This is from the Aging In Place blog by Laurie Orlov’s blog
Please email me for details of my Aging in Your Home soon to be published PDF
The Washington Post article about aging in place was, uh, provocative. It provoked me, anyway. The concept of aging in place has been oversold, says Professor Stephen Golant, author of a new book called less provocatively Aging in the Right Place. The Post encapsulation included a few gems from his book, noting that seniors who prefer to age in place have 'residential inertia' -- and paraphrasing their thinking as 'I’d rather rot in my own home.' The premise that the concept was oversold to the public, however, makes a nice headline, almost sounding like a marketing campaign -- but that simply is not what has happened in the recent past. What else was going on?
Government enablers and incentives emerged to keep seniors out of nursing homes. Aging in place is not only a concept, it was a government strategy and policy for low income elderly, government agencies viewed it as cheaper than Medicaid-reimbursed nursing homes. So over the past twenty years funding programs like PACE and Medicaid Long Term Services and Support specifically focused on keeping people out of nursing homes and thus in their homes (or variants). To make this ‘aging in place’ a reality, nursing home building moratoriums appeared from time to time – and sometimes lasted for a very long time – as in Florida. Pretty soon a waiver system sprang up to use nursing home Medicaid funds for the equivalent of nursing home care – at (some sort of) home. And the Money Follows the Person program had a similar result. By 2000, due to this migration of money, many nursing homes closed.
Full article is at