I recently spoke with friends, he in his early eighties and she in her early seventies, who were concerned about funding either of them in a U.K. retirement home if needed, which, according to them, can cost £6,000 or more a month.
Firstly, I was horrified that we were having this discussion and, at the same time, by the threat of such a cost. They’d been with people who were facing these issues, so naturally they started to think, ‘What if this happened to us?’
Payment depends on your assets, and generally that means your home, savings, and investments will be the source of payment.
Investing in staying in your own home can be a life-changing strategy, but it may not be so profitable to the outside world.
Imagine keeping your independence and being in your own space.
My Nana died in a home, so I’ve had experience. She went to several before my Mother felt safe and satisfied with her choice and my Nana’s comfort. On reflection, we faced obstacles that weren’t right. That shaped how I saw my own Mother ageing and made me want to do everything I could to prevent the same fate as her own Mother.
Fortunately, neither of my parents had to endure going into a ‘home’. That’s the wrong word; it isn’t a home; it’s an institution, very different from your own life. Reduced mobility and dementia can, no doubt, have an impact, and in certain circumstances, choices are limited.
Your own environment should be your haven, and if you need help, social services should be at hand.
Are investors more inclined to put their money into senior homes rather than preventative strategies? The answer is yes. Although research on what is termed ageing diseases and ways to stay healthy as we age is growing, big money is still going to traditional ways of treating the ageing community. In the U.S.A., investors put roughly three times more into senior housing than into longevity and prevention. Housing is safe, predictable real estate; prevention is riskier science with a longer payoff.
We need our homes and environments designed to be more ageing-friendly, and this is happening, albeit slowly in some countries.
There are exceptions: countries like Singapore are on the front line of valuing their senior communities and thinking differently.
Singapore is already officially a super-age country as of 2026: because 21.4% of citizens are now 65+, up from 13.7% in 2016, and by 2035 more than 1 in 4 citizens will be in that bracket. In my opinion, we should all keep an eye on how Singapore manages what most would call a challenge.
Minister Indranee Rajah says, “a longevity society, not an ageing population”, and that ageing should be treated as an economic opportunity to design for, not a problem to manage. A study suggests healthy-lifestyle changes could save Singapore $650 million in healthcare costs by 2050, so why aren’t other societies following suit? Singapore is wealthy, small, centrally governed, and visionary.
My book, Forward After Fifty: The Rising Reinventors, discusses Finland, another country with a vision for its aging society similar to Singapore’s, given its high percentage of people over 60. Again, the focus is on keeping people at home, with an emphasis on adjusting living spaces for easier mobility if needed and creating opportunities for seniors to connect to prevent loneliness.
Some good news, according to the Office for National Statistics in the UK, is that ‘a proportion of the older population residing in care homes has decreased over time, from 3.2% of the 65 years and over usual resident population in 2011 to 2.5% in 2021. So does this mean my friends shouldn’t worry about possibilities that could never happen?
I have watched my Nana end up in a home because her own house was impossible to accommodate her physical situation. Of course, an alternative to going into a home could have been planned, but this was up to my Mother and her brother, who was ill himself at the time. The family was left to make decisions, which may not have been in the individual’s best interests.
My goal was to keep my Mother in her own home, which we did, but not because we’d chosen accommodation to suit her needs; in fact, the opposite, which showed we’d learned no lessons from my Nana’s home circumstances.
I’m 70 now, the same age my Mother moved to France, where a home served her well until immobility got the best of her. We adapted and were fortunate to have help from a brilliant health team. However, returning to my own situation, I also don’t have a house that’s suitable for people who aren’t mobile. I spend a lot of time exercising and keeping my muscles toned. My motto has always been, “Prevention is better than cure,” but who knows…
What I do know is that we waste so much time in the negative zone, thinking about “what if and that a number one fear is losing independence.
What can we do now, in our own lives, to keep independence for as long as possible, and what can society do culturally and practically to prevent it? Culturally and practically, looking at other countries’ strategies, such as Finland and Singapore, may help. However, what we can do ourselves is this, taken from my book Forward After Fifty: The Rising Reinventors; 
Recognise that your environment is important. Keep Connected.
Take control of your money to give yourself more options.
Decide today to stay as independent as possible. Feel empowered. Rely on yourself rather than relying on others. Conversely, if ill health prevails, it takes great courage to ask for the help you need.
Keep up with technology; connect online and offline.
What matters most will vary for each individual, so make a list and your own action plan for independence.