Mom's much touted "LTC" insurance paid a whopping $25 a day towards her long term care shen she went into a rehab facility.
Maybe when she and dad bought the policy in the early 70's that actually would have been helpful. We were absolutely shocked at how poor the coverage was!
Mom had almost no savings, but her short stint in rehab made us aware that LT care would have been unreachable on her small SS income.
My DH and I are covered so that BOTH of us could go into Long term care in the best of the best facilities, and not have our monthly income affected negatively. We've invested well over $1M and are now drawing down on the principal. That isn't a lot, we've come to realize and are making sure our kids are making wise choices and saving for THEIR needs.
Thanks for the link. This line stood out for me and made me wonder how well the reporter grasps the situation:
"The sandwich generation is also saving money for their children to take care of them. According to the study, 42% say they've put aside $43,136.67 on average."
In some zip codes this sum would cover maybe two months of NH care.
I wonder, too, about the "solution" of long term health insurance. Every caregiving account I read that mentions LTC insurance describes situations where that insurance turns out to be nearly useless.
Back in the early days LTC insurance policies were better, I think. But then insurance companies confronted large claims eating into profits, and the policies were significantly weakened. And the red-tape is apparently extraordinary (surely by design) and often too much for the caregivers and certainly too much for those in need of care.
It seems there really isn't *any* solution in place right now (in the U.S.) for the challenge of slow/multi-year/multi-decade decline.
I'm looking forward to digging into the 1000+ comments. The specificity of these comments (versus journalistic generalities) is often really illuminating, really clarifying.
Maybe when she and dad bought the policy in the early 70's that actually would have been helpful. We were absolutely shocked at how poor the coverage was!
Mom had almost no savings, but her short stint in rehab made us aware that LT care would have been unreachable on her small SS income.
My DH and I are covered so that BOTH of us could go into Long term care in the best of the best facilities, and not have our monthly income affected negatively. We've invested well over $1M and are now drawing down on the principal. That isn't a lot, we've come to realize and are making sure our kids are making wise choices and saving for THEIR needs.
"The sandwich generation is also saving money for their children to take care of them. According to the study, 42% say they've put aside $43,136.67 on average."
In some zip codes this sum would cover maybe two months of NH care.
I wonder, too, about the "solution" of long term health insurance. Every caregiving account I read that mentions LTC insurance describes situations where that insurance turns out to be nearly useless.
Back in the early days LTC insurance policies were better, I think. But then insurance companies confronted large claims eating into profits, and the policies were significantly weakened. And the red-tape is apparently extraordinary (surely by design) and often too much for the caregivers and certainly too much for those in need of care.
It seems there really isn't *any* solution in place right now (in the U.S.) for the challenge of slow/multi-year/multi-decade decline.
I'm looking forward to digging into the 1000+ comments. The specificity of these comments (versus journalistic generalities) is often really illuminating, really clarifying.
Thanks again, Southernwaver!