I am "travelling solo" now - in my 70'th year and currently exploring housing for me. Actually I am happy where I am - renting a duplex but finding it hard financially, and getting a bit of flack from my family as I am "too far away" for them. Not too far when it comes to them wanting a babysitter, but too far for them to drive to visit me. It is just 45 minutes on a motorway for one of my offspring, though the other does live a further distance away.
I have a three bedroom duplex - I only need two bedrooms really although when grandchildren come to stay the third bedroom is most useful. It was the best that was available to me - that I thought I could afford.
I have searched (Australian) sites for seniors rental, and generally all I find are one bedroom "apartments" with meals included. Eeeeek! I don't want to eat "institutional" food. I've seen it. I'm not ready for that at the moment, and I don't want to meld my life with any group of folk. I know there are benefits in this sort of living "ordinary" bathroom/toilet, and a small lounge/sitting room with virtually no kitchen (why would you need one when all the food is provided?????!!!) - in fact almost a "dog box" as I call them. Car parking is "under cover" but pretty primitive and storage is non existent.
There is an Australian program (NRAS) which I may not be eligible for anyway - but it does provide housing at reasonable rental but they are mostly houses.
Most of the seniors housing is for purchase. And while I may have a few dollars in the bank I cannot afford to purchase.
I have friends in government housing - one has a two bedroomed house and unit - with stairs to the bedrooms upstairs. Downstairs is very well set out - kitchen, small lounge and dining and lovely outdoor area. She has been there for many years - though is under government pressure to move to something smaller.
Other friends are in what I call "dog boxes" with little more than a small bedroom (with no wardrobes!!!), a kitchenette, a tiny lounge room (if one is to dine there, there is no space in one of them for even a small dining table and two chairs. My friend eats on the lounge chair or outside on the narrow "patio") She has no storage space. The bathroom is tiny and doubles for the laundry so it is always small - and as it has shelving everything looks cluttered and overflowing.
I do believe that it is unreasonable to expect people to downsize to such an extent that they do not have room for an overnight guest, visiting grandchildren, or someone to stay overnight with them when they have a health issue.
Government housing does not have a caretaker or anyone on site to "monitor" behaviour, incidents, problems - each individual has to "fight" for things to be fixed, improved, resolved by contacting a bureaucrat.
I can think of nothing more depressing than having to confine myself to a small apartment without room for my hobbies, without adequate storage space - even for my clothes.
The reality is that there is little choice and few vacancies - and certainly very minimal options for those who are not cashed up.
I do think women fare worse - men generally have minimal possessions, don't like to cook and enjoy it when others cook for them, and generally are less fuzzy about food.
Even their living expenses are often less than women (think cosmetics, hair care, health care, and items that men never have to consider.
My friends appear to have fared less well after marriage breakups, (how often do I hear that somehow the bloke got more than his "fair share" of things when they went their separate ways?)
I must do some research (quality research that is) to find out what people want. Does the government do any research or do they just build to a price? I suspect the latter.
I remember a few years ago I rescued a bloke who had slipped and fallen into a creek opposite our house. I "saved" him and some passing young folk drove him to his government unit which was not far from where I lived - in fact in the same complex as a friend. She lives in one of the "dogboxes" I referred to earlier. He lived alone in a place with much more space - with very little furnishings or anything else in it. It was a stark contrast to what I had seen at my friends.
Sadly for him, he was moved into something with more care as he was clearly deteriorating. My friend has lived in her small unit for many years and would have loved to be moved into something bigger.
I wonder if any reader who is "senior" would comment on how they would like to live. What do you think should be the minimum standard for housing for seniors?
I have a three bedroom duplex - I only need two bedrooms really although when grandchildren come to stay the third bedroom is most useful. It was the best that was available to me - that I thought I could afford.
I have searched (Australian) sites for seniors rental, and generally all I find are one bedroom "apartments" with meals included. Eeeeek! I don't want to eat "institutional" food. I've seen it. I'm not ready for that at the moment, and I don't want to meld my life with any group of folk. I know there are benefits in this sort of living "ordinary" bathroom/toilet, and a small lounge/sitting room with virtually no kitchen (why would you need one when all the food is provided?????!!!) - in fact almost a "dog box" as I call them. Car parking is "under cover" but pretty primitive and storage is non existent.
There is an Australian program (NRAS) which I may not be eligible for anyway - but it does provide housing at reasonable rental but they are mostly houses.
Most of the seniors housing is for purchase. And while I may have a few dollars in the bank I cannot afford to purchase.
I have friends in government housing - one has a two bedroomed house and unit - with stairs to the bedrooms upstairs. Downstairs is very well set out - kitchen, small lounge and dining and lovely outdoor area. She has been there for many years - though is under government pressure to move to something smaller.
Other friends are in what I call "dog boxes" with little more than a small bedroom (with no wardrobes!!!), a kitchenette, a tiny lounge room (if one is to dine there, there is no space in one of them for even a small dining table and two chairs. My friend eats on the lounge chair or outside on the narrow "patio") She has no storage space. The bathroom is tiny and doubles for the laundry so it is always small - and as it has shelving everything looks cluttered and overflowing.
I do believe that it is unreasonable to expect people to downsize to such an extent that they do not have room for an overnight guest, visiting grandchildren, or someone to stay overnight with them when they have a health issue.
Government housing does not have a caretaker or anyone on site to "monitor" behaviour, incidents, problems - each individual has to "fight" for things to be fixed, improved, resolved by contacting a bureaucrat.
I can think of nothing more depressing than having to confine myself to a small apartment without room for my hobbies, without adequate storage space - even for my clothes.
The reality is that there is little choice and few vacancies - and certainly very minimal options for those who are not cashed up.
I do think women fare worse - men generally have minimal possessions, don't like to cook and enjoy it when others cook for them, and generally are less fuzzy about food.
Even their living expenses are often less than women (think cosmetics, hair care, health care, and items that men never have to consider.
My friends appear to have fared less well after marriage breakups, (how often do I hear that somehow the bloke got more than his "fair share" of things when they went their separate ways?)
I must do some research (quality research that is) to find out what people want. Does the government do any research or do they just build to a price? I suspect the latter.
I remember a few years ago I rescued a bloke who had slipped and fallen into a creek opposite our house. I "saved" him and some passing young folk drove him to his government unit which was not far from where I lived - in fact in the same complex as a friend. She lives in one of the "dogboxes" I referred to earlier. He lived alone in a place with much more space - with very little furnishings or anything else in it. It was a stark contrast to what I had seen at my friends.
Sadly for him, he was moved into something with more care as he was clearly deteriorating. My friend has lived in her small unit for many years and would have loved to be moved into something bigger.
I wonder if any reader who is "senior" would comment on how they would like to live. What do you think should be the minimum standard for housing for seniors?
