|
|
Aging in Place Editorial, New York Times April 24, 2006
In a report last year, the U.S. National Council on Aging, a research and advocacy organization, made a case for expanding the use of loans known as reverse mortgages to help older people pay for the care they need to remain at home, even as they become frailer.
The idea is to free up money to improve the quality of daily life, while delaying or averting the need for a nursing home. And since that should also be the nation's overall goal when it comes to the well-being of the elderly, reverse mortgages have to be regarded as a kind of social policy.
Reverse mortgages are loans that are made to retirees against a portion of their home equity. They require no monthly repayments. Unless a borrower chooses to repay sooner, the loan comes due, with interest, only when the house is sold - such sales are often after the borrowers die.
Yet the loans have never really caught on. They're readily available, but the obstacles are daunting.
Perhaps the biggest reason reverse mortgages aren't used more widely is the lack of a high-profile, concerted partnership among government, private and nonprofit sectors to promote them for what experts call "aging in place." Both the states and the federal government need to enact comprehensive incentives - and consumer protections - to encourage people to use reverse mortgages to pay for services that will allow them to grow old at home.
Reverse mortgages are bound to become a social norm. The sooner there is debate, planning and action to link reverse mortgages to aging in place, the better the chances for an outcome that benefits the elderly.
|
|
