Archive

ShareThis Page
Retirement planning should consider Alzheimer’s | TribLIVE.com
News

Retirement planning should consider Alzheimer’s

Tribune-Review
| Monday, April 5, 2010 12:00 a.m

BOSTON — When it comes to retirement, there are lots of things to consider: tax rates, earthquakes, and drug interactions to name a few. But experts say there are two big elephants in the room with which many of us will have to deal, sooner or later.

One is trying to make up for lost time on the savings front by assuming you can work later in life. The other is a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease, either for oneself or a close family member.

Let’s tackle the tougher one first.

Some 5.3 million people now have Alzheimer’s, according to a recent report issued by the Alzheimer’s Association. That’s roughly the population of Colorado. The disease is the seventh leading cause of death. There are some 10 million unpaid caregivers.

What’s worse still, there’s no end in sight: The prevalence of Alzheimer’s is expected to grow by more than 80 percent from 2000 to 2025 in at least nine states, including Colorado. By 2050, some 19 million Americans will have Alzheimer’s.

You don’t have go far in your family tree or on your Facebook page to realize that you’re just one degree of separation away from this disease.

So how should you tackle or at least think about this elephant in the room?

“Alzheimer’s disease is the largest thief of retirement,” said Chris Cooper, president of Chris Cooper & Company Inc. and ElderCare Advocates, Inc. “It is a slowly progressing disease, leaving the person oftentimes with good physical health and less mental faculties to use this good physical health.”

Americans are often diagnosed with Alzheimer’s in their late 60s and 70s, but it can and does occur earlier. And, Cooper said, many Americans fail to plan for the disease.

Because there’s a long three-to-20-year life span from diagnosis to death with Alzheimer’s disease, Cooper said retirement planning can be difficult. “You have to plan for a possible 20-year period of dependency on others to manage your resources, to make decisions for you, and see to your care and comfort as your fiduciary,” he said.

But just because it’s difficult doesn’t mean that you should avoid it. Instead, you have to confront it head on. “It is happening to more and more of us now, as our life expectancies increase,” he said.

The Employee Benefit Research Institute’s recent report about retirement confidence found that many Americans plan to keep working as a way to make up for not having saved enough or invested wisely enough for retirement, or as a way to keep health insurance.

But, as many have written before, working is not a fail-safe plan. Or is it?

Two new reports seem to indicate this elephant might be smaller than we think — unless, of course, you develop Alzheimer’s.

According to a recent Urban Institute report, unemployment rates for men and women age 55 and older did hit record highs in 2009. And older African-Americans, Hispanics and adults with limited education were especially likely to find themselves unemployed. Plus, the report noted that older adults who lost their jobs spent more time out of work than their younger counterparts.

Working in retirement does seem viable for some.

“My recommendation to workers is to delay retiring as long as possible — another three to five years, or even longer where feasible,” said Olivia S. Mitchell, associate director of the Financial Literacy Center. “Working longer preserves assets, yields higher eventual Social Security benefits, and probably results in people staying healthier, as compared to retiring early.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.