Showing posts with label aging in place. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aging in place. Show all posts

Monday, December 8, 2025

“I Just Want to Be Home”: Emily Ladau’s Powerful Senate Testimony and Why It Matters for Every Senior Aging in Place


On December 3, 2025, International Day of Persons with Disabilities,  disability rights advocate and author Emily Ladau delivered moving testimony to the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging titled “
Aging in Place: The Impact of Community During the Holidays.” At just 34, Ladau shared a story that transcends age: the raw, human need to remain in the place we call home, surrounded by the people and routines that make life worth living. Her words, rooted in her own lifelong experience with disability and her family’s journey, struck at the heart of what this blog has always championed:
Home is not just a location: it is dignity, autonomy, and love made tangible.

Ladau recounted sitting with her grandfather during what would be his final holiday at home. As he opened mail in his own kitchen, he wept over the simple joy of performing an ordinary task in the place he loved. “It’s the only time I ever saw him cry,” she told the committee. That moment crystallized a truth we see every day with our clients: Being forced out of home isn’t just inconvenient, it’s a profound loss of self.
She then turned the lens on her own life. Born with a physical disability, Ladau benefited from early intervention and New York’s Medicaid Care at Home waiver, services that gave her in-home therapy, home modifications, and the power wheelchair that has been her ticket to independence. Yet, as an adult, the $2,000 Medicaid asset limit,  unchanged for over 35 years, forced an impossible choice: stay on Medicaid and remain financially trapped, or risk losing essential care to pursue marriage and career. She chose the risk, forgoing weekly in-home physical therapy she can no longer afford.
Now newly married and house-hunting in New Jersey, Ladau and her husband confront a brutal reality: accessible, affordable housing is almost nonexistent. The very supports that once kept her thriving at home are now out of reach, a warning for every senior who assumes Medicare, Medicaid, or savings will be enough.Why This Testimony Matters for Every Senior
Ladau’s story is powerful because it bridges generations. She reminded the committee that 43.9 % of adults with disabilities are 65 or older,  and that most of us who aren’t disabled today will become disabled tomorrow, whether permanently or only for a short time. The barriers she faces, rigid asset limits, scarce accessible housing, and inadequate home-care funding, are the same ones that push countless seniors into nursing homes against their will.
The numbers are stark:
  • 75% of adults 50+ want to age in place (AARP 2025), and many people living in long-term care facilities characterize it as a "fate worse than death."
  • Yet Medicaid’s $2,000 asset cap and long-term care waiting lists averaging 6–12 months force many into facilities (MACPAC 2025).
  • Once there, isolation triples depression risk, falls rise 28 % (2025 JAGS and CNA data).
Ladau’s closing line landed like a gavel:
“This isn’t just about making treasured holiday memories… It’s about fostering a country where all of us can grow older assured by the notion that we will always have a place to call home.”
What We Can Do Today Because Tomorrow Isn’t Guaranteed
Emily Ladau’s testimony is a call to action at the policy level and in our own families. While we wait for Congress to modernize Medicaid’s 1980s-era asset limits or fund HCBS at the level seniors deserve, we can act by implementing a robust Aging-in-Place Plan, including a trust, powers of attorney, advanced directives, and Supported Decision-Making Agreements. 
Emily Ladau reminded us that home is where memories are made, dignity is preserved, and love lives on. This holiday season, let her grandfather’s tears and her own fierce independence inspire you to plan,  so you, too, can open your mail in your kitchen, surrounded by the people who matter most.
While this article has provided a heartfelt reflection on Emily Ladau’s testimony, it is by no means comprehensive. The fight for actual aging-in-place policy reforms continues. Readers must remain vigilant. By combining awareness with proactive planning, families can safeguard independence and thrive as they age in place. 

Thursday, December 4, 2025

The Death of Nursing Home Staffing Mandates: What It Means for Seniors, Families, and the Future of Care


In a move hailed as a "milestone victory" by the nursing home industry, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has fully repealed the Biden administration's controversial minimum staffing rule for skilled nursing facilities, eliminating requirements that could have reshaped care quality for millions of residents. As reported by Kimberly Marselas, writing for  McKnight's Long-Term Care News, the repeal, effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register, nullifies the 2024 rule's core mandates for 3.48 hours of nursing care per resident per day (including 0.55 hours from a registered nurse and 2.45 hours from a nurse aide) and a 24/7 onsite RN. For providers, it's a relief from what they called an "unrealistic" burden amid labor shortages; for seniors and families, it's a sobering reminder that we're back to square one in a chronically understaffed system where 24% of facilities fail federal standards

As readers of the Aging-in-Place Planning and Elderlaw Blog know, this development doesn't just highlight institutional care's vulnerabilities; it strengthens the case for aging in place, where family coordination and proactive planning can prevent the 2.5 times higher risk of institutionalization due to caregiver overburden and avoid the need for and risks of institutional care. This article explains the rule's resolution, why it was so divisive, the real-world implications for consumers in an understaffed landscape, and, beyond the obvious push for home, practical paths forward to demand better care wherever you choose.

The Staffing Mandate's Demise: A Timeline of Controversy and Relief
The 2024 staffing rule, finalized by CMS after years of debate, was born of undeniable crises related to understaffing.  It mandated 3.48 total nursing hours per resident daily,0.55 from RNs and 2.45 from aides, plus an RN on-site 24/7, with phased rollout starting in 2026 for larger chains.
Legal challenges from 11 states and industry groups led federal courts to vacate the RN and hourly minimums in August 2024. Then, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (signed July 4, 2025) imposed a nine-year moratorium on staffing mandates, paving the way for HHS's full repeal on December 2, 2025.
AHCA/NCAL President Clif Porter called it "a victory for our nation’s seniors and their families," warning the rule "threatened to close nursing homes and displace vulnerable residents." CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz added, "Every American deserves access to compassionate, high-quality care...This repeal is a step toward smarter, more practical solutions that truly work for the American people." LeadingAge's Katie Smith-Sloan described it as "an important milestone," recognizing "the very real barriers that our nursing home members navigate in recruiting and retaining staff."A Troublesome Proposal: Ambitious Aims, Unrealistic Execution
Proponents saw the 3.48-hour threshold as evidence-based; the "minimum safe level" from a 2023 CMS study linking higher staffing to 15% fewer deficiencies. It addressed the RN shortage projected through 2030 (AHCA 2025) and aimed to curb unchecked falls and other indicators of negative health outcomes.
But troubles abounded:
  • Rural and Small-Facility Strain: 40% of homes in underserved areas couldn't meet RN requirements without closures, potentially displacing 100,000+ residents (AHCA 2025).
  • One-Size-Fits-All Flaw: Ignored acuity variations; dementia units need more aides than rehab wings, creating a 20% mismatch (AARP 2025).
  • Enforcement Gaps: Phased rollout (2026-2030) lacked immediate teeth, with CMS recouping just $4 million of $1.1 billion in overpayments (GAO 2025).
Providers called it "unrealistic," while advocates decried the repeal as favoring profits over people. The compromise retains 8-hour RN shifts (waivable) and facility assessments for transparency, but no hard minimums.Back to Square One: The Harsh Reality for Consumers
For seniors and families considering or relying on nursing homes, the repeal feels like a gut punch.  We are reverting to a status quo in which "adequate" staffing means one CNA for 20 residents, contributing to 28% of falls going unchecked (CNA 2025) and 18% spikes in infections (OIG 2024). Facilities remain chronically understaffed (94% CNA turnover, Argentum 2025), with private equity chains (20% market) cutting hours 13% for profits (AARP Florida 2025). Consumers face:
  • Higher Risks: 1 in 10 abuse odds (NCEA 2025), triple depression from isolation (2025 JAGS).
  • Cost Burdens: No mandates mean uneven quality, forcing 75% of families to supplement with private pay ($2,000/month aides).
  • Choice Illusion: Star ratings persist, but without floors, "high-rated" homes can still fail; 20% higher neglect in chains (GAO 2023).
According to advocates such as the Center for Medicare Advocacy, the repeal ignores current adverse health outcomes stemming from inadequate staffing, perpetuating a system in which quality varies widely. For those in facilities, it's a roll of the dice; for families, it's anxiety over "good enough" care.Where Do We Go from Here?  Aging in Place to Smarter System Demands
Aging in place remains the gold standard, saving 42% compared to facilities (Wakely 2025) and reducing the risk of institutionalization by 2.5 times (2025 JAGS). But for those in or considering facilities, here's how to forge ahead:
  1. Demand Transparency Now: Use Care Compare's 2025 ownership data to filter chains; avoid those with less than 3 stars or OIG flags.
  2. Push for Local Reforms: Advocate for Ohio's HB 521 (2026 hospital nursing requirements) and for extension to skilled nursing facilities.  Contact reps at house.ohio.gov.
  3. Legal Shields: SDM agreements nominate family for oversight—our "SDM-Driven Supplemental Advanced Directive" template.
  4. Fund Home Alternatives: Trusts pay private aides; MAPTs qualify for waivers without spend-down.
Conclusion: From Mandate to Momentum—Your Home Is Still the Answer
The repeal of the staffing mandate may be a setback, but it sharpens the focus: Facilities are understaffed, risky, and in need of reform. Aging in place, with planning, is the way forward. 
While this article provides a thorough analysis of the repeal and its strategies, it is by no means comprehensive. The landscape evolves rapidly. Readers must remain vigilant. By combining awareness with proactive planning, seniors and families can safeguard independence and thrive while aging in place. Your security depends on proactive engagement.

Finance: Estate Plan Trusts Articles from EzineArticles.com

Home, life, car, and health insurance advice and news - CNNMoney.com

IRS help, tax breaks and loopholes - CNNMoney.com

Personal finance news - CNNMoney.com