Segregation Alive and Well in . . . .

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Drucifer, Feb 13, 2012.

Tags:
  1. Drucifer

    Drucifer Well-Known Member

    9,489
    248
    Feb 12, 2009
    NY Hudson...
    No One Disabled in the Dining Room?

    http://blog.aarp.org/2012/02/13/should-only-the-healthy-dine-in-retirement-dining-rooms/
     
  2. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,266
    136
    Jun 6, 2009
    Not even gonna read it, but somebody better have some deep pockets to pay the penalties under ADA.
     
  3. yosoyellobo

    yosoyellobo Icon

    2,960
    226
    Nov 1, 2006
    Jacksonville Fl
    The pockets are deep. It takes $600,000 just to live in that facility. The article is interesting and you might want to read it.
     
  4. dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,344
    505
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    I remember in my grandparents retirement home, even back in the late 80s, the residents living in Residential Care had their own dining room, though I can't say that they were required to use it. Most probably did because there was more assistance available from the staff.

    Based on some of these comments, some of these facilities might ban Parkinson's patients. It's highly unlikely that advanced Alzheimer's patients are in the main dining room.

    And this was a Quaker facility.
     
  5. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    392
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    On the surface I am not seeing a huge problem here. Consider...

    We have handicapped parking and special handicapped restrooms and tables at restaurants... designed to give better access to those who need it, and able-bodied people are expected not to use those tables, restrooms, and parking spaces.

    So... why could the reverse not be true?

    I don't know where you draw the line, but if you did have your sicker residents eating in another dining room perhaps you would be able to employ people in that dining room to help them in ways they would need it that other diners would not need.
     
  6. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,416
    425
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I think we need to understand that we're talking about segregation by definition. The term "continuing care retirement facilities" frequently means combined independent living, assisted living, and skilled nursing care in one facility.

    It is not unusual to have people living in fully independent homes (sometimes single family dwellings, usually [put in a number]-plexes, or full apartments) , assisted living apartments, and skilled nursing care nearly-hospital rooms in the same common community or even single building.

    The potential for difficulties almost boggles the mind and what people are asking for, really, is for someone to make day-by-day, resident-by-resident judgement calls about who in assisted living and, maybe, even in nursing care rooms are "ok" to eat in a dining room and participate in certain activities which are oriented to independent living residents.

    The specific conflict is, of course, the independent living resident wanting to eat in the dining room with their spouse when the health of the other spouse has declined to needing assisted living or nursing care support. Or when one's parent who used to live in independent living but who's health has declined wants to continue to eat in the dining room. The problem is this:
    Seemingly logical reasons abound for the rule. But apparently we have a PR-challenged developer:
    You've got to smile at his apparent naive thinking, particularly when you have residents who say they don't want to eat with crippled people.:sure:
     
  7. spartanstew

    spartanstew Dry as a bone

    12,566
    61
    Nov 16, 2005
    Wylie, Texas
    While the pockets are still deep, that figure is a bit misleading. Most CCRC's with a buy-in treat it merely as a refundable deposit. The resident (or their family) usually receives 80% - 90% of that money back when they leave/pass on. It also guarantees that they can live there for life even if they run out of money (cause there's still monthly rent). Of course, their finances are adequately checked before moving in to reduce that likelihood.
     
  8. yosoyellobo

    yosoyellobo Icon

    2,960
    226
    Nov 1, 2006
    Jacksonville Fl
    Did not know that. Thanks for the info. I might be able to live there after all.:)
     
  9. spartanstew

    spartanstew Dry as a bone

    12,566
    61
    Nov 16, 2005
    Wylie, Texas
    Also keep in mind that most of these places already have separate dining rooms for the different areas of the facility. IL dining room, AL dining room, Memory Care dining room, etc.

    It's not necessarily because of the reasons outlined above (although they're certainly a factor at many), but usually because the various areas of the building are already separated (i.e. AL in one building, IL in another, OR AL on one floor, IL on another). This is especially true with memory care units (Alzheimers) which are locked down.

    Throw in the fact that most independent 60+ year olds don't want to be reminded of how close they are to needing Assistance and you see why this is so prevalent.
     
  10. smiddy

    smiddy Tain't ogre til its ogre

    15,654
    122
    Apr 5, 2006
    I get what you are saying spartanstew. I didn't get it from the article, but since the precedence was combined at one point and is now different, can the facility change their direction due to safety issues or the like, not subjective offenses towards people? I know you are close to this, but are their laws tied to this or is it at the suggestion of the policy makers of the facility (assumed MDs and the like on a board) to do it this way (separating differing tenants)? If this is too personal, please PM me also...I'm looking to educate myself as well as others if you can leave it in the thread.
     
  11. spartanstew

    spartanstew Dry as a bone

    12,566
    61
    Nov 16, 2005
    Wylie, Texas
    I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think there are laws against it, although public perception is often bigger than any laws. They're private communities where people choose to live, so they can make any rules that they want, I would think (within reason, of course). That being said, if they change the policies, current tenants should be able to leave without penalty, but it all depends on what was written up in the lease agreement.

    While most of these types of facilities do have separate dining areas for the different levels of care, I don't think I've been in one that excluded other areas, with the exception of Memory Care (Alzheimers and Dementia) since it is limited access due to wander issues.

    That being said, most of the time residents do eat in their own areas due to many factors: Location and Selection. The Assisted Living dining area would be much more convenient for someone in the Assisted Living area, but in addition to that, they're more equipped to handle special dietary needs. They staff in that dining room would know the residence and would know what foods they should or should not eat. Some residents in assisted living would also need help with eating. The assisted living dining room would be equipped to handle that, but the independent dining room might not. So, in that regard it makes sense to have policies about where residents can eat.

    If a husband is in independent living and their spouse is in assisted living, they usually would eat their meals together in the assisted living dining room. If the spouse is in Memory Care, they would eat their meals together there.

    To complicate things further, usually assisted living residents are provided three meals per day. Independent living residents aren't always provided meals, since they may have full kitchens in their rooms, so the dining hours might be different too (independent only open for breakfast and dinner, for example, or it's on a cash/credit basis). The last thing you want to do with someone in assisted living, is make things more complicated for them. Having their own dining room with set hours three times per day and possessing the help they'll need has many advantages.

    Is it segregation? I don't know.
     
  12. smiddy

    smiddy Tain't ogre til its ogre

    15,654
    122
    Apr 5, 2006
    Thanks! This is not an easy issue, and I think your question in the end makes one ponder if it is or not. I guess that is why the article was written, to spark discussions in an area of potential problems. Based on your inputs I'd lean towards not so much, but that each individual's care be taken into consideration to meet their needs effectively, is probably the best course, and then too, perhaps communication to folks so they are aware of the rationales behind those decisions. What you're saying makes perfect sense for a lot of situations, thanks!
     
  13. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    392
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    All things considered... this seems like small potatoes compared to actual problems I have heard about at retirement and assisted living homes.

    Some seem more threatened by this perceived segregation than they do actual lack of care for the individuals... and throwing around words like "segregation" seem to rile people up more than trying to explain how people just aren't being cared for in other ways.
     
  14. spartanstew

    spartanstew Dry as a bone

    12,566
    61
    Nov 16, 2005
    Wylie, Texas
    Absolutely true Stewart, although those problems typically occur in Nursing Homes and long term care facilities, which are actually different than assisted living facilities and retirement communities.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall