My heart goes out to any one going through this or needing to make a decision about in home care vs. a nursing home. With my FIL, we are opting for the later. He and our family will be safer (he put a gun to his stomach and also cut himself with a knife and has violent outbursts and is on anti-depressants and diagnosed as paranoid) and our health is such we cannot lift him, which he requires. Will his life be shorted by going into a nursing home? It is anyone's guess. Is it bad if it is? In my opinion, if he has his heart right with the Lord, then no.
I also like to ask questions that make people think and explore issues for the future. My original post was clear - I am interested in the question of whether the need for extended caregiving is how aging typically goes for everyone now in modern times. Personally I'm interested in this wondering what is ahead for me with my own two current and future caregiving situations and then for my own aging as well.
Again you have a lot of nerve telling me I don't belong here. I have a hell of a lot to contribute even if I don't walk in the same shoes exactly as many of you yet - but I don't feel quite so welcome anymore.
Apologies to everyone that has been good to me here, this just really hit a nerve.
Sad thing is, if it was not for gambling his money away, playing big shot with girlfriends, etc. my FIL has a killer pension. He is 86 years old, took a buyout at his job and has drawn a pension for 25 years. He had one of the kind of jobs they don't make anymore. If he had saved just a percentage of what he earned with his pension, he could have stayed at home and had 24/7 round the clock care with an aid and it most likely would have been enough to do him for the rest of his life. He would have never had to set foot in a nursing home. But he wasted it. His bank account is slowly growing since he has been in the hospital/rehab and my husband and I have looked at his bills and see what really goes out. He has very few regular monthly bills -- the rest has been blown.
I am recovering from acute renal failure and early congestive heart failure and am at high risk for a stoke. My husband is older than me, diabetic and other health problems. We could kill ourselves so he could knock out 90 or more. I could also cash in all our savings and my daughter's college fund and pay for him to be cared for 24/7 at home -- but why should we let him rob my daughter and ourselves when he didn't care to save for himself?
As I mentioned on another thread -- free will is a tricky thing. Your dad and my FIL made all the decisions they did freely. Sometimes you have to pay the piper at the end.
(((Hugs))) to you and your decision.
Whirlpool ~ please know that you are welcome on this forum to ask ANY question! To answer your question, in my humble opinion (IMHO), unfortunately, with the advances of medical care over the past 50 years, it has made it pretty much a given that "extension" of life is valued over "quality of life". I have had this discussion in depth with my 87-year old mother-in-law. She was always very active (up until a couple of years ago) -- she is still living independently with my FIL -- and in her opinion she has had a pretty much happy life and has told me numerous times she's "ready to go" and has no regrets. On the other hand, my own mother (age 84) who also still lives independently at home but struggles with mobility and (I believe) unresolved depression about my father's death 5 years ago, refuses to discuss end-of-life issues in any way, shape or form. I think she just hopes that she will one day just not wake up and that will be that. Well, guess what, that most likely will not happen. I think the elderly (like my mother) would like to live forever and not think about the fact that they no longer will be walking this earth and as someone else mentioned (I think on this forum) that they are scared that no one will remember them and that their life was for naught. Unforntunately, for the vast majority of the earth's population, that will be true. Unless your famous, or Marie Curie, Elvis, Abraham Lincoln, etc., only one or two generations will remember you after you pass. That is a fact and it is what it is. You can only hope to live a good, happy life and enjoy it while you can.
Butterflygrl, I hear you. I get it. Elderly people can become very angry with their circumstances and their loss of control and sometimes it may or may not be within their power to change their situation. Do not feel guilty for your father's circumstance. As you said, he lived his life the way he wanted and now when he is unable to control his surroundings, he is taking it out on you. Just know you are keeping him safe and if he has to be angry about that, then so be it. Stay strong. In my girlfriend's situation where she had to put her mother -- now 93 -- into a nursing home several years ago because she kept falling and could not live on her own anymore, she visits her Mom 3 x a week and still, her mother makes her feel guilty about it. Her Mom felt that it was her "job" to care for her no matter what, that she should even have left her husband and move in to HER home and take care of her. Ahhh, I think not. My girlfriend struggles with this guilt all the time. I just tell her that no matter what, she did the best she could for her Mom in finding her a NH that takes fairly good care of her and she is safe. She is an only child, by the way. We have this discussion on many occasions. Her mother never fails to guilt-trip her at nearly every visit. I don't know how she does these visits 3 x a week. If it were me, I'd be cutting it down to once a week.
But, I digress. To the original question, I think the answer in the future, is a change in the way the medical community thinks about preserving life at any cost. My son is in medical school and the courses he takes on medical ethics are very thought provoking. A doctors creed is "do not harm" but in essence, is keeping one alive under any circumstances "doing no harm". There are some who say they do not want to be kept alive if their foreseeable quality of life will be less than ideal. And then there are those who feel they want to live as long as possible no matter what the emotional/physical/financial cost becomes. That's why the medical community has tried to encourage everyone (at every doctor appt or hospital stay) to make their wishes known through a health care proxy or medical POA. And even then with those things, it is not black and white. My father signed a DNR order and at 11 pm at night I was awakened by a phone call from the hospital staff on duty that they had started CPR on my father and they wanted to know if I wanted th em to stop chest compressions. Really??? Are you kidding me??? What the hell was the DNR he signed for? To this day, I still feel guilty for telling them to "stop" and let him go. Did I make the right decision? I think so. Do I feel guilty about it? You bet. I thought do not resusitate meant just that -- do not resusitate if someone goes into cardiac arrest. I am still angry to this day at the hospital staff for making me make that decision when clearly my father had already made that decision for himself. He was another one who would not discuss any end-of-life decisions with his family (wife, kids, etc.) and it was only when I asked the hospital staff to discuss with him a DNR that he signed it. It broke my heart that the nurse who had that discussion with him, told me later that he was crying when he signed it. I am crying while I write this now.
To all the caregivers out there, I say God bless you. It is a difficult journey and ((((HUGS)))) are sent to all.