Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Sharon Villines (sharonsharonvillines.com) | |
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 09:46:29 -0800 (PST) |
I agree that multi-generational housing is best. What I would like to hear more about is what people like about senior cohousing. Adding some statistical data, most “adult” communities have 55 as the lowest qualifying age with a variety of rules when on spouse is younger. For communities with continuing care, the average age at entry used to be 70 with a population of many 85-95 year olds. (I don’t have current data but I doubt if there have been drastic changes.) I suspect that senior cohousing is closer to the 55 minimum than the age 70 initial entry. When we have talked here about declining physical ability, even the senior cohousing communities are saying, “We aren’t there yet. We don’t know.” There is a concern about how do we cope with declining physical ability, which is legitimate, but there is also the concern for “adult behavior” zones. My memory of visiting a senior cohousing community was the quiet order of things. It was slower and more “decorated” is the only word I can think of. Both the interior and the exterior were not designed according the lowest common denominator, “What if a child….” The what-if-a-child design style assumes (1) children should not be expected to be capable of reasonable behavior, and (2) children should be included in all areas of the CH and all activities. There is a self-righteousness in those advocating for children but none in advocating for the rights of those who have been there done that and are ready to move on — at least a few hours a day. A post many years ago, a cohouser said the group was upset that the three older households had chosen the houses on the other side of a small wood. The others were concerned about their isolation and wanted them to physically integrate themselves into the community. They declined, being very happy with the distance. The poster was checking to be sure this was okay and not a bad direction. There are many topics of conversation that people over 60 or 70 that will enjoy and need, that anyone younger will find boring or weird. They can’t relate. Aside from forming a "Tuesday evening for seniors”, like a book club, there needs to be places and times in the community where children or even the young professionals don’t set the tone. Their boredom doesn’t take precedence. In discussions of presidents and presidential candidates for example. It is nice to discuss past presidents without either explaining who Johnson was or to have the subject changed to what ever is of interest to a 30-40 something. Sharon ---- Sharon Villines Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC http://www.takomavillage.org
-
Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject Ann Zabaldo, December 19 2015
-
Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject Fred-List manager, December 21 2015
-
Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject castrohom, December 22 2015
- Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject R Philip Dowds, December 23 2015
- Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject Sharon Villines, December 23 2015
- Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject Elizabeth Magill, December 23 2015
- Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject R Philip Dowds, December 23 2015
- Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject Sharon Villines, December 23 2015
-
Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject castrohom, December 22 2015
-
Re: Deep Aging (TM); And a Totally Different Subject Fred-List manager, December 21 2015
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.