Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
While that is an accurate quote from the beginning of the column, it's not what the column focuses on. What is important is not the odds of needing care, but what type and for how long. As the article goes on to say:
" you will find that most Americans, if they need long-term care, will need three years or less, and much of that will be in-home. "
It adds that this is not the risk. The risk is the low probability catastrophic event of needing many years of long term care along with a spouse also needing extended long term care.
IMHO this simply highlights the basic idea of insurance - you insure against low probability, high cost events, and deal with the (fairly) routine stuff yourself. As the article asks:
"Given the options out there—long-term-care insurance, life insurance, annuities, reverse mortgages, continuing-care communities and programs, veteran benefits, self-insuring—and given your personal circumstances (assets, estate plans, health, life expectancy), how can you best hedge against an outsize threat to your retirement finances?"
I have MS and my *plan* is to self-deliver, for lack of a better term, when the going gets unbearable. And I believe that will be before I need LTC. As always, the problem with this plan is two fold. One, deciding to carry on at the last minute, into oblivion. Two, making the attempt and failing, making things much much worse for all concerned. Fear of Number Two leads to Number One, most likely. Oh well.
Comments
" you will find that most Americans, if they need long-term care, will need three years or less, and much of that will be in-home. "
It adds that this is not the risk. The risk is the low probability catastrophic event of needing many years of long term care along with a spouse also needing extended long term care.
IMHO this simply highlights the basic idea of insurance - you insure against low probability, high cost events, and deal with the (fairly) routine stuff yourself. As the article asks:
"Given the options out there—long-term-care insurance, life insurance, annuities, reverse mortgages, continuing-care communities and programs, veteran benefits, self-insuring—and given your personal circumstances (assets, estate plans, health, life expectancy), how can you best hedge against an outsize threat to your retirement finances?"