Courage Opens All Doors – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

Courage Opens All Doors – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

“When one door closes, another door opens,” states an old adage. The real issue is not about whether the door is opening or closing, but how seniors deal with the place in between.

“How long will you keep pounding on an open door, begging someone to answer?” – Rabia, Sufi Mystic

“When one door closes, another door opens,” states an old adage. How many of us have heard or read that statement when facing a particularly difficult obstacle? Seniors may find themselves experiencing that phrase when they deal with a difficult member of their community or when they have to confront a challenge in their family. In those two examples, that goodwill phrase probably does not help to quell uncertainty or the anxiety it produces. The real issue is not about whether the door is opening or closing, but how seniors deal with the place in between.

Many people have called this in between place “hell in the hallway” while other people refer to this emotion as “closing off” or “going underground.” I have even heard it called “the room of a thousand demons.” It’s as if the door is locked from the inside. Seniors feeling this impasse can find themselves in a predicament called Stuckthinking™ or trapped in a state of inertia causing a restrictive feeling that squeezes their heart.

Seniors make choices about how they are going to spend their lives and who they are going to share their lives with, keeping busy until it may be too late. Rushing through life, they rarely see that complacency filled with excuses and justifications seeped into their spirits and drained their precious reservoir of courage. At 60 years of age we may eventually see that the people we called our friends have now passed away.

Seniors know that not all doors are locked from the inside. Some doors close in a necessary and positive way, such as when you choose to transfer your passion to a new life mission such as volunteering. More commonly in our minds, the closed door represents a negative event such as relocating from a wonderful congregation or an inability to come to an agreement with a complicated financial issue. During these times, seniors can find themselves trying to use force to heave the next door open. Determined to do whatever it takes to overcome this barrier, a confused senior wishing to do the right thing might be vaguely aware that they are forcing the issue. If they are alert, the use of force (recognized as a gnawing sense of discomfort) will tell them that this opportunity is probably not the right choice.

Despite the frustration and sense of loss, hell in the hallway provides a chance for introspection. This reflective opportunity sheds light on a person’s true heart and spirit intentions.

Courageous Conversations

Female seniors might hold themselves to a higher standard, which puts them under undue pressure such as always trying to be helpful. This is a Catch-22 if they are unable to muster the courage to say “no thank you” when they feel overwhelmed and need to take time to nurture their own spirits. So these women push wholeheartedly to open a door. The paradox is that by tapping into the reservoir of courage that already exists in each and every one of us we can open and close all doors with greater ease and grace.

In general, seniors may consider slowing down to examine their spiritual path and level of happiness by asking this difficult question: What is the courageous conversation I am not having?

Reflecting on that question seniors might discover that they are stuck in courage obstacles such as apathy, self-doubt, blame or full-blown denial. These obstacles confine seniors in the hallway without even noticing that there are doors! Once seniors have declared their willingness to confront their personal hurdles they have moved into the zone called “courageous intention.” Then, the path ahead opens and clarity reigns.

Courageous Choices

If fear occupies the hallway know that fear is nothing more than being stuck, and stuck is mired in inertia. So ask yourself: “Will you stay in the hallway or make a choice to open the door?” “Choices determine consequences,” David R. Hawkins, M.D. writes in Truth vs Falsehood: How to Tell the Difference, “which is a mechanism that is really impersonal and operates automatically…. One then realizes that there is no hand on the tiller but one’s own and that ‘I myself am heaven and hell.’”

Ask yourself: “What positive lifestyle choices have you made to align your life with your heart that exposes your true Self?” In fact, “heart and spirit” is the root of the word courage. Tapping into your courage enables you to stand in your true Self—your solid core. But, a senior must act to begin the courage process. Recall and list some of the times you found yourself in the hallway wondering if and where the next door would open. What patterns do you see? What are the feelings in your body?

Courage opens all doors. Seniors have the answers that brought them to the hallway; they have always been accessible. Perhaps, upon reflection you’re where you are because, in reality, most growth in consciousness comes in the lonely hallway. Pacing in the hallway, reassessing your hearts desires, delving deeper into your values—this may be the place where you discover loving acceptance for your life’s precious journey.

Grant yourself permission to use the hallway as a positive growth opportunity. It is never the place to stay, but a place to rest and reflect. Time in this hallway acts as a foil to the animated energy we need to claim the courage to act on what we know must be done.

When seniors give themselves permission to claim and apply their courage they feel renewed and able to continue facing life’s challenges. All you have to do is choose to awaken from the poppy field of dispiritedness and live from your essence. You do this by applying your innate courage! It is a perfect starting place if you’re a senior who wishes to “make courage my daily legacy.”

The door is open. What are you waiting for?

A Better Way to Care for the Dying – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

A Better Way to Care for the Dying – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

The medical profession is beginning to take a more thoughtful approach to people with terminal illness. Reformers are overhauling how end-of-life care is delivered and improving communication between doctors and patients.

End-of-life careA better way to care for the dying

How the medical profession is starting to move beyond fighting death to easing it

Print edition | International

Apr 29th 2017| TOKYO

A STROLL from Todoroki station, at the kink of a path lined with cherry trees, lies a small wooden temple. A baby Buddha sits on the sill. The residents of the Tokyo suburb ask the infant for pin pin korori. It is a wish for two things. The first is a long, spry life. The second is a quick and painless death.

Just part of this wish is likely to be granted. The paradox of modern medicine is that people are living longer, and yet doing so with more disease. Death is rarely either quick or painless. Often it is traumatic. As the end nears, people tend to have goals that matter more than eking out every last second. But too few are asked what matters most to them. In the rich world most people die in a hospital or nursing home, often after pointless, aggressive treatment. Many die alone, confused and in pain.

Latest updates

See all updates

The distress is largely unnecessary. Fortunately medicine is beginning to take a more thoughtful approach to people with terminal illness. Reformers are overhauling how end-of-life care is delivered and improving communication between doctors and patients. The changes mean that patients will experience less pain and suffering. And they will have more control over their lives, right up until the end.

Many aspects of death changed during the 20th century. One was when it happens. The average lifespan increased by more over the past four generations than over the previous 8,000. In 1900 global life expectancy at birth was about 32 years, little more than at the dawn of agriculture. It is now 71.8 years. In large part that is a result of lower infant and child mortality; a century ago about a third of children died before their fifth birthday. But it is also because adults live longer. Today a 50-year-old Englishman can expect to live for another 33 years, 13 more than in 1900.

The chance of an adult dying was once largely unrelated to age; infections were indiscriminate. Michel de Montaigne, a French essayist who died in 1592, wrote that death in old age was “rare, singular and extraordinary”. Now, says Katherine Sleeman of King’s College London, death mostly comes by stealth. She estimates that in Britain only a fifth of deaths are sudden, for example in a car crash. Another fifth follow a swift decline, as with some cancer patients, who stay fairly active until their final few weeks. But three-fifths come after years of relapse and recovery. They involve a “slow, progressive deterioration of function”, Dr Sleeman says.

People in rich countries can spend eight to ten years seriously ill at the end of life. Chronic illness is rising in poorer countries, too. In 2015 it accounted for more than three-quarters of premature mortality in China, according to the Global Burden of Disease, a survey. In 1990 the share was just a half. The World Health Organisation (WHO) predicts that rates of cancer and heart disease in Sub-Saharan Africa will more than double by 2030.

A side-effect of progress, however, has been what Atul Gawande, a surgeon and author, calls “the experiment of making mortality a medical experience”. A century ago most deaths were at home. Now, according to a survey of 45 rich countries by the WHO, fewer than a third are. Death also used to be egalitarian, says Haider Warraich of Duke University Medical Centre and the author of “Modern Death”. Income did not much affect when or where people died. Today poor people in rich countries are more likely than their better-off compatriots to die in hospital.

No dying fall

Many deaths are preceded by a surge of treatment, often pointless. A survey of doctors in Japan found that 90% expected that patients with tubes inserted into their windpipes would never recover. Yet a fifth of patients who die in the country’s hospitals have been intubated. An eighth of Americans with terminal cancer receive chemotherapy in their final fortnight, despite it offering no benefit at such a late stage. Nearly a third of elderly Americans undergo surgery during their final year; 8% do so in their last week.

The way health care is funded encourages over-treatment. Hospitals are paid for doing things to people, not for preventing pain. And not only patients, but those who love them, suffer. Many people who may need intubation or artificial ventilation are not in a condition to indicate consent. An American study found that in about half of cases involving decisions about the withdrawal of treatment there is conflict between family and doctors. A third of relatives of patients in intensive-care units (ICUs) report symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Many people will want to “rage, rage against the dying of the light”, as the poet Dylan Thomas put it. Others will have particular events they want to attend: a grandchild’s graduation, say. But the medical crescendo often occurs by default, not as a result of personal choice based on a clearly understood prognosis.

The huge gap between what people want from end-of-life care and what they are likely to get is visible in a survey conducted by The Economist in partnership with the Kaiser Family Foundation, an American health-care think-tank. Representative samples of people in four large countries with differing demographics, religious traditions and levels of development (America, Brazil, Italy and Japan) were asked a set of questions about dying and end-of-life care. Most had lost close friends or family in the previous five years.

In all four countries the majority of people said they hoped to die at home (see chart 1). But fewer said they expected to do so—and even fewer said that their deceased loved ones had. Apart from in Brazil, only small shares said that extending life as long as possible was more important than dying without pain, discomfort and stress (see article). Other research suggests that wish, too, is increasingly unlikely to be granted. One study found that between 1998 and 2010 the shares of Americans experiencing confusion, depression and pain in their final year all increased.

What healthy people think they will want when they are mortally ill may well change when that moment comes. “Life becomes mighty precious when there is not a lot left,” says Diane Meier, a geriatrician at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York. It is common, for example, to hate the idea of a feeding tube but grudgingly accept one when the alternative is death.

Words I never thought to speak

Yet the gap between what people hope for and what they get cannot be explained away so easily. Dying people’s wishes are often unknown or ignored. Among those involved in making decisions about a loved one’s end-of-life care, more than a third in Italy, Japan and Brazil said they did not know what their friend or family member wanted. Either they never asked, or only thought to do so too late. A Japanese woman who cared for her mother, an Alzheimer’s patient, says she regrets that “once the door closed there was no way of knowing what she wanted.”

And sometimes, even when relatives know a loved one’s wishes, they cannot make sure they are granted. Between 12% and 24% of those who had lost someone close to them said that the patient’s wishes had not been carried out. Between 25% and 38% said that friends or family had experienced needless pain. Across the whole survey most people rated the quality of end-of-life care as “fair” or “poor”.

End-of-life care can resemble a “conspiracy of silence”, says Robert Fine of Baylor Scott & White Health, a Texan health-care provider. In our survey majorities in all four countries said that death is a subject which is generally avoided. An obvious reason is that death is feared. “In every calm and reasonable person there is a hidden second person scared witless about death,” says the narrator of a Philip Roth novel. One school of psychology—“terror management theory”—holds that fear of death is the source of everything distinctively human, from phobias to religion.

But death was once what Philippe Ariès, a French historian, called a “public ceremony”, where friends and family gathered. Now, changing family structures mean the elderly and dying are more isolated from younger people, who are therefore less likely to witness death up close, or to find a suitable moment to talk about its approach. Just 10% of Europeans aged over 80 live with their families; half live alone. By 2020, 40% of Americans are expected to die alone in nursing homes.

In Japan, where survey respondents were most likely to say that not being a financial burden was a primary consideration, daughters are abandoning their traditional caring role. That has given rise to institutions such as the House of Hope, a hospice in east Tokyo that looks after people who are too poor for hospital care and too alone to die at home. A decade ago Hisako Yanagida, 88, lost her husband, with whom she had sung in a traditional Japanese troupe. Now her sight is going but she can still make out the faded pictures of the two of them on her wall. She tries not to think about death: “There is no point.”

But the chief responsibility for the failures of end-of-life care lies with medicine. The relationship between doctors and seriously ill patients is one of “mutual suspicion”, says Naoki Ikegami of St Luke’s International University, in Tokyo. A decade ago it was common for Japanese doctors to withhold cancer diagnoses. Today they are more honest, but still insensitive. One Japanese woman recalls her oncologist saying that if her chemotherapy made her bald, it would not be a big deal.

And doctors commonly overestimate how long the terminally ill will live, making it more likely that they will duck frank conversations, or recommend drastic treatments that have little chance of success. One international review of prognoses of patients who die within two months suggests that seriously ill people live on average little more than half as long as their doctors suggested they would. Another study found that, for patients who died within four weeks of receiving a prognosis, doctors had predicted the date to within a week in just a quarter of cases. Mostly, they had erred on the side of optimism.

Doctors often neglect palliative care, which involves giving opioids for pain, treating breathlessness and counselling patients. (The name comes from the Latin palliare, as in “to cloak” pain.) A typical question is “What is important to you now?” It does not seek to cure. As a result, “it is seen as what you do when you give up on a patient,” sighs Dr Ikegami. It receives just 0.2% of the funding for cancer research in Britain and 1% in America.

Breaking the taboo

What studies there have been show the cost of this neglect. Since 2009 several randomised controlled trials have looked at what happens when patients with advanced cancer are given palliative care alongside standard treatment, such as chemotherapy. In each, the group receiving palliative care had lower rates of depression; and in all but one study, patients in that group were less likely to report pain.

Remarkably, in three trials the patients receiving palliative care lived longer, even though the quantity of conventional treatment they opted to receive was lower. (The other two trials showed no difference.) In one study their median survival was a year, compared with nine months for the group receiving only ordinary treatment. A review in 2016 of cases where palliative care was used instead of standard treatment found that even when it was the only care given, it did not seem to shorten life.

The reason for the results is unclear, and the research has mostly been on cancer patients. Those receiving palliative care spend less time in hospital, so may contract fewer infections. But some researchers think that the explanation is psychological: that through counselling they reduce depression, which is linked to earlier death. “A conversation can be more powerful than technology,” says Dr Sleeman.

At St Luke’s hospital in Tokyo, Yuki Asano supports the argument. Ever the executive, the 76-year-old slides his business card across the tray of his bed. The former boss of a brewery company (and 7th dan in kendo, a Japanese martial art) is riddled with cancer. He stopped chemotherapy last year. The care at one of Japan’s few dedicated palliative centres has helped him feel ready for death. “I achieved everything I wanted in life,” he says. “Now I am waiting for the awards ceremony.”

But few of the 56m or so people who die each year receive good end-of-life care. A report published in 2015 by the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister company, assessed the “quality of death” in 80 countries. Only Austria and America, the EIU found, had the capacity to ensure that at least half the patients for whom palliative care was suitable received it.

Many countries promise public access to palliative care but do not pay for it. Spain has passed two laws to ensure palliative care is available but in reality, just a quarter of patients can get it. Though the hospice movement, dedicated to providing high-quality care to dying patients, started in Britain in the 1960s, only about a fifth of the country’s hospitals provide access to palliative care every day of the week.

The way health-care providers are funded often sidelines palliative care. In Japan hospital doctors receive no payment from insurers for talking to patients about end-of-life options. In America hospitals suck up a big share of spending, even though the seriously ill are often better treated elsewhere. Nine in ten emergency visits are because of escalations in symptoms, such as breathlessness; most of these patients could be treated better, faster and more cheaply at home. Medicare, the public-health scheme for the elderly, does not generally cover spells in nursing homes.

Slowly, however, countries are reforming. In 2014 the WHO recommended integrating palliative care with health systems. Some developing countries, including Ecuador, Mongolia and Sri Lanka, are beginning to do so. In America some insurers are realising that what would be better for patients would be better for them, too. In 2015 Medicare announced that it would pay for conversations about end-of-life care between doctors and patients.

“Talking almost always helps and yet we don’t talk,” says Susan Block of Harvard Medical School. To improve end-of-life care, she says, “every doctor needs to be an expert in communicating.” American oncologists, for example, need to have an average of 35 conversations per month about end-of-life care. In a study of patients with congestive heart failure, doctors rarely followed up after a patient expressed a fear of death. Nearly three-quarters of nephrologists were never taught how to tell patients they are dying. A common cause of burnout among doctors is an inability to talk with patients about death.

To fill this gap Ariadne Labs, a research group founded by Dr Gawande, has launched the “Serious Illness Conversation Guide”. It is a straightforward checklist of the topics doctors should be sure to talk about with their terminally ill patients. They should start by asking what patients understand about their conditions, check how much each wants to know, offer an honest prognosis, and ask about their goals and the trade-offs each is willing to make.

Early results from a trial of the guide at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston suggest it led to doctors having more and earlier conversations. Patients reported less anxiety. Tension between doctors and families was eased. The scheme is being expanded; in February Baylor Scott & White became the first big provider to use it for all its staff. England’s National Health Service is trying it out in Clatterbridge, near Liverpool. Japan is retraining its oncologists in how to talk about death.

In America advance directives and living wills, documents that spell out the treatment people want if they become incapacitated, have become more popular over the past few decades. In our survey 51% of Americans over 65 had written down their end-of-life wishes. Yet such documents cannot cover all the possibilities that may arise as the end nears. Doctors worry that patients may have changed their minds. In one study just 43% of people who had written living wills wanted the same treatment course two years later.

Living wills are rare outside America (see chart 2). But there is a broader cultural shift. More than 4,400 “death cafés”, where people eat cake and talk about mortality, have sprung up. They discuss books such as “When Breath Becomes Air”, by the late Paul Kalanithi, a neurosurgeon, and the documentary “Extremis”, which is set in an intensive-care unit and offers a more honest account of hospital care than in popular TV shows. In Japan “ending notebooks” are now available, to record messages and instructions for relatives.

Here at the end of all things

In 2010 Ellen Goodman, an American author, founded the Conversation Project, which started with people gathering to share stories of the “good deaths” and “bad deaths” experienced by their loved ones. It publishes guides like those from Ariadne Labs, but for use by people without medical training. Laurie Kay from Boston, who is 70, recently told her husband and daughter that what mattered to her was dignity. She wants to look good: her nails should be painted. Her views may change, she says, but “having opened the conversation now we can reopen it later.”

Experiences of death are being shared online. Dying Matters is a popular forum. In 2013 Scott Simon, a journalist, tweeted from his mother’s bedside as she died (“Heart rate dropping. Heart dropping”, read one tweet). Kate Granger, an English geriatrician who died of cancer last year, planned to tweet during her final days using the tag #deathbedlive. She did not quite manage it, but a tweet she prepared was sent posthumously: “TY all for being part of my life. Pls look after my amazing hubby @PointonChris (Ps – Don’t let him spend all his money on a Range Rover) xx”.

Bringing death “within the pale of conversation” is needed to overhaul end-of-life care, argues Dr Warraich. Yet the “death positive” movement is not an excuse for medicine to remain stuck in its ways. Death will remain terrifying for many people. Unless the way health care is organised changes, most people will continue to suffer unnecessarily at the end.

Correction (April 30th): A previous version of this piece said that Laurie Kay is in her 80s. She is in fact only 70. Apologies.

This article appeared in the International section of the print edition under the headline “Mending mortality”

For Older People Living Alone, Daily Automated Calls Can Mean Safety – – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

For Older People Living Alone, Daily Automated Calls Can Mean Safety – – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

Hundreds of police agencies in small towns, suburbs and rural areas are checking in on seniors who live alone by placing an automated call to them every day.

‘Pre-Hospice’ Saves Money By Keeping People At Home Near The End Of Life – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

‘Pre-Hospice’ Saves Money By Keeping People At Home Near The End Of Life – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

Most people would choose to stay home in their last years of life. But for many, it doesn’t work out. They go in and out of hospitals, getting treated for flare-ups of chronic illnesses, costing the healthcare system billions.

Portland Promising Tiny Housing Revolution – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

Portland Promising Tiny Housing Revolution – Alzheimer’s – Optimum Senior Care – Chicago In Home Caregivers

A look at Portland’s pioneering policy of encouraging accessory dwellings as a way to promote sustainable growth, affordability, and a housing alternative for older people.

In 2011 Lesa Dixon-Gray of Portland, Oregon, wanted her 90-year-old mother to move from Miami to live nearby.  Her mother, Shirley, was willing, but she wanted her own place.  So Dixon-Gray began to look for housing options.  First she looked at duplexes.  But they all had stairs, not a good option for Shirley.

Then she found the ideal solution:  build a small cottage on the same property as Dixon-Gray’s home.  Although it took some doing—she and her husband had to move to a place with an over-sized lot on which to build the cottage—the option worked out well for all of them.  They each have privacy, yet they are there for each other and regularly dine together.  Shirley contributes to household expenses, and she’s formed a close bond with her step-granddaughters.

“It goes back to the relationship,” says Dixon-Gray, of why their housing choic worked out so well.  “I’ve always had this great mom.  She’s very funny.  It’s wonderful that my husband has a great relationship with her. Even though she’s 96 now and physically becoming more dependent, she’s my mom. That’s really the sweet part.”

Lesa and Shirley’s Case Study

Families like this one are taking advantage of Portland’s pioneering policy of encouraging accessory dwellings as a way to promote sustainable growth, affordability, and a housing alternative for older people wanting to either stay put or to move near their children. Known in the policy world as “ADUs” – accessory dwelling units– these small homes come in many forms, including traditional basement “mother-in-law suites,” apartments atop or inside garages, and backyard cottages like Dixon-Gray’s.  Portland hopes that through zoning changes and fee waivers, the number of ADUs will rapidly expand.

Accessory dwellings are among a growing number of housing options for older people, as I explore in my book, With a Little Help from Our Friends—Creating Community as We Grow Older.  From cohousing to cooperative trailer parks, senior artist colonies, house-sharing, or the Village model of neighbors helping neighbors, housing alternatives are blossoming around the country as people seek ways to age in a circle of mutual support.  For many, this support comes from family.  The challenge is finding the right balance between closeness on the one hand, and privacy and independence on the other.  Accessory dwellings fit the bill.

“This idea of multigenerational living is ancient,” says ChangingAging’s Dr. Bill Thomas.  “We call them ADUs, but people have been doing this for a long time all over the world.”

Well-known as the founder of the small house nursing home alternative The Green House Project, typically housing 10-12 elders, Dr. Thomas is currently hoping to revolutionize the tiny house movement. For the past year he has been developing a modular, prefab model for rapidly constructing tiny houses that are “optimized for independent living in all phases of life.”

What we need now, he says, “is an ADU that is really designed to support and to maximize the opportunity of people to have their own home and that means having well-designed, small, smart, digitally-aware, and accessible housing.”  Dr. Thomas plans to add his voice to ongoing discussions about how best to expand ADUs and to make them accessible when he comes to Portland May 1, as part of the national ChangingAging tour.

A leading proponent of Portland’s ADU policy is Alan DeLaTorre, a research associate at Portland State University’s Institute on Aging and co-coordinator of Age-Friendly Portland. DeLaTorre is convinced that “aging in place” is not always a good option as we age.  “It depends on the home,” he says.  Many houses that worked well for us when we moved in become too big, too expensive to maintain, and unsafe as we grow older.  Too often, he says, “We’ve zoned out creative and innovative housing types.  We’ve created strict zoning codes that adhere to NIMBY standards—don’t change my community or the value of my property.”

Instead of being stuck in an aging-in-place mindset, he says, “Aging in community is the option we want to explore.  Our communities provide social support, comfort, and familiarity.”

Expanding ADUs

More than a decade ago, Portland began to encourage homeowners to build ADUs as a way to help alleviate a growing lack of affordable close-in housing.  ADUs were also seen as a way for older people to downsize, while remaining in their long-time neighborhoods and generating rental income from the main house. Early on, AARP supported ADU development and suggested a model code. In addition to changing zoning codes, the city later waived some development fees to encourage more ADU construction.  The hope was that many older people would build ADUs.

But a 2014 report found that older people were no more likely to have ADUs than the Portland population in general.  This will likely change substantially in the near future, according to the study.  Unlike today’s 75-year-olds and older who show little interest in accessory units, the baby boomers (in the 55-74 year old categories) were most likely of all age groups to have an ADU.  As they age, the use of ADUs among the oldest Portlanders will likely grow.

Meanwhile, efforts to make accessory dwellings more attractive are continuing. One novel pilot project in Multnomah County, where Portland is located, will pay for construction of an ADU, in exchange for the homeowner allowing a homeless person or family to live there for up to 5 years.  After that, the homeowner would have full use of the ADU.  Four families are set to try the experiment this summer.

At the same time a new Residential Infill Project is going to further liberalize zoning as a way to increase housing density.  Single-family homes in walkable areas, close to public transit and other services, will be able to build two ADUs, and those with a corner lot may build three.  “The zoning codes haven’t been written, but the concept has been approved,” says DeLaTorre, who serves on the stakeholder advisory committee for the project.

Next Step: Accessibility

As part of the zoning code changes, DeLaTorre proposed making “visitability”—a type of accessibility—required of all accessory dwellings.  Visitability has three main features:  a single-step entry to the home, hallways and doorways that are 36 inches wide or more, and a half-bath on the ground floor.  “It’s the least stringent requirement set, regarding broad accessibility or age-friendly design,” he says. Exceptions would be made if the property has site constraints, such as uneven slope. The requirements, though, did not go through, due in part to pushback from developers.  “The city council came back with an amendment using language that is very soft—it’s all incentive-based and not visitable.  We were disappointed, but we’re pushing forward.”

Eli Spevak, a developer of green, affordable housing who serves on the city’s Planning and Sustainability Commission, is a proponent of ADUs.  But he is one who opposes that visitability be required.  For one, he argues, many sites would be difficult to make accessible, such as those built above garages or on sloped land. “There’s an unfortunate history in the developments of ADUs of death by 100 paper cuts,” he says.  “We want them affordable, and compatible with neighborhoods, and owner-occupied and accessible. Then lo and behold nobody builds any.” (Portland is one of the few places that does not require ADUs to be owner-occupied, although two-thirds of them are.) That said, he suggests that incentives be used instead, such as waiving building fees for visitability.

Developer opposition is not the only obstacle to accessible housing.  DeLaTorre says that  homeowner denial of their own aging also plays a role.  “I was helping my dad find a home here in Portland,” he says.  “As an environmental gerontologist I had a specific idea of what he needed.  He was wholeheartedly against it.  ‘I don’t need to worry about those things. I’m in good health.’” It wasn’t until DeLaTorre changed the conversation to talk about his sister, who has medical issues, did the light go on.  Of course he wanted his home to be easier for her to come see him.  “That’s what visitability does,” says DeLaTorre.  “It softens the need for people to address their own decline in aging.”

Accessory Dwellings Support Sustainable Growth

Robert Liberty, director of Portland State University’s Institute for Sustainable Solutions, supports ADUs from another angle – environmental sustainability.  Liberty launched a Small Backyard Homes project https://www.pdx.edu/sustainability/small-backyard-homes-accessory-dwelling-units-adus as a response to Portland’s push to encourage infill development, a key part of the strategy to tackle climate change.  “It’s pretty straightforward,” says Liberty.  “The single largest source of greenhouse gases is from driving in our region, and the second is from heating and cooling buildings. People who build [ADUs] near the core of the region will have a lot more opportunities to use mass transit or to bike and walk.”  The small square footage also costs substantially less to heat and cool.

One obstacle to ADU expansion, Liberty says, is that most homeowners have no experience as developers. In addition to overseeing a construction project, “You have to figure out the permits and fees, and then you’re a landlord,” says Liberty.  And it can be costly.  Although interior apartment conversions can be $30,000-$40,000, a freestanding, 800-square-foot cottage averages $160,000.

“A lot of people don’t have that kind of equity,” says Liberty.  “So our strategy is to address all these things that are hard to do and act as a facilitator or concierge.”  Homeowners will be able to go online and find financing packages and accessory dwelling designs that are affordable, accessible, and energy-efficient.  “We’re trying to make it as easy as possible,” he says.

The Institute worked with students at Portland State’s Center of Public Interest Design “to think about the challenges in building ADUs and reducing the cost,” explains project manager Beth Gilden.  “We decided early on we wanted all of them to be accessible.  One of the most important things about ADUs is that people use them differently over time.”  Homeowners may first rent out the smaller unit, but “there may be a time in their lives where they have mobility issues, and they want to live in their ADU,” she says.

With the population aging, Liberty sees ADUs as an important piece of the housing puzzle. “This is a way to restore traditional family values, keeping generations together, or allowing continued independence for seniors by having a small, accessible unit, by having income from the main house, or by having close relationships with their own children,” he says. “What we’ve learned here in Portland will have application across the U.S., and it will generate interest in having ADUs across the spectrum that has a particular value for seniors.”

As for Lesa Dixon-Gray, although the challenge of multigenerational living has grown along with her mother’s frailty, she continues to appreciate having the family close together.  Shirley, now 96, cannot do many things that she could when she first moved in—cooking, taking the bus, bathing without help.  A part-time caregiver helps out.  Still, she goes grocery shopping with her daughter, sitting in the grocery café, and reminding Dixon-Gray not to forget the challah bread.  “And she still wins at bridge,” says Dixon-Gray.

She and her husband have not been able to travel for the last three years, and even finding an accessible restaurant can be challenging.  But having her mom live in the backyard has been 90 percent positive, she says. “For us, it’s working pretty well.  It’s a choice we’ve made.  And I know someday we’ll be able to travel.  Everything goes in phases.”