Itineraries 2012

From the editor, Gaya Erlandson…

winter is a time of going within, getting clear on our values, priorities, needs, and goals in all areas of our lives. If the desire to live in community has been germinating in you, this is a time when those yearnings rumble from deep within, and you may find yourself wanting to clear out what is outmoded in your life and make way for new seeds of possibility.

The communities we choose to create are shaped — and limited — by whatever model of living we embrace, consciously or, more often, unconsciously. The first article in this section explores the different implicit models that control how we live our lives. After looking at the Consumer Model, the Medical Model, and the Individualistic Model, I propose a Community Model where interdependence — firmly grounded in the realization that the most important resources for living well are other people — is the hallmark.

In the two articles that follow, we move from the theoretical to the practical: Alex Mawhinney, in “Not My Father’s Retirement,” tells why the old models no longer speak to us and suggests some guidelines as we search for new ones; and Marianne Kilkenny, in “Dreaming Becomes Doing,” provides practical suggestions to get you started.

I close with a personal essay that explores how the nuclear family paradigm, one that has been so antithetical to community — has created estrangement between offspring and their parents — including boomers and their aging parents.

What is a healthy community? What principles, values, and perspective underpin it? What aspects must you carefully clarify before you begin the next step of building your ideal community?

I hope we provide enough to get you started!

Four Models of Later Life by Gaya Erlandson

To sharpen our understanding and discussion of community, I offer these four models of living and aging. My descriptions are brief and thus, by necessity, overly simplified. I’m less interested in sharp distinctions and more in a general push for clarity about what our choices are and how those choices support or discourage our moving into more collaborative, interdependent ways of community living.

Consumer Model

In the Consumer Model, people — even though they seldom believe this to be the case — act as if most of one’s needs and personal fulfillment can be purchased. A major shift from living more collaboratively among one’s extended family to living with a focus on consumption began after WWII. Most of us don’t even realize how steeped in this approach to life our society has become.

Our media-driven culture encourages us to buy as much as possible, and it measures the health of our economy according to how much we spend — the Gross Domestic Product or GDP. Often consuming our way into debt for things we hardly have room for, we are led to believe that this is somehow patriotic. The government recently attempted to help people in economic trouble by offering “stimulus funds” — to stimulate more purchasing!

Children, who are targeted by much of the advertising, are encouraged from early on to demand various items, from designer clothes to high-tech electronics. Parents work hard to provide the money required and thus too often don’t have the time or energy to spend with the family. Shopping itself is considered by some to be a meaningful way to spend time with loved ones.

Often we don’t know our neighbors and then break what connections we do make with them by moving on average every three years, either to be closer to some job or school or because the new place is deemed somehow better. For the “consumer,” the grass is always greener elsewhere.

Elders into consumption spend their well-earned savings and retirement funds on travel and on living a more luxurious or serene life. Advertisements abound of senior couples walking along some exotic beach, laughing, or playing golf at an expensive retirement community. Seniors are told that they worked hard long enough and now it is time to enjoy life — that is, now it is time to spend their money.

Toward the end of their lives, those expenses begin to include concierge services to bring home groceries and do housework and other tasks. Eventually their “care” is completely provided by paid-for workers in some facility. Increasingly, many of the relationships these elders have on a day-to-day basis are with people who wouldn’t show up if they were not paid to do so. Though this can allow people to “age in place” for a period of time, it is a long way from being part of a caring community.

After the Civil War in America, there was a tremendous movement to live collaboratively within the large cities. In response to the Industrial Revolution, people moved out of their rural, collaborative, extended family homes and into urban centers where both men and women sought work. For the first time in history women worked outside the home and it was difficult to know what to do with the children. New ways to organize living space in support of urban working families were actively pursued for decades.

By the turn of the 19th century, business enterprises to serve working parents were common. Cities had numerous laundries, nurseries, kindergartens, and child care centers. The many public kitchens offered nutritious, economical meals that parents could pick up at the end of the day, along with their children. Hundreds of urban collaborative living experiments were built, including “apartment hotels” of kitchenless units (in favor of staffed, cooperative kitchens) that were specifically designed to accommodate working women and their families.

After 1930, the government and building industry began a campaign to promote the single-family home — preferably a large home away from the city — precisely because it promotes consumerism. Starting with having to buy more cars and gasoline to get there along with individual mowers, appliances, furnaces, etc., such homes indeed promote consumerism! By 1931, President Hoover made the single-family home a national goal in order to promote long-term economic growth and recovery from the Depression.

It took 20 years, but Americans did buy into the individual home as the ideal. In media and advertising of the 1950s, a woman was depicted as being happy and personally fulfilled by servicing her home and family — much like the television shows Father Knows Best, Ozzie and Harriet, and Leave it to Beaver. A woman that didn’t embrace the joys of homemaking was depicted as selfish and lazy, and her womanhood questioned. It worked.

I mention this because the current interest in collaborative living and collaborative consumption is thought of as new, and the two-generational, nuclear family home as “traditional,” when the exact opposite is true. For the bulk of human history, including our American history, we have lived collaboratively and with a mindset to be economical in our use of resources, including our use of time.

The elusive promise of the Industrial Revolution was that enormous gains in productivity would usher in 30-hour work weeks that allowed families to spend more time together. W. H. Kellogg was one employer noted for this policy for years. The media, however, promoted ever-increasing consumption to match ever-increasing productivity. This required a society-wide belief in scarcity (“gotta have it — even if stored and I never use it!”) and a belief in short-term use or waste (whether it be in storage units or landfills) as acceptable.

Medical Model

Consistent with the western model of medicine, the Medical Model implies that health is the absence of disease. This is most obvious in our health care system. While called “health care,” it clearly has been a disease-care model. Doctors are paid to treat illness, not prevent it. People or issues are not treated or supported until something is obviously wrong.

According to the Medical Model, aging is a process of deterioration that must be minimized and managed. People locked into this view of aging have a particularly difficult time moving into their elder years with grace. In a culture which denies the value of age, it makes sense for older adults to resist being seen as seniors.

The most objectionable assisted care homes are those of the Medical Model. Such facilities typically refer to elders as “patients,” sedate them with daily mind-altering medications, and feed them food of questionable nutritional value — similar to what is offered in many hospitals. Too often patients in these “care” homes spend their time sitting in wheelchairs, lying in bed alone in their rooms, or watching TV for hours each day — killing time until they deteriorate enough to die.

There is a modicum of good news, however. The attempt to address the dire condition in such facilities has spawned tremendous innovations in housing, and western medicine itself has generated countless improvements in treating diseases and ailments that commonly killed or handicapped people before. But It has been western medicine, not the medical or, more aptly, the disease model, from which the benefits have flowed.

Individualistic Model

Individualism has become a central tenet of the American Dream. Through most of modern history, when people wanted to improve social conditions, they focused on creating the ideal community or town. The American Dream was the ideal city. After World War II, the focus changed from the ideal town to the ideal home. Living “the good life” meant acquiring lots of toys, tools, and appliances which you stored in your single-family home whose occupants represented one or two generations.

Without the safety net of a larger extended family involvement, women in particular are challenged, as most work outside the home — and today most resume work, at least part time, when their infants are less than one year old. Often sleep deprived and exhausted, many mothers resort to antianxiety and antidepressant drugs as well as sleep medication. Such prescribed use of drugs has been considered epidemic since the late 1950s and has been grossly underreported, as have been the long-term effects of such drug use (Whitaker, 2010).

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of individualism is the myth that single-family households are — and should be — independent of the support and resources of others. Thus, even if extended family or willing neighbors are available to support a family’s child-rearing efforts, for example, having them do so on a regular, daily basis is almost unthinkable. Young and older people worry about burdening or being burdened by others. What is acceptable is paying for such services, which then contributes to the sense of exhaustion many parents experience.

Nobody has ever before asked the nuclear family to live all by itself in a box the way we do. With no relatives, no support, we’ve put it in an impossible situation. — Margaret Mead

For seniors, the end state of this ruggedly individualistic approach to living is the aging individual or couple who lives alone in an oversized home in deep isolation from others. Even if there are neighbors living nearby, they still feel they must be independent and do for themselves. After all, this is how they lived while they were raising their families. And so they struggle increasingly with their own care and the difficult upkeep of their property.

The alternative to this “independence trap” is the recognition that we can, do, and should depend on others within the community and welcome the proximity and engagement of extended family. This is how we behaved just decades ago; fortunately, we now are rediscovering its benefits and values. Sharing our lives beyond the box of our one- or two-generational homes and effectively negotiating our values, desires, and the gifts we have to offer are necessary to live locally in effective collaborative communities.

In the interest of balance, we should note that we have also reaped tremendous benefits from Individualism. Taking a very broad historical perspective, one can trace a progression from tyranny to democracy which clearly correlates with the increasing value of the individual. Indeed, the increased rights and responsibilities of the individual are a hallmark of more civilized societies. Even the increasing isolation of individuals since WWII has its benefits: Had people been more tied to the traditions of their families and clans, it is possible that many of the innovations we now use every day would never have been invented. Thus, while the celebration of the individual has perhaps gone to an extreme (Slater, 1990), the ingenuity and irrepressible pioneering spirit of the individual is a highly valued part of our American identity.

Community Model

Interdependence — firmly grounded in the realization that the most important resources for living well are other people — is the hallmark of the Community Model. By valuing, believing in, and trusting in the gifts, wisdom, and support of our neighbors and nearby family members, interdependence — and thus true community — is possible. People of all ages in such communities share skills, responsibilities, and resources.

We all have heard of different kinds of land-based communities: bedroom, gated, new urban, golf communities, retirement communities, ecovillages, and cohousing “intentional communities,” to name a few. What I am emphasizing is the related concepts of collaboration and interdependence. The belief here is that whatever you call the community, the more it embraces effective collaboration and balanced interdependence, the more rewarding and life enhancing it becomes for all. And these benefits derive from caring relationships.

Recent research has shown that people are neurologically “wired” to connect and to contribute. This means that when we live in communities that support the giving of our gifts, we are healthier, happier, and we live longer (Post, 2011). Studies attempting to isolate the common denominator of people who live the longest have identified their sense of caring connection and community. This has a far more dramatic impact than such things as diet and exercise (Buettner, 2010).

Though less common than in years past, communities with a high amount of interdependence still exist in many smaller towns across America. People in such towns know one another and “take care of their own.” Too often, however, the young people are moving away, especially as factories close and employment opportunities dry up. The promise on the horizon, however, is a plethora of excellent researchers and activists who are cocreating a modern version of caring communities to meet our needs as individuals and families.

I’ll mention one example here, namely, the work of John McKnight and Peter Block. McKnight and Block describe what they call a “competent” community — one in which the people know each other, care for one another, and cocreate fulfilling lives. Such competence is essential for families to function at their best.

The reason why many young people have so many “problems” that need servicing is that they are raised without a culture of community where they are a part of something…. teenagers are not needed. In the absence of purpose, they search for the belonging found in a social networking. For youth, the peer group is a substitute for the community of family and neighborhood. (p. 67)

The competent community also recognizes how much elders have to contribute to the mutual good. The young can apprentice with older adults in any area of mutual interest — auto repair, furniture making, carpentry, baking, herbal medicine, physics, storytelling, or music making. Also, kids can mentor other kids. A new kind of community-based education can occur within a rich fabric of relationship (see my article on “Envisioning Intentional Community” in this section).

When effective collaboration and balanced interdependence are high, a sense of belonging, personal worth, and interpersonal competence is generated from early on. Lifelong learning and meaningful engagement become natural activities for everyone. When all are encouraged to seek others out as valued resources for wisdom, inspiration, and personal fulfillment, elders naturally are revered.

In other words, the optimum community is one where everyone is involved in the raising of the children, in interdependent caring relationships, and in contributing to the vitality of the whole. While elders may well be housed in clusters of living units unto themselves, they are best integrated into the larger neighborhood to help it be a competent, collaborative community for the benefit of all.

Conclusion

The first three models all have their place in history and in our lives. Miracles are performed every day from the Disease Model, and both the Consumption and Individualistic models have promoted the acceptance of cultural change at unprecedented rates. It’s all about balance and values, however.

In taking a paradigm of oneness view, we can celebrate the value of the individual beyond individualism, and we can create structures that allow for effective collaboration and sustainable living. I believe that it’s only within the context of competent, collaborative communities that we as citizens of all ages and capacities can live long, happy lives and develop to our rich human potential.

References

Buettner, Dan. 2010. The Blue Zones: Lessons for Living Longer From the People Who’ve Lived the Longest. Washington, DC: National Geographic.

McKnight, John and Peter Block. 2012. Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Post, Stephen G. 2011. The Hidden Gifts of Helping: How the Power of Giving, Compassion, and Hope Can Get Us Through Hard Times. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Slater, Philip. 1990. The Pursuit of Loneliness, 20th Anniversary Edition. Boston: Beacon Press.

Whitaker, Robert. 2011. Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America. Louisville, KY: Broadway.

Gaya Erlandson is a psychologist, writer, teacher, social architect, and community consultant. Certified in Imago Relationship Therapy, she loves to coach couples, facilitate groups, and offer trainings related to conscious relationships and living the new paradigm. Gaya lives in Lotus Lodge — a shared home near Asheville, NC, which is situated on 2.5 acres of land with a pond, stream, and organic gardens. Lotus Lodge and its community was the subject of a recent news segment on CBS Early Morning — an experience which in part has inspired the project she is now working on, a how-to book on creating and maintaining shared households.

Not My Father’s Retirement by J. Alexander Mawhinney

Back in the 1970s, U.S. automaker Oldsmobile coined a commercial slogan: “It’s not your father’s Oldsmobile.” The goal was to convince the public that the product was a radical change from the previous generation of cars. Instead of rehashing the same tired old institutional models of retirement living, why not launch a radical new model more in sync with a new generation of elders?

We are all familiar with the “older generation” of elder living options that were available to our parents:

Age in place — in a home not designed for aging in place, eventually aging alone.

Move in with children or other relatives
Move to an institution — and pay highly for care delivered by strangers, under their rules and schedules. The institution might be a nursing home, an assisted living facility, a rest home, a retirement hotel, or a continuing care retirement community with multiple levels of care.

The children who were being wooed to buy that radically changed Oldsmobile in the ‘70s are now older than their fathers were then. And they expect an entirely new model of retirement living from what their fathers accepted. WE are among them!

These “children” are members of the (in)famous post–WWII baby boom generation, and they have been radicals all their lives. They don’t intend to get old, they don’t intend to leave their homes, and they certainly don’t want to live under other people’s rules and schedules!

Boomers are less regimented than their parents, more independent, more social, and more extravagant. Moving to an institution is not a consideration for most. As boomers age, we will see nursing homes, assisted living, and even continuing care retirement communities become passé and struggle to reinvent themselves.

Baby Boomers Paving the Way to New Options

Now is the time to consider a new lifestyle for the aging baby boomers — a new paradigm that is a polar opposite from the institution-based nursing home or assisted living facility in which many of our fathers, mothers, aunts, and uncles spent their last years. While many imaginative options are being developed, the new model I particularly advocate is the intentional community.

First, a definition: An intentional community is “a group of unrelated people who come together to share the deliberate pursuit of some noble aim.” That noble aim usually includes some form of shared values along with a disposition to be proactive and creative instead of waiting for the aging process to preclude their making a choice.

Though intentional communities typically are multigenerational, there is a new genre of elder community — an intentional elder-friendly neighborhood — that merits a careful look. While not usually designated as age-restricted, its design and amenities appeal to mature people (40s up) who are seeking the opportunity to choose neighbors — almost in the way one might select a new family — with whom they intend to share the second half of life.

When considering the creation of a new elder-friendly community, the structural principles for a successful community become essential:

Principles of an Intentional Elder Neighborhood

Relationship-based community — We humans are social animals. We find personal meaning from the personal recognition from others. We are seeking not just interaction, but mutual respect, admiration, belonging, a feeling of usefulness, and even love. In a platonic relationship, we find the potential for those desires and basic human needs to be met. We can be more together than we can be when we are alone.
Human Scale — Ten seems to be the natural limit on how many people an individual can know on a close “first person” basis and up to another 25 or so on a second person basis.The community is planned so we can develop personal relationships with everyone who lives in our neighborhood. We know their stories, and they know ours on a personal and intimate level. The neighborhood, therefore, is limited to 30-40 households. There may be multiple neighborhoods in the community.
Resident Centered — Residents determine and manage their own schedules and the activities in which they are involved. If a resident needs assistance with daily activities, that help can be managed without becoming the focus of the daily routine.
Embracing Lifelong Learning — Residents recognize and embrace the joy of learning and sharing knowledge throughout their lives. There is usually an affiliation with a nearby college or university to enable residents to take and/or teach classes and help others’ lifelong learning though mentoring and volunteering. Intellectual stimulation is essential to continuing mental, physical, and spiritual health.
Spirituality in Later Life — Residents recognize that spiritual growth is a primary work of those in the later stages of life. Residents encourage one another to seek meaning in life and Spirit in daily experiences. Acceptance of spiritual diversity is fundamental.
Environmental Consciousness — Though environmental commitments have a strong social grounding, economic considerations also come into play as residents seek to extend their incomes in a time when heating, cooling, water, and other infrastructure costs are rising.Consequently, homes are designed and sited to take advantage of solar or geo-thermal opportunities. Gray-water recycling systems can be incorporated for watering the community garden and other secondary needs. Homes are constructed from sustainable, “healthy-built/non-toxic” materials and frequently have common walls and shared heating/cooling systems. Appliances are carefully selected to minimize electric consumption.
Part of Greater Community — In lieu of being segregated as an elder-only community, the intentional elder neighborhood is integrated into a greater community. Residents are encouraged to share the wisdom and experience they have accumulated over a lifetime. Elders are in a unique position in life to offer perspective to youth and younger adults, many of whom struggle to meet the demands of modern life.Indeed, elders can mentor younger people, volunteer in various settings, teach or lecture as desired, and provide inspiration to young and old alike. In a time when living locally is called for on every level (economic, environmental, social), elders can provide the essential element to weave the social fabric of a community together.

This movement for improved housing for elders has the potential for creating community in neighborhoods where none existed, an outcome that can radically improve everyone’s lives for generations to come. And it may be boomers that lead the way.

J. Alexander Mawhinney NHA, FACHCE, MS (in Healthcare Administration), has spent most of the past 35 years developing and managing conventional “retirement communities” including independent, assisted living, dementia care, skilled nursing, and continuing care retirement communities.

A few years ago, he realized that a retirement community, no matter how beautiful or well managed, is still an institution and so began working with Dr. Bill Thomas and others in the “new paradigm elder community” movement. Currently he is a consultant nationwide to developers interested in building elder neighborhoods in human scale — including cluster cottages, atrium houses, and the Green House (replacement for nursing and assisted living facilities). He is also working to introduce the Life Care at Home concept in states in which it can be developed.

Dreaming Becomes Doing by Marianne Kilkenny

One of the oldest human needs is having someone to wonder where you are when you don’t come home at night.

— Margaret Mead

I come home from my long trip to the West Coast exhausted from the time change and the joys of current air travel. As I turn into my driveway, I see my lights are on in my house and the shades are drawn. What a welcome sight for a woman living alone. Someone is expecting me and welcoming me home.

It is my neighbor, Ginny, who has been taking care of the house and my two cats while I visited other states in my travels talking about the glories of living in community. Since 2006, I have encouraged, cajoled, and nudged those in my cohort to investigate new ways of spending our lives as we move forward into our second half of life.

Home Alone

My quest to live in community kicked into gear when my parents died about five years ago. Because I had no children, I’d spent many years talking to my friends about emulating the Golden Girls (though maybe with separate dwellings!). It was suddenly time to do something about it. No time to waste.

Since then, I have sponsored conferences, one-day events, and spoken about women wanting to live in community in our second half of life. Why women? My answer: because I am one, and I understand us better. And to state the obvious, we live longer, we have freedoms now that no women before us had — and the list goes on. To add to that, I believe in what Scott Peck said back in 1987 in The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace: “In and through community lies the salvation of the world.”

Urgency. Yes, there is some of that because I don’t have all the time in the world now. Not like when I was 20. And maybe that is a good thing as we endeavor to bring community to a large group of aging Americans. No time to waste.

Why, What, Who?

So… what are the steps to envisioning your community? The biggest one is WHY? Why is this something you want to do or might consider doing?

Is it the connection with others? Lights on when you get home? Mutual support? Shared gardens, cooperative meals, economic advantages and resources, business opportunities, sustainability (learning, teaching and practicing it), community support, and social networks?

Is it being with like-minded others, ease of education, health and fitness, creative expression, recreational opportunities, personal and spiritual growth, fun and laughter, shared resources, and overall ease of living? The list is endless. For me, it’s connection with others.

Then there is the WHAT: What will it look like, where will it be? Large or small, a shared single-family home, multiunit structures, apartments/condos? Urban, suburban, walk to town, countryside, mountainside, forest? Ecovillage, ecocity, cohousing, or a mixture of the best of these?

Also, important is the WHO — the others in your community. Who are the people you want to be living with? All artists, elders, mixed generations, couples, families, all women, multigenerational, like-minded or those who share your stated values and your location? How to find these people?

Getting Creative

I am often asked which is more important, the place or the people? Both are important.

As a spiritual person who believes we attract like people and locations to us, I know that having a written vision and/or a drawing or bullet points of what I want laid out helps. I can show it to someone, explain my thoughts, and relay my deep convictions. I also can enroll others in my vision, but only if I have one.

I often get calls, especially from women, whether married or single, who are looking for “the place to age in community.” We need to cocreate them, adapting current models as needed: cohousing, shared housing, and new urbanist villages, Naturally Occurring Retirement Communities (NORCs) all are part of the solution. Possibly a hybrid, taking the best of these, will emerge.

One woman wrote her WHY: “I am 55 and would love to find like-minded and like-hearted souls who want to come together for greater ease of living, companionship, looking out for one another, and a sense of continuous growth mentally and spiritually.”

As of right now, I challenge you to talk, listen to others, go within, draw pictures, visit communities: clarifying your vision of your community in whatever way works for you. Maybe it’s staying where you are and making it a neighborhood community, using your identified WHY as your model. That is possible. That is what I did for four years.

Marianne Kilkenny is a speaker, coach, and educator who works with groups and individuals looking for alternative models for living in communities in later life. Formerly a Human Resource executive in California, she currently lives in Asheville, NC, where she co-founded the Asheville Communities Network in 2006 and the Women FOR Living in Community Network in 2009. This later organization has offered events in both Asheville, NC, and Sarasota, FL, and is looking to spread the word through speaking, workshops, and online webinars and videos. The collaborative household in which Marianne has lived since January 2011 (after this article was written) was featured last year on NBC Nightly News.

Seeds of Collaborative Community by Gaya Erlandson

I was born to educated parents who valued equality, social justice for all — including women — and who espoused the importance of being authentic and living one’s dream. In sharp contrast to this, however, my mother was clinically depressed — enough to spend time in psychiatric hospitals.

Intelligent, talented, and beautiful, she dreamed of having a family and a professional life, to do her art and have various social, intellectual, and creative pursuits. Somehow I knew that her depression was because she felt trapped at home with her five kids. Then one day when I was nine, I had an intriguing thought.

I wondered whether other mothers also were depressed. I decided to find out. So I went to my friends’ homes, this time to take a serious look at their mothers. We lived in a middle- to upper-middle-class neighborhood in Minneapolis, MN, with houses up and down both sides of the street. What I saw in those big homes were women who looked dull, duty bound, and depressed. I was stunned! I remember standing on the front lawn afterward and saying to myself, “If everyone would just learn to collaborate, it would be so much easier and fun. Life is meant to be easy and fun!” Thus were sewn the seeds of my lifelong interest in living in community — in a particular way.

Let’s Collaborate for Fun and Ease!

For me, the whole point of living in community is to make life easier, more free and fun for everyone — all ages and perspectives. Within such an environment, I envisioned high quality of life and the opportunity for everyone to reach their potential. Consequently, the intentional communities that I became aware of starting in the 1970s didn’t interest me.

Many “ecovillages” have taken a “back to basics” approach that have women baking bread, gardening, and canning food, and the men chopping wood, etc. I wasn’t interested in more work or going back to gender stratification. My mother taught me well.

Also, I couldn’t buy into the idea that these “earth-friendly” rural communities were really promoting sustainability in the long run. After all, how sustainable is a project that has only 50 people living on 200 acres? Especially when they require proximity to the services of an urban center and a road and commute to get there.

Hoping to find or found a happy, flowing community some day, I pursued a career as a psychologist. I also researched, wrote, and created workshops relevant to community, compiling information and processes that could help people communicate and collaborate well together.

A New Perspective

I realized that the post-WWII parents, my parents, were the FIRST generation to raise a family without the experience or assistance of extended family. Without reliable birth control, they still had families of 3, 4, 5 or more children who, for the first time in history, weren’t expected to contribute to the homestead.

Help from the extended family members was replaced by appliances, “mother’s helpers,” that only the woman was expected to operate. Childrearing practices included considerable permissiveness compared with before, and fathers now worked miles away from home, often in unfulfilling careers, in an attempt to pay for it all.

I also learned by 1960 that there was an epidemic of depressed women who were taking prescribed antidepressants, just like my mother. Unbeknownst to each other and in sharp contrast to the media portrayal of utopian nuclear family life, women en masse felt trapped and depressed in their isolated homes.

What catalyzed the women’s movement in the late 1960s was women sharing the truth of their personal distress instead of pretending all was well. Women all over the country sat in consciousness-raising groups, sharing their sense of disappointment and disempowerment. Initial fear and hopelessness turned to relief, anger for some, and a new determinism.

Many of the women who contributed to the women’s movement were those baby boomers who attempted to live the lifestyle of their mothers. Having been raised to focus more on their own fulfillment, however, they were much more able to refuse the limitation and difficulty of that lifestyle.

They also saw that this was a cultural and political issue, rather than a personal one. I remember hearing the slogan, “The personal is political,” and totally understanding what that meant. I never agreed, however, that the “liberation” movement should be named after women. Instead, I saw a broader context having to do with moving outside the rules and roles of society for both genders. For me, what was happening was a “human liberation” movement, and the possibilities were exciting.

Domestic Revolution

Interestingly, however, the women’s movement didn’t challenge the notion of the nuclear family as the primary caregiving unit. Perhaps because of this, it also didn’t address the aging issues of their parents — whose hearts and hands had always been part of the traditional extended family.

Rather than being replaced by innovative, urban, collaborative living structures that would have welcomed the older generations, the nuclear family household went largely unchallenged. As a result, millions of households became hotbeds for hostility and estrangement between the genders and between the generations.

The Generation Gaps

Conflict, confusion, and estrangement between parents and their children are inevitable and utterly predictable when looked at in terms of time management and economics.

Even a surface analysis shows what you will get when you add over-extended parents with children, who are acculturated to disdain any substantive household contribution while also demanding goods (i.e., are largely ungrateful) and services (i.e., taxi!) from early on.

A friend recently told me that the number of presents his grandchildren received from his son and wife was “obscene.” “They tore into one after the other, with no real appreciation.” I would bet that these young parents were attempting to compensate for their guilt and rage they have felt and can’t acknowledge.

Collaboration Breeds Harmony; Injustice, Contempt

Parents within nuclear family households work hard to pay the bills and to suppress personal pain, disillusionment, and denial. Isolation breeds susceptibility to media-fed illusions that all the other Joneses are doing just fine, but we are falling behind.

The result is longer working hours for both men and women to pay for it all, with little time for personal fulfillment and very little time for family involvement — with either the children or their grandparents.

Women now have achieved rates of stress-related illness similar to men. No wonder so many of their/our aging parents have ended up in some institutionalized setting. Adherence to the nuclear family structure precludes substantive, contributory involvement from either the youth or their grandparents.

And speaking of youth, in some cities, many of the offspring of working parents (single- and dual-income parents) can’t avoid violence. In middle- and upper-middle-class suburbs of ideal dream homes, a surprising number of children have shown pathological behavior, such as gratuitous violence and even cold-blooded murder.

The Way We Never Were

Stephanie Coontz, professor of history and family studies at Evergreen State College in Olympia, WA, and national co-chair of the Council on Contemporary Families, gives more thought-provoking data. According to Coontz, the 1995 census, for the first time ever, indicated a majority of moms in the U.S. went back to work at least part time before their kids reached age one.

In her book, The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap, Coontz suggests the images we hold today of the “traditional family” are derived from 1950s television serials.

Coontz researched the composition and functioning of American families that existed from 1600 on and concludes that no “golden age” of family can be found, and that many of our ideals are based on a mythical family that never existed in the real world.

Whereas some claim our social ills are due to a breakdown of the “traditional” family —referring to the nuclear family — Coontz asserts that many of America’s problems, both in and outside of the family, result from the clash between unrealistic expectations of this illusory family and a changing socioeconomic world.

According to Coontz, many of the most visible symptoms of a “family crisis” are not caused by those who have rejected presumed “traditional” family values, but by those who cling to those values. She concludes that solving the complex issues of modern times requires social commitments and obligations that extend beyond the nuclear family.

Boomers and Elders, Unite!

While the issues are complex, I believe the estrangement between boomers and their aging parents can be attributed in large part to the continued unquestioned adherence to the nuclear family paradigm. Both households hold unto themselves and don’t want to be a burden to, or burdened by, the other.

What’s very hopeful is that boomers are demanding and are looking to revolutionize how people live through the elder years. Rather than simply renovating retirement settings, what really interests me is a whole paradigm shift in how the masses structure their lives, so that people of all ages live together and transform our future.

One of the oldest human needs is having someone to wonder where you are when you don’t come home at night.

— Margaret Mead

Home Alone

Why, What, Who?

So… what are the steps to envisioning your community? The biggest one is WHY? Why is this something you want to do or might consider doing?

Getting Creative

I am often asked which is more important, the place or the people? Both are important.

From the Editor, Gaya Erlandson…

Spring is a time we see the seeds we planted during our visioning stage begin to emerge into the light of day. This section focuses on the two kinds of structures needed to build community. The first, and in my opinion the most important, are soft structures — legal agreements and governance structures. We will examine these first, exploring how they support the effective interaction and collaboration among stakeholders that is KEY to having a harmonious community experience. Then we will look at issues of architecture and site design.

Social beings need the loving support of others to thrive. Though most of us have a deep yearning for a loving community, questions make us cautious. Will there be much conflict? How do people resolve their differences? Will I have enough privacy? Enough autonomy? Will I feel as though I’m actually less empowered to direct my life, or will it be better? Will strong personalities dominate meetings and decision-making so that I have to put up with an undercurrent of tension and resentment? Will it be worth all the adjustment required?

Boiled down, all these concerns revolve around getting along with others. As much as we need people in our lives, our individualistic lifestyles and structured roles within hierarchical work situations rarely prepare us to negotiate or collaborate with others as equals. Among the tools that can resolve these dilemmas — and one I highly recommend to any organization where equality, transparency, and shared leadership are highly valued — is Dynamic Governance. I explore it in my piece, “Dynamic Governance and Sharing Lives,” then illustrate how it works with a story by Larilee Suiter about a community where it was used.

“Aging in place” — staying in your own home until the end of life — is, according to research, most people’s preference. Economics is a factor here: for many, the costs of building or moving into “intentional” or other specialized communities is prohibitive. An affordable and promising approach to aging in place — namely, creating community within our existing neighborhoods — is currently attracting a lot of attention. In “The Sharing Solution” I preview a recent book by attorney Janelle Orsi and then excerpt brief articles by her on (1) urban agriculture and how cities should encourage it, (2) using homes as neighborhood sharing hubs, and (3) how to make our neighborhoods more sharing environments.

The remaining articles in Section 2 focus on the “hard” structures of community. Alex Mawhinney, in “Intentional Elder-Friendly Communities,” surveys the almost dizzying array of alternatives currently being explored. Then cohousing expert Ann Zabaldo — in her engaging article, “Romancing the Developer” — provides good advice for anyone flirting with the idea of being their own developer.

Dynamic Governance and Sharing Lives by Gaya Erlandson

Sharing is a vital aspect of community building. By uniting isolated neighbors into caring networks, sharing has the capacity to create communities of people who understand that their greatest source of abundance is in their shared, human assets. Parents who struggle alone to provide for their families, for example, can collaborate with neighbors for reliable, quality childcare, teen mentoring with local seniors, and meal and ride sharing.

Key to community building, however, is good governance and decision-making processes. Community building has been a lifelong passion of mine, and I am truly delighted to spread the word about a highly effective governance system that enables communities to be thriving containers of caring, collaborative relationships.

Dynamic Governance is an innovative approach to governance based on scientific principles. It combines the best business practices with the principles of cybernetics and systems thinking to create modern organizations — including communities whose governance meetings are more effective, more productive, and more efficient. Among its many benefits, Dynamic Governance:

Streamlines decision-making while reducing tension around power
Maximizes decision-making effectiveness and efficiency
Kindles creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurial spirit
Decreases number of meetings and increases their productivity
Increases individual engagement, productivity, and commitment
Builds relationships and community belonging
Provides a structure that assures ongoing progress, learning, and improvement

In much of the world, Dynamic Governance is called “sociocracy” based on the Latin and Greek roots socius, meaning social familiarity, and kratein, meaning governance. The word was coined in 1851 by Auguste Comte, and the concept was developed extensively by Gerard Endenburg in the Netherlands, who in 1970 began applying its principles to his electrical engineering corporation.

Sociocracy was brought to the United States by business consultant John Buck who has studied with Endenburg since the 1980s. To date, sociocracy has been implemented in hundreds of organizations around the world — private and public schools and universities, professional groups, large and small businesses, government agencies, and intentional communities. In the United States, sociocracy is largely referred to as Dynamic Governance (DG), the term we will use.

Structure and Principles

DG can be pictured as a hierarchy of circles reflecting different levels of work, not control. Circles are of just 2-40 people who know each other and who have a particular aim or job within a business or community organization. A simple three-tiered hierarchy includes the Top circle, made up of those heading the organization (Board of Directors, CEO, CFO, etc.) and a representative from the next circle down called the General circle. The General circle is made up of representatives from the circles at the third level (sometimes referred to as departments, committees, etc.) and also has its own representative in each of the lowest level circles as well as in the Top Circle (see double-linking below).

Just as implementation of Dynamic Governance makes minimal change to operations and maximum change to decision-making, its four principles are simple, but have dramatic effects.

1. Consent — Policy decisions are made by consent. Consent means members must offer a well-reasoned “paramount objection” (relevant to stated goals and aims) so it can be addressed. Rather than generating a negative turning point, paramount objections are expected to result in the opposite. Discord and chaos are embraced as opportunities to improve the proposal — and as opportunities for the group to build trust and understanding. In articulating objections, for example, members learn about the needs, gifts, and ideas of the others. They also gain clarity on their own motivation, goals, and ideas.

2. Circles of Equivalence — Members within each circle are highly involved: in determining meeting agendas, engaging in transparent elections, cocreating proposals for policies or projects, decision-making, etc. Decisions that are implemented are monitored and the outcomes measured by members of the circle to further the group’s learning and effectiveness. Those members that were most skeptical of a proposal may be elected as the best ones to do its measuring.

3. Double Linking — All the circles are “double linked.” Two people within each circle are members of the next higher circle — one selected from within the higher circle and the other elected from within the lower circle. This means that the higher circle is represented in the lower one and vice versa. Thus, any decision made in a circle is “passed” or consented to by all in that circle, including the member that is there as a representative of the higher and lower circles.
Because of this, ideas from the “lowest” circles can link upward and become implemented at any higher level, or move laterally through the representatives. Indeed, information flows to where it needs to go. With a comprehensive feedback system that ensures communication up and down the organization, DG’s double linking optimizes an organization’s ability to respond to internal and external pressures. This self-optimization allows a business or community organization to be very resilient.

4. Elections — Although some people are elected for specific tasks and functions over time, everyone within each circle has an equal vote and can be elected for any function. The election process assures both that the elected person is accepted by the group as the best available one to do the task, and that s/he understands what the task requires. In addition to enhancing effectiveness, the specific procedures used during elections greatly enhance interpersonal awareness and connection.

DG and Sharing Law

Writing DG governing documents into a new or existing legal structure can be done rather easily. In Appendix E of the book We The People, Buck and Villines offer an example of DG operating agreements and bylaws for a limited liability company. Article 1 includes three sections entitled, Organizational Model (describes the four principles), Structure (describes Top Circle, General Circle, Department Circles, etc.), and Investing and Working Partners.

Article 2, entitled “Top Circle,” gives details on its composition, roles, terms, meeting requirements, how to handle vacancies, etc., and Article 3 focuses on “Executive Officers of the Top Circle.” Significantly, the Board of Directors is part of the Top Circle and shall not meet separately from the Top Circle, and all decisions are made according to the principle of consent. External members chosen from outside the organization also are part of the Top Circle for their expertise in: financial matters, business management, city politics, DG consulting, and legal advice.

Article 4, “Circle Management,” has several subsections. It is stated here, for example, that each circle shall be a separate organ of the LLC and be empowered to draft its own regulations (in agreement with Top Circle’s vision, etc.); that the next higher circle, through its representative, is responsible for assuring that decision-making in a circle below functions according to the operating agreement; that recording circle minutes be done properly, etc.

Article 5, entitled “Compensation and Profit Sharing,” offers an ingenious way to compensate investing and working partners (workers), with both fixed and variable payments, depending on profitability. Additional example articles are offered, one entitled, “Conduct of Meeting of Investing Partners.” Again, decision-making by consent prevails; however, investing partners may choose other methods and structures of decision-making, provided they agree to do so by consent.

Vision of Neighborhood Communities

Similarly, one can implement DG in a neighborhood by working with its Homeowners Association. Perhaps more likely, however, is to work from the grassroots up. When a group of people contacts a lawyer to help them set up legal agreements for a shared project, such as a childcare collaborative, they could be taught DG circle meeting procedures, as offered by the lawyer should s/he become a DG consultant.

After experiencing success in sharing and making decisions together, members of this initial circle might seed new circles, such as one that creates a playground in a shared area or a food co-op, each requiring the services of a lawyer. When several of these third-level circles exist, they could create a General circle made up of representatives from each initial circle to better coordinate efforts. Eventually the homeowners association (or some other group) may adopt DG and become the Top circle and thus create a completely integrated (double-linked) DG hierarchy.

Activist Communities Unite!

I can see various groups coming together to cocreate community, using DG and sharing law. The Transition Town efforts — the grassroots network of communities that are working to build resilience in response to peak oil, climate destruction, and economic instability — would, for example, do well to consider implementing DG. Also the Occupy Wall Street movement may well coalesce efforts using DG. What power in uniting efforts!

Every indicator suggests that we need to live as locally as possible via community relations. Schools, neighborhoods, and businesses set up with DG can be linked together. DG procedures generate a sense of safety and belonging for all people — true community — by building personal and interpersonal skills and enabling effective, collaborative relationships.

This vision is consistent with the brilliant work of John McKnight and Peter Block who help create “competent” communities — where the people are considered the most important resource. Members consider themselves capable of taking care of their own, regardless of economic standing or any consumer index rating. Instead of requiring continual consumption of services from outsiders, community members exchange assets as they share in the work, responsibility, and joy of cocreating an interconnected, interdependent life together.

In short, DG is a scalable, decision-making structure (from a few to countless, interlinking small groups) that guarantees the opportunity of self-directed contribution and optimal development for all within a sharing, caring context. By using DG, we shift our certainty from the forms of previous decisions (the old structures of education, retirement, economic, political, and social systems) to a different kind of certainty. It is certainty that we as individuals have a right to our own unique existence and that we can direct our lives with others effectively.

Occupy Our Human Potential

Human history can be seen as a process of increasing the rights and decision-making responsibility of the individual. We have gone from magical thinking to autocracy or authoritarian decision-making models, to democracy in many parts of the world. Corruption of democracy by transnational corporations, however, threatens to have us step back to pre-democratic social structures. DG is a step forward.

According to Endenburg, when we apply the basic rules and principles of sociocracy, “a further step is not only possible … but inevitable” (1981, p 11). It is a step forward in achieving our human potential — and it all begins with the basic human desire to connect, contribute, and share equitably in a caring context of community.

References

Buck, John and Sharon Villines. 2007. We The People: Consenting to a Deeper Democracy, A Guide to Sociocratic Principles and Methods. Washington, DC:Sociocracy.info. See GovernanceAlive.com.

Endenburg, Gerard. 1998. Sociocracy as Social Design. Columbia, MD: Sociocratic Engineering Company.

Endenburg, Gerard. 1998. Sociocracy: The Organization of Decision-Making. Delft, Netherlands: Eburon.

Kretzmann, John P. and John L. McKnight. 1993. Building Communities From the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community’s Assets. Chicago: ACTA Publications.

McKnight, John and Peter Block. 2010. The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. See http://www.abcdinstitute.org/.

Orsi, Janelle. 2012. Sharing Law: The Legal Landscape of the New Economy. Chicago: American Bar Association Publishing.

Orsi, Janelle and Emily Doskow. 2009. The Sharing Solution: How to Save Money, Simplify Your Life and Build Community. Berkeley, CA: Nolo Press.

Dynamic Governance: Key to a Nurturing Community by Larilee Suiter

I began dreaming of alternative families at age 8, sure there was a better way than my personal family had discovered. In junior high I wrote term papers on utopian communities. Later I studied philosophy and psychology at Duke University, still trying to find the core components of a nurturing life. Graduate school in social work led to a 37-year counseling career, mostly working with couples, families, and groups.

Suburban life was barely tolerable for this misplaced zygote. I sent my kids to Quaker-founded Farm and Wilderness Camp in Vermont. I yearned to be with them in that effective intentional community. Then I read about cohousing in the mid-eighties and immediately determined I would someday live in one.

The mix of private home ownership and collective every-thing-else suited my temperament. Finally I joined Champlain Valley Cohousing in 2000 when it was still a kitchen table dialogue. They talked about doing Dynamic Governance (DG), and from my reading I felt that I finally found my nurturing community home. I moved to Vermont in 2002 to be a part of it.

From Dream to Nightmare

Soon after my arrival, however, it was painfully clear that no one in the group really knew how to do DG. People were arguing and some leaving. Our community founder knew John Buck, founder of the DG movement in the US, who thankfully was willing to work with our group for a reduced fee.

John was in the Top circle, advisory board. He helped us find an appropriate architect and developer and stayed through the whole permitting and building of the first quad building, all the while teaching and coaching us when he could, often by phone. I am convinced that we would not have survived as a group those early days, had it not been for John and Dynamic Governance.

With John’s expertise supporting me, I became Project Coordinator in 2003 and have been gratefully living here since June 2006, when my building was finished. At last my inner values and my external life match. Lucky me!

Dynamic Governance in Action

You might wish you could sit in on a DG meeting to witness how it works. Read on for a fictional but representative snapshot of DG in Champlain Valley Cohousing, our community near Burlington, Vermont.

It’s 9:05 AM. The community children are in a nearby room with two lively sitters. Coffee/tea and hot cider are steaming from mugs. The monthly Community Circle Meeting begins.

Each member in turn reveals a glimpse into their momentary reality, e.g., “I’m eager to get started and glad to be all together again”; I’m a bit fatigued and my teething baby may need my attention this morning, but I’m here for now and ready to go”; “I’m anxious to get a final decision on the Common House Design and hope we can accomplish that today.”

First agenda item: An Election of a Circle Chair

The facilitator describes the job responsibilities and asks for nominations. Without discussion, each member writes their own name on a piece of paper and the name of their nominee.

“I, Larilee, nominate Sally Burns.” The slips of paper are gathered by the facilitator and read aloud one by one, with everyone — including those nominated — in the room.

“Larilee, you nominated Sally Burns. Will you share your reasons?”

“Sure. I’ve worked with Sally on two different circles and notice that she is both highly organized and very flexible. She comes prepared to meetings and listens well to all input. Then she is exceptionally creative at crafting proposal language that incorporates everyone’s best thinking.”

“We share some meals, some labor, some challenges and lots of merriment as singles and families, youngsters and elders grow and learn from one another. Conscious of the need to find more peaceful and sustainable ways to live in partnership with each other and with the earth’s natural resources, we engage in ongoing dialogue as we define and refine our community.”

— Larilee Suiter

By the time all nominations are read and their rationale disclosed, we have people to consider. The Chair asks, “Given the ‘arguments’ you have heard for all the nominees, would anyone wish to change their nomination?” It is clear two of the candidates have received multiple nominations. Several people shift their original nomination to one or the other of those candidates.

The Chair weighs the number of nominations for each candidate along with the relative persuasiveness of the supporting arguments for their election and then proposes one of the names for a Consent Round.

“I propose Sally Burns to be our next Circle Chair.” Each person responds with “No objection.” The individual nominated is the last person asked for consent. Since no one has any reasoned or “paramount objection,” including the nominee, Sally is warmly welcomed into her new job.

What has just happened?

A DG election is a wonder to watch!!! By utilizing this process, six people have received public recognition for their competencies and probably feel good about themselves. One person has been selected without any secrecy about the reasons and with openly expressed support from all present. It is an affirming process, without any of the collateral divisive damage that is often the fallout from secret balloting. Fabulous!

Second Agenda Item: A proposal from the Farm and Forest Circle

A Proposal from the Farm and Forest Circle is brought forward: to purchase 8 bare-root fruit and nut trees and plant them in the meadow north of the anticipated Common House. The proposal has been generated by the circle with the most knowledge about the subject and whose consented aims include creating sustainable crops on site.

The Proposal was published in the agenda with requests for feedback several days prior to the current meeting. The Proposal includes a rationale explaining the site choice, the cost consequences, and reason to proceed this spring.

The Community Chair reads the Proposal. She conducts a Clarifying Round: “Are there any questions about the intent of the proposal?” Every member’s input is solicited. After all clarifying questions are answered to the group’s satisfaction, the Chair proceeds to a Reaction Round. One by one, without any discussion, members indicate their support or objections to any part of the proposal.

Objections are noted on a flip chart and suggestions for satisfying those concerns are solicited. Again, no open discussion, no dialogue. Everyone’s voice is heard. The proposal is modified to incorporate some or most of the suggestions and the Chair presents a modified proposal for a Consent Round. Often the proposal receives full consent.

All Objections are Addressed

Sometimes there are still objections. If so, the chair has multiple options, among them are: (1) Take a break while the objectors and proposers meet together for a few minutes to work out an acceptable proposal and try again for Consent; (2) Have the whole group continue in rounds seeking modifying suggestions; (3) send the proposal back to the Farm and Forest Circle to work out the modifications and bring the proposal forward again in a future meeting.

In this imagined scenario, the concerns of some that the proposed orchard site might better be utilized for a kitchen garden is satisfied by agreeing to reserve a 40’ by 60’ parcel closest to the Common House for future use as a kitchen garden. That commitment is added to the Proposal which then passes in a Consent Round.

What just happened?

A rather complex proposal with long-term consequences was deeply discussed and vetted in the Farm and Forest Circle and then improved in rounds by the Community Circle. Objections are encouraged because that is the DG mechanism for soliciting the best thinking of all participants. Although there is some initial disagreement, no one is disagreeable.

Round format, rather than open discussion, assures that each voice is heard. All members have equivalence or parity. While perhaps not the first choice of some members, the final outcome is acceptable to all members. The process is inclusive and efficient. How lovely!

The Final Round of Feedback

The community meeting takes up several other proposals and then ends with Closing Rounds. This is the moment when members give feedback to the leader about how effective the meeting was for them. Appreciations for what worked well are expressed.

Suggestions for improving future meetings are offered, and they might include such things as: posting the agenda items earlier, having the room be somehow more comfortable, or suggestions on any aspect of the facilitation and process. Such feedback contributes to a continuous learning cycle for the community. Closing Rounds end every meeting throughout the community.

Embedded throughout DG is an emphasis on having measurable Aims or goals within each circle. These aims provide clear guidance and direction to circle actions and provide a baseline for clear assessment of progress being made. Closing Rounds offers a public moment to celebrate accomplishments, including the consent of any proposal, and acknowledge individual and collective effort.

Comments on Dynamic Governance

In a start-up community or an organization that already has a governance system, the group may not be large enough or willing enough to fully employ all that DG entails. As an organization grows with more people, more complexity, and more responsibility, it will need to establish a full DG schema, briefly described here.

At the top of this hierarchy of circles is a “Top Circle” typically comprised of the Board, CEO, etc., as well as members from the larger community to bring a broader perspective. The Top Circle has the legal authority, fiscal responsibility, and long-term planning capacity from which it develops the organization’s Vision, Mission, and Aims
(VMA).

In a three-tier hierarchy, such as we have at our community, the third or bottom level is made up of a number of small circles of people who have self selected to participate. Each has a particular area of interest (such as the Farm and Forest Circle mentioned above) and is semiautonomous, with authority to make decisions within their own approved VMA. Each also utilizes a set of tools to evaluate how effectively its tasks or aims are being accomplished.

In between the Top and third tier of Circles is a “General Circle” that is a community-wide managing circle made up of a representative from the Top Circle and from each of the bottom circles (their chairperson). The General Circle also has someone from the General Circle itself that represents it in the Top Circle and in all of the lower Circles, thus creating the double-linking among all circles, both up and down the organization.

Transparency

The double linking is the DG twist that makes it special. DG is not simply another top- down power plot. It is bottom up and top down. Power to influence decisions is held equivalently by every participant at every level.

Agendas for each circle are published ahead of time so Circle members can suggest additions or changes. Members also can attend, vote on the day’s agenda, and speak their preferences in meetings. Thus anyone has the power to influence proposals and decisions. The elected representatives bring the collective thinking of their Circle to the table in the General Circle and afterward take back to their Circles the rationale behind their decisions.

Everything is transparent. Any member can request that a decision be revisited, any time, and objections are required to have “reasoned” ideas. Alfred Whitney Griswold said, “The only sure weapon against a bad idea is a better idea.” In DG, there are mechanisms built in that repeatedly invite the “better idea” person to step forward and share a new view while also ensuring efficiency.

Doing What Works

Because of this surety, members are more willing to consent to a “good-enough-for- now” decision, knowing that if later data reveals a better idea, the group has the power to execute it promptly. I believe more actual work gets done using this consent format (where members have no paramount objection), than can get done while awaiting an often elusive consensus.

When our community membership was too small to operate with all the layered aspects of DG, John Buck said to me:

Larilee, just start somewhere. Incorporate the parts that are most workable for you. As you grow and as the members experience the inherent advantages of DG, more aspects can be added to your procedures. Keep the momentum going by making “good-enough-for-now” decisions. Build in feedback-measuring features whenever you can so that the group “learns while doing.” Nothing is as persuasive as real-time data. Any decision can be revisited if a better alternative appears.

How reassuring! Thanks, John.

We are using a somewhat modified version of DG here at Champlain Valley Cohousing. I personally am a great fan of the format. However it needs some tweaking here and there to work when the organization is small. We are fully utilizing some of the aspects, but not all. And it works.

Frankly, I think DG holds the best possibility of any governance method for dealing with matters as complex as creating intentional communities. More than an improvement upon, or a step better than consensus, I think that DG is a quantum leap better than any other decision-making format I’ve learned about or ever used previously. Try it. I have an informed hunch that your might like it — a lot.

Larliee Suiter lives in Champlain Valley Cohousing, a nurturing pedestrian-centered community with 14 attached units, a large common house (pending), and 12 individual lots around an extensive central green — with 115 acres preserved forever for wildlife corridors and farming. One town house and three building lots are still available for purchase. In addition to several edits to the original article, Larilee adds: “I have lived in cohousing using Dynamic Governance now for 7 years and continue to find it stimulating, affirming, and compatible with my deepest beliefs.”

The Sharing Solution by Gaya Erlandson and Janelle Orsi

I had enthusiastically touted her book, The Sharing Solution,¹ for nearly two years, so it was a real pleasure to meet Janelle Orsi² last October at a conference in Colorado on Collaborating for Social Change. Janelle is founder of SELC (the Sustainable Economies Legal Center) in Oakland, CA, a firm which trains lawyers, law students, and citizens in what’s called sharing law. Like real estate or family law, sharing law is emerging now as a specialized area of legal practice. Janelle is taking a lead in promoting sharing law in part by coauthoring this book written for the general public.

The Sharing Solution is a treasure trove of ideas and tools for sharing goods, services, wisdom, space, etc. — almost anything you can think of! — with our neighbors. Its surveys and forms help us be clear about what we have to share and what our expectations are. The useful legal advice details, for example, how to craft agreements that include ways to end the arrangement cleanly when that becomes desirable. The end result of such agreements is we have more while buying less.

The benefits of sharing with people who live in close proximity are obvious: we save money, reduce resource consumption and thus landfill, and live more sustainably. Less obvious, perhaps, is how our interactions and shared interdependence help create a caring community. Sharing becomes a way to break through the isolation and illusion of independent living.

What To Share

Here’s a quick inventory of things we use only rarely: hand tools, lawn and garden equipment, ladders, long extension cords, vacuum cleaners, cars, washing machines, clothes lines, wheel barrows, bicycles and pumps, folding tables, irons and ironing boards, extra TVs, binoculars, telescopes, camping gear, back packs, canopy tents, folding or plastic chairs for special events, car or bicycle racks, inflatable boats or swimming inner tubes, special kitchen ware (crock pot, Vitamix juicer or blender, electric mixer, yogurt and bread makers, picnic baskets, thermoses, coolers, etc.), musical instruments, piano, holiday or special event decorations.

Another category is office extras: dry erase easel, flip chart stand, tripod, FedEx service, 3-hole punch, paper cutter and shredder, pencil sharpener, microphone, karaoke device, loud speaker, clip boards, extra computer, fax machine.

Space also can be shared. Plots of land can become common vegetable and herb gardens or children’s playgrounds. Garages can be used to fix cars, support work projects, or maintain a tool-lending library within a neighborhood community.

We also can share information and skills and create a neighborhood food or business co-op, a barter network, community energy projects, ride sharing, shared food gardens, etc. Time itself can be shared for fun purposes such as going to the movies, sharing meals, a BBQ or holiday gathering, block yard sale, music events, neighborhood talent shows, birthday celebrations, just to name a few.

I hope this quick catalog opened your eyes about the possibilities of sharing. To delve more deeply into the matter, order The Sharing Solution.

As is unfortunately too often the case, existing public policies will need to be changed if we are to maximize the social benefits of sharing. The three excerpts below are taken from articles by Janelle Orsi:

The focus of the first is on urban agriculture and how cities should be doing everything in their power to facilitate localized food production.
The second is about using homes as sharing hubs.
The third is on how to make our neighborhoods more sharing environments.

All three are guaranteed to stretch your thinking with concrete recipes for creating community within the neighborhoods where we live. (You may click on the links above to jump to the different articles.)

Urban Agriculture (3)

Cities should be doing everything in their power to facilitate localized food production, and a key component of that is enabling urban agriculture and community gardening. Peak oil, the breakdown of our industrial food system, the high cost of sustainably produced food — these and other factors lend an urgent need to use every plot of available city land for food growing.

Sharing is a critical component of urban food growing. First, food growing is labor intensive and requires that community members collaborate and share skills and knowledge. Sharing is also critical to land access; the people who will suffer the most from a food crisis are the urban poor who have less access to resources and tillable land. Much of the land that could be cultivated is owned by middle- or upper-class urban residents, private vacant lot owners, and government entities. A key question for cities is: how can the city incentivize the sharing of land resources to ensure that everyone is nourished?

Here are a few suggestions for ways that cities can adopt policies to facilitate the growth of urban agriculture and community food growing spaces:

Offer property tax incentives for vacant private lots that are used for urban farming: Cities should offer private land owners a property tax discount during years when an otherwise empty lot is used for food growing. The Williamson Act in California already provides property tax incentives to preserve land as agricultural in rural areas, and a similar policy should be applied in urban areas. Generally, land has higher income earning potential when it is built up with strip malls and housing developments. But it doesn’t always make sense to assess a property based on this potential value when the land is actually being used for a more modest activity, like agriculture. Even if a piece of land will eventually be developed, landowners should be rewarded for putting it to productive agricultural use in the meantime. Such a tax incentive could dramatically multiply the amount of available land for community gardening and urban farming.
Conduct a land inventory and prioritize the use of city-owned land for urban farming: Cities should conduct inventories of land available for urban food growing, and prioritize the use of public lands for food growing. In 2009, Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco, California, asked the city “to conduct an audit of unused land — including empty lots, rooftops, windowsills, and median strips — that could be turned into community gardens or farms.” (Yes, he even asked for a survey of windowsills!) In other cities, private groups have conducted such inventories. In Brooklyn, New York, an organization called 596 Acres has identified and created a map of 596 acres of vacant publicly owned land. In Oakland, California, geographer Nathan McClintock published a report and interactive map of public lots available for urban farming. Conducting land inventories for urban food growing is not a new idea. During WWI and WWII, to relieve burdens on the railroads and reduce demands for materials used in canning and processing, the U.S. government encouraged the cultivation of yards and unused plots of land. Up to 44 percent of the country’s vegetables were produced by individuals and families in small “victory gardens” during WWII. Community organizers were sent out to survey available land for urban and suburban food growing. The National War Commission used the slogan “put the slacker lands to work,” implying that any tillable lands not being used for food production were, basically, slacking off.
Create definitions of “community gardening” and “personal gardening” in the zoning code and allow such activities in every city zone: Many cities simply do not know where to fit community gardens into the zoning picture and, as a result, sometimes community gardens have had to jump through extensive legal hoops to get a permit for operating. Cities should recognize that individuals and communities that produce food for their own consumption or for charitable/educational purposes are providing a public good. Cities should create definitions of “community gardening” and “personal gardening” in the zoning code and specify that such uses are a permitted activity in every city zone. For example, community gardens in Oakland are now permitted in nearly every zoning except certain industrial zones.
Create a simple permitting procedure and allow commercial food growing in every city zone: The next logical step after enabling food growing throughout a city is to allow people to sell the veggies they grow. In some cities, urban farmers growing produce for sale have had to pay thousands of dollars to obtain conditional use permits. However, given the low margins of urban food production and the high social value of localized food systems, a city should require no more than a simple administrative use permit and charge no more than $100 or $200 in permit fees for someone wishing to engage in commercial food growing. For example, in Oakland, it is now possible to get a $40 home occupation permit to sell produce grown in one’s backyard.
Allow people to plant vegetables in sidewalk/parking strips: It is often illegal for people to plant vegetables in the strip of land between a sidewalk and the street, or a permit is required to do any landscaping other than grass. Seattle, Washington, recently changed this law, allowing anyone to plant vegetables in the sidewalk strips in front of their homes. A sidewalk strip could become a micro-community garden for neighbors to enjoy together.
And, for heaven’s sake, allow people to plant vegetables in front yards: Front yards are another ideal spot for community food growing, and cities should not fine and penalize people for planting front yard veggies. A Berkeley, California, resident was fined $4,500 for his front yard veggies, and an Oak Park, Michigan, resident was charged with a misdemeanor for planting a front yard veggie garden. An outright ban on front yard vegetables is bad policy. If a city is worried that front yard vegetable gardens could give the appearance of blight if neglected, the city should simply impose requirements that front yard vegetable gardens be reasonably well-kept and that a significant amount of dead plant material may not be left in the yard for too long.
Subsidize water for urban farms and community gardens: Water is typically subsidized for rural farmers, and the same should apply to urban farms. Cities should at least offer water discounts to organizations that designate land for publicly accessible community food gardens. Cities could also offer rebates and subsidies to urban farms that make use of recycled grey water or that capture and store rainwater that would otherwise drain to the sewer system. Such incentives could make water access more affordable to urban farms, while reducing the impact on the city’s fresh water resources and stormwater run-off.
Create reasonable policies for urban livestock raising: The ability to raise one’s own eggs, milk, and meat is critical to a more sustainable food system, since the majority of such products are currently produced by large-scale factory farms. Cities should give residents the right to raise their own livestock, within reasonable limits to ensure the well-being of animals and to ensure a low impact on surrounding neighbors. A group of students and faculty at the University of Oregon have produced a very helpful guide to Local Land Use Laws to Allow Urban Microlivestock which includes a sample ordinance for cities. Cities should also create guides and resources for urban livestock raisers, such as the helpful resource created by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture.
Exempt certain chicken coops and goat shelters from building and zoning permit requirements: It can be unclear at what point a small chicken coop or goat shelter has become a “structure” or “building” subject to regulation and permitting requirements from the local building and planning departments. Most people build their own simple coops and shelters, and are sometimes surprised to learn that a local building department would have required a permit for such a building, or they may be surprised to learn that the planning department must approve the size and placement of the construction. Cities should define the size and placement of certain small chicken coops and goat shelters, such that residents can construct them without obtaining any permits.
Limit the right of homeowners’ associations to prevent home food production: Currently, most homeowners associations have the right to make rules about how homeowners use their properties. Some homeowners’ associations have been known to tell residents that they cannot keep chickens and bees, or that they cannot grow edible plants in their front yards. Although it would be preferable to make state laws to curtail homeowners’ associations’ powers in this regard, each city can also pass laws that allow people to grow and raise their own food as a right.
De-pave paradise and put a tax on parking lots: The City of Philadelphia imposes a tax on properties based on the size of impervious space on the property. This tax serves to prevent stormwater floods and incentivizes capture, storage, and percolation of rainwater. Because urban farms allow almost all rainwater to percolate, Philadelphia’s tax system creates a huge incentive for property owners to replace paved spaces with urban gardens. Although most residences and commercial properties are required to provide some parking areas, such a tax would encourage property owners to at least remove any unnecessary pavement and replace it with gardens.

Homes as Sharing Hubs (4)

Our homes are the most obvious hubs for the sharing and collaborative consumption movements. After all, we live in them, and so does most of our stuff. Sharing our car, sharing our vacuum cleaner, borrowing and lending household goods, offering our homes as a temporary place for others to stay — these are all activities that make a great deal of sense — from economic, efficiency, and ecological standpoints. Generally, there are almost no legal barriers to these sharing activities, so long as they are happening on a casual, occasional, and uncompensated basis.

But what if we want to get more organized about our sharing, and maybe even share the costs of things like owning a car and certain household goods? Perhaps we want to earn a profit. As the folks at Collaborative Consumption have pointed out, there is HUGE potential to make money by sharing what is in our home.

Unfortunately, legal barriers begin to kick in when we turn our household sharing activities into money-makers. We have already discussed these barriers in our article on Collaborative Consumption’s Legal Paradox. To sum up the barrier: in most residentially zoned areas of a city, residents are very limited in the types of businesses they can engage in at home. Home offices tend to be okay, as do some tutoring activities; but any businesses that involve more than a few visiting customers, or that involve keeping an inventory, tend to be disallowed.

Here are a few suggestions for ways that a city can encourage people to share what they have in their homes. We encourage readers to post additional suggestions in the comments area:

Allow community gathering activities in homes: Cities should consider expanding the list of allowable community gathering activities in residential areas. In most cities, zoning barriers could arise if someone wanted to use their home as a community gathering space — for example, to host cooking, garden, or yoga classes; to hold house concerts; to host regular food swaps or underground restaurants; or to offer the yard as a community garden. While we are all allowed to hold a reasonable number of gatherings in our home, cities do tend to object when such gatherings become regular or involve money making. In many residential zones in Oakland, California, for example, residents would need an expensive conditional use permit in order to engage in activities defined as Community Assembly, Recreational Assembly, and Community Education activities.
Allow people to sell produce grown in backyards: Our food system probably cannot get any more local than a neighborhood-based vegetable delivery service. Sophie Hahn of Berkeley, California, began selling weekly vegetable boxes to a few of her neighbors, only to learn that the city zoning prohibited such activities. Cities should follow in Oakland’s footsteps and allow people to sell produce they grow in their backyards.
Expand allowable garage and yard sale activities: Many cities put a cap on the number of yard sales that a property can host each year; for example, in Dallas, Texas, the limit is two per year. Other cities impose limitations that prevent a person from turning their garage sale into a regular retail location. For example, a city might specify that you can only sell your own belongings, and not things you bought for the sole purpose of reselling. Maybe it’s time to open up the way we think about yard sales and consider that yard sales could be an important site for increasingly localized economies, within limits, of course. One suggestion would be to allow people to sell their home-grown vegetables in a yard sale, and to allow sales of baked goods, in those states where cottage food production is legal.
Exempt residential childcare cooperatives from permitting requirements: When parents make cooperative arrangements to provide care for their own and others’ children, they are often exempt from state childcare licensing requirements. For example, in California, a cooperative home childcare arrangement involving 12 or fewer children is exempt from state licensure, if it meets the statute’s requirements. Cities can likewise encourage such cooperative arrangements by offering permit exemptions or lowering the permitting barriers for such cooperative arrangements.
Allow personal vehicle sharing in home driveways and garages: Getaround and Relay Rides are two San Francisco-based services offering car owners the opportunity to share their vehicles through a car-sharing program. Yet, these services could potentially face a barrier, which is that cities may not allow personal residences to essentially be used as car-rental hubs. To reduce traffic and parking problems, cities should clarify that each residential property is allowed to regularly rent at least one car, if not an unlimited number of cars from their property. Furthermore, cities should allow people to park such vehicles anywhere in the driveway, and not just in the legally designated spots on the property map.
Allow a limited number of short-term stays in people’s homes: Currently, many cities have a blanket prohibition on charging guests for short-term stays (usually defined as shorter than two weeks or a month). To charge a guest for such a stay would mean the host is operating a hotel, which is not legal to do without a permit. This is a problem that peer-to-peer rental service AirBNB is facing, as some cities are calling attention to the unpermitted home stays. Ideally cities would allow this to happen, at least on a limited scale, since such activities not only reduce the cost of living for local residents, but also make it more affordable for travelers to stay in the city.

Shareable Neighborhoods (5)

A city’s safety and economic stability can be greatly enhanced if a spirit of community and sharing is fostered in every neighborhood.

Here are a handful of suggestions for ways that city policies and programs could foster community-building in neighborhoods:

Create a staff position focused on neighborhood community activities: Each city should hire at least one staff person dedicated to facilitating community-building activities in neighborhoods. This staff person would communicate regularly with neighborhood groups and associations, facilitate permitting and offer supplies for block parties, help organize emergency preparedness meetings, and give neighborhoods other support and resources. For example, in the City of Albany, California, there is a Community Services Manager that facilitates a handful of community-building activities such as neighborhood veggie swaps and block movie nights, for which the city lends neighborhoods a giant screen and projector.
Facilitate sharing and emergency preparedness simultaneously: In many respects, sharing and building community are the most important things we can be doing to prepare for emergencies. The City of Berkeley has a great tactic for getting neighborhoods organized: give them free stuff to share. The city awards caches of emergency supplies to neighborhood groups that have demonstrated that they have gotten organized and done some emergency preparedness planning and training.
Design neighborhoods for sharing: The layout and physical features of a neighborhood can greatly influence the ways that neighbors interact with each other. For example, social interaction is enhanced in neighborhoods with walkable spaces, plazas, parks, and narrower streets. Cities can enhance neighborhoods with initiatives to redesign streets, sidewalks, and intersections, and by imposing shareable design requirements on new planned communities.
Offer neighborhood sharing sheds and pods: In the same way that the City of Berkeley has offered special containers to neighborhoods for storing emergency supplies, a city could offer special containers or sheds where neighbors could store other shared items, such as the neighborhood lawn mower, vacuum cleaner, badminton set, and so on. It would be like having a mini tool library in every neighborhood. Cities could, for example, supply a container that is 6x6x6 feet (something similar to a POD), and designate a street parking spot for that container. The neighborhood group could complete an application with the city that demonstrates that it is organized and has a plan for managing the shared stuff.
Adopt a neighborhood social network platform: Recently, companies like NextDoor, rBlock, and OhSoWe have developed social network platforms for neighbors, and California cities like Redwood City and Palo Alto have begun to adopt these platforms on a citywide basis or actively encourage neighborhoods to use them as a community-building tool. With such platforms, users get daily updates from their neighbors with information like: “Free plums from my tree!” “Has anyone seen my orange cat today?” “Can someone lend me a bicycle pump?” These platforms could grease the wheels of sharing in a neighborhood, and also give cities a more effective platform for communicating with residents.
Help neighbors remove fences: At least one city that we know of, Elgin, Illinois, has created an incentive program to help people remove chain link fences from their front yards. Removing fences from front or back yards helps to increase everyone’s access to open green spaces and facilitates connection between neighbors.

Notes

1 Orsi, Janelle and Emily Doskow. 2009. The Sharing Solution: How to Save Money, Simplify Your Life and Build Community. Berkeley, CA: Nolo Press.

² Janelle Orsi, director of the Sustainable Economies Law Center, is an attorney and mediator focused on helping individuals and organizations share resources and create more sustainable communities. She works with social enterprises, nonprofits, cooperatives, community gardens, cohousing communities, ecovillages, and others doing innovative work to change the world. Previously, she was Executive Director of Women Defenders, a professional organization of women defense attorneys and has worked in a range of legal practice areas, including criminal defense, youth law, immigration, adoptions, LGBT rights, and estate planning. She attended UC Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law.

³ Click here to post comments to this article on Urban Agriculture and add to the collection of policy suggestions. To view a 9-minute YouTube cartoon on urban agriculture and city policies produced by the Sustainable Economies Law Center entitled “Citylicious,” click here.

⁴ “How else might a city further enable the use of our homes as sharing hubs? Please post your thoughts at the link below and help us build this collection of policy proposals. Thank you!” — Janelle Orsi
Click here to post comments to this article on Homes as Shareable Hubs.

⁵ “How else might a city encourage sharing in neighborhoods? Please post your thoughts below and help us build this collection of policy proposals. Thank you! !” — Janelle Orsi
Click here to post comments to this article on Shareable Neighborhoods and add to the collection of policy suggestions.

Intentional Elder-Friendly Communities by Alex Mawhinney

Recall our previous discussion of the essential principles for a successful intentional elder-friendly community: Human scaled, relationship based, resident centered, with an overlay of lifelong learning, later life spirituality, environmental awareness and sustainable lifestyle, and continuing contribution to the greater community. Let’s now consider additional factors and models.

Let us note that, for many elders, retirement comes in two stages: an active phase during which they maintain their homes and usual community activities; then a later phase where they confront challenges that make it more difficult to maintain their earlier lifestyle without assistance of varying degree. Under the current paradigm, this realization often results in a move to an institution. But, with careful planning and conscious protection of one’s lifestyle, the majority of elders will not require institutionalization.

Research demonstrates incontrovertibly that a sense of “community” is an essential ingredient in quality of life and accounts for significantly improved health status.(1)

In an elder-friendly community, the physical design enhances both social contact and privacy. Private residences contain all the features of conventional homes AND are augmented by special features that support a person as they age in place. Residents also have access to common facilities that may include a common kitchen, dining/gathering area, open green areas, or courtyards. Specialty elder-friendly housing that combines special support systems (internal, external, or hybrid) embedded in a larger multigenerational community is the ideal for maintaining the majority of elders in an empowered and relatively self-sufficient living situation.

But “community” can be expressed in a wide variety of models. Here are a few representative choices:

Co-housing Communities

First, a definition: “Cohousing is a type of collaborative housing in which residents actively participate in the design and operation of their own neighborhoods. Cohousing residents are consciously committed to living as a community.”

Homes or condos typically are owned individually or rented, and residents determine what common activities they will engage in. Taking turns preparing and sharing meals a few times a week, doing projects, and having celebrations together are common and effective community builders.

A “common house” serves as the community’s gathering place for shared meals, group meetings, and other activities; it may also incorporate guest rooms for residents’ guests. A part-time caregiver can be hired by one or several residents, or a full-time caregiver may live in a community guest suite to serve several residents.

Elderspirit Community in Abingdon, VA, is an example of a flourishing elder cohousing community that includes both condos and apartments. Members have impressively clear agreements on how they plan to live and die in place and how they will mutually support that commitment.

Cottage Community (including Retirement Trailer Parks)

These typically consist of clusters of cottages or attached units, some built with “aging-in-place” design elements, arranged in groups of 20-40 living units with a common building for gatherings. Most are built in urban areas around a street grid, with relatively little green space.

Newer models follow the pattern of the cohousing community and have more shared outdoor space that encourages interaction. The Cottage Housing Development ordinance of Lehigh County, PA, is a national model for this kind of development.

“Active Adult” Developments

These have been utilized for decades and are especially conspicuous in areas like Florida, Arizona, and other resort destinations where retirees concentrate. Many cities and towns offer subsidized units for moderate-to-lower-income elders.

Too often, these developments — which may consist of apartments, cooperatives, or condominiums — were built without elder-friendly features, so adding such features as special lighting, improved kitchen and bathroom design, wider door and passageways, user-friendly door handles, etc. are necessary. Units can be pre-wired for monitoring by other residents and/or caregivers.

A unique active adult concept is the SOTEL Community™ (Service Oriented Technically Enhanced Living). Inspired by projects in the Netherlands, this is a hotel-like building with multiple floors of apartments surrounding an open, climate-conditioned atrium (think Embassy Suites with apartments instead of rooms).(2)

The apartments provide for both privacy — each has a rear patio or covered porch — and community. When residents walk out their front door, they are in the common house, in the beautiful atrium. The facility has edible landscaping and inviting spaces for dining, gathering, exercise, and socializing.

The SOTEL is designed to be user- and elder-friendly in every respect, including height-adjustable bath and kitchen cabinets, specialty lighting and fixtures with motion detectors, nanny-cam capabilities, modular wall systems that permit customizing apartments for various uses, and computer-controlled environmental systems.

A scaled-down version was approved recently for HUD financing; this model offers an unairconditioned, but covered, atrium and smaller apartments or town homes. Units — whether subsidized or market rate — incorporate the essential elements of the SOTEL concept. They can be resident managed (cohousing style), managed by an outside company, or some combination of both.

Collaborative or Shared Household

This is a home in which two or more unrelated individuals live, usually for social and economic benefit. Life in a collaborative household has been popularized by the TV series, The Golden Girls (currently in re-runs), and featured in The Ladies of Covingtonbook series by author Joan Medlicott.

Each resident has his or her own bedroom that may or may not include a private bath. Some houses or apartment units are designed specifically for this use and have several master suites and a shared living room, kitchen, dining area, and other common spaces.

Residents can live in the home by owning it collectively as a cooperative (a legal structure) or as a tenants-in-common arrangement, or they can be renters. By combining resources, several residents can share a far more elaborate home than any as an individual could afford.

The residents are well advised to organize their arrangements with written expectations and agreements, potentially using models of Dynamic Governance and/or State of Grace Documents.

Community Support

The range of available support services is high and depends, of course, on the resources of the community (nonprofit, volunteer organizations such as churches, for example) and the affluence of the elders. These vary from chore services (see Seniors Helping Seniors and Home Instead Senior Care, for example), to a myriad of home health, volunteer, and concierge services.

Organizing NORC

An example of the naturally occurring retirement community (NORC) is Beacon Hill Village in Boston, MA, a place for residents age 50 and over. A group of neighbors came together and created an organization allowing members to access various services at discounted prices “so members can lead vibrant, active and healthy lives, while living in their own homes… Our social and cultural programs are always changing to support member interests.”

The NORC Aging in Place concept is supported by The Jewish Federations of North America. It is being replicated across the country in neighborhoods with high concentrations of elders who have the resources to purchase services at reasonable group discount prices.

Life Care at Home

The recently emerging model of Life Care at Home is based on a project pioneered by Friends LifeCare located at Plymouth Meeting in Pennsylvania. Friends LifeCare is licensed in Pennsylvania and Delaware as a “continuing care retirement community without walls.” This model includes the benefits of long-term care insurance, as a pre-paid medical model, and direct provision of care through a related organization that assures strict quality of care standards.

The program is capable of providing any level of care to a member at home for as long as the member desires, and in an institutional setting upon a member request. As with any long-term-care policy, the member has the option of selecting the daily dollar amount of coverage and its extent, that is, its time frame. But in this case, the recipients are also members of a continuing care retirement community organization. Each member has his/her own personal care manager who is aware of and coordinates all the member’s services provided. In other words, the FLC member enjoys all the security and benefits of a campus-based continuing care retirement community without having to move away from their family, friends, and community.

This model can be especially advantageous when applied to the wide variety of community housing, including intentional communities of all sorts, cottage cluster neighborhoods, “active adult” communities, cohousing, and other congregate living arrangements.

The Life Care at Home concept is available or under development in a limited number of states at present (including PA, FL, NJ, ME, CT, NC, and unregulated in DE, TN, OH, DC), but is spreading to other states.

Personal Support

Active Adult Communities

“Active adult communities” which are mushrooming across the country, most of them modeled after Del Webb housing subdivisions, cater to the “first retirement” phase. The prime focus in these communities is personal entertainment and diversion, like golf, bridge, and other pastimes. Yes, friendships develop on the golf course or across a card table, but perhaps not deep, personal, enduring relationships. In this setting, when a resident gets to the point where they may need some kind of assistance, they are on their own. Either they hire in-home help or move to one of the afore-mentioned “old paradigm” options, usually an assisted living facility or similar situation.

Comprehensive Concierge Services

Where a concentrated population of elders exists, a comprehensive concierge service can offer an array of services that is limited only by a resident’s imagination and budget: from housekeeping and transportation to party planning and touring excursions. A NORC, an active-adult community, an elder apartment, cluster cottage or pocket neighborhood — the list is long — can create the critical density needed to make this model economically feasible. Concierge services could be bundled with Life Care at Home insurance. Licensed home healthcare can be added, as needed. A “concierge” can coordinate and assure delivery of services to residents, who only pay for services received.

Higher Levels of Care

Inevitably there are individuals whose needs are not met in the intentional elder-friendly community. Perhaps due to traumatic injury, chronic and debilitating illnesses, or issues of dementia, a specialized intentional community or care facility may be desired. Below are two options:

The Green House Project™

The Green House Project was conceived by Dr. William Thomas, a physician whose firm conviction is that “people do not belong in institutions — they belong at home.” A Green House is a 10-bedroom home, a small intentional community that can offer higher levels of care.

The project replaces the institutional nursing home with clustered neighborhoods of “Green Houses” designed so each of the 10 residents has a private room and private bath. Each room opens onto the shared living/dining room area that has a hearth. Residents and caregivers share meals at a single table.

Care in the Green House is provided by a caregiver referred to as a “Shahbaz” (a Persian word for “Royal Falcon”) who protects, sustains, and nurtures residents. The same team of Shahbazim (plural) serves the same house every day which allows for relationships to be built among residents and caregivers. (Unlike conventional nursing homes where staff turnover is very high, turnover in the Green House model is almost nonexistent.)

Residents and Shahbazim plan the menu, order the food, and store it in the pantry together. When meals are being prepared, residents can watch, gossip, offer assistance, and smell the meal to come — as in any normal home.

Residents determine how they will spend their day; their options usually include gardening, individual or group volunteer projects, studying, playing with visiting children, or petting the house dog or cat. They plan together for special events such as barbecues, trips, and sightseeing.

Health care is not the focus of life. In the Green House, residents receive the care they need and still are an integral part of life in the house and neighborhood.

More than 50 Green House Projects have opened since 2002, and many more are under development. Each can be state-licensed for assisted living, dementia care, or skilled nursing care. The Green House is now an initiative of NCB Capital Impact and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and read the fascinating book, What Are Old People For? by Dr. William H. Thomas.

The Small House Community

Launched in 2006, an ambitious 10-year plan to enhance and expand the continuing care system in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia bears watching to see what new elder housing and care system may emerge through government legislation. The goal of the Continuing Care Strategy (CCS) is to increase local solutions and ensure that care options are widely available, enabling citizens “to live well in a place they can call home.”

The principles that animate the initiative are worth emulating:

acknowledge the role individuals and families have in achieving maximum health and independence
celebrate and support local initiatives that help individuals remain in their homes and communities as long as possible
ensure that caregivers and health providers are well supported
offer a range of services to children, youth, adults, and seniors
provide long-term care when and where it’s needed

Developing the small-house community is a prime focus of the initiative; the design values that the approach takes are similar to those of the Green House.

Designs of these facilities may have one or multiple households for 10-20 residents that are detached, or may be a larger building that has been divided into smaller neighborhoods and separated by community social spaces. These communities often have loosened scheduling and opportunities for independence and autonomy, and include expanded choice in menus and meal times, strengthened caregiver relationships, and a less stressful workplace for staff.

Intentional Elder Village Concept

While any of the aforementioned elder-housing models can be created as a free-standing, contained community, combining the options into an integrated elder village creates a continuum of choices to meet any need or desire a mature person might have. Add proximity or ready access to urban commercial areas and you have a well-rounded and well-functioning village.

Such a village has all the elements of a continuing care retirement community without the entry fees and legal contractual issues. A resident can buy into or rent a unit in this village and be assured access to any service they may require for the rest of their life.

Incorporating an Intentional Elder Village into the context of a town or village or into a new urban-design community seems very promising. The human-scale, relationship-based, resident-centered elder community is created as a vital, participating, contributing asset to the greater, multigenerational community.

Community Organization and Governance

An intentional elder neighborhood can be organized and governed in a variety of ways. Some of the more typical are:

Homeowner or Residents’ Association — Many elder neighborhoods use consensus. More sophisticated communities have discovered Dynamic Governance, a model from Europe, featuring governance by consent.

Managed community — Owned or rented living units managed by a professional management company, which (hopefully) is attuned to resident input and decisions. This model is rare at present, as resident choice and contributions are diluted.

Other variations on the theme — Limited only by our imagination.

The choice to imagine a future as self-directed and institution-free is ours to make. The manifestation of our dream for the second half of life is limited only by our individuality, our desire to live consciously, and the people we include to plan and live with the rest of this lifetime. GO FOR IT!

J. Alexander Mawhinney, NHA, FACHCE, MS (in Healthcare Administration), has spent most of the past 35 years developing and managing conventional “retirement communities” including independent, assisted living, dementia care, skilled nursing, and continuing care retirement communities.

From the Editor, Gaya Erlandson…

What is living in community like? This section explores that question, focusing on people and how their lives are enhanced by the experience of community. We start with my recounting of the day “CBS Came and Filmed My Community!” (The article includes a link to the 3½-minute news segment which the network aired about our own version of the The Golden Girls. Though short, the segment does capture some of the fun we often have living at Lotus Lodge!) The article tells what the whole experience was like and the tremendous response it generated from women around the country.

A story from a resident of the Champlain Valley Cohousing Community in Vermont is followed by an updated report on Living Well Care Home Center in Bristol, Vermont. Living Well is the first continuing-care facility to successfully — and profitably — provide affordable, holistic services. At Living Well, success is measured in the improved health, happiness, and engagement of the residents; and their success has made their model one that is being carefully studied and replicated. Very inspiring! We need many more homes like this!

In the article which follows I profile five interesting and unique communities and community concepts that welcome elders and that will stretch your thinking about what is possible. I close with a book review of The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods by John McKnight and Peter Block — a short book that is a must read.

The whole community movement is about transformation — at the community level — and we can do it by building homes next to folks with whom we think we have more in common, or by connecting with existing neighbors. The benefit to all ages and stages of life is well documented. What I know is that transformation happens in conversation — new conversations about new possible futures. And it is the conversations we have in relationships that matter. We live in very transformational times, both as individuals in the second half of life and as a global community. It truly is time to act locally together, and I believe we have the tools and inspiring models with which to work.

CBS Came and Filmed My Community! by Gaya Erlandson

One day late in 2010, producer Jeanine Ibrahim called from NY and asked whether they could film us for a “Golden Girls” segment on their CBS Early Show. They wanted four women, age 45 or over, living together under one roof. While Lotus Lodge, our community of about 9 people has always included men, at the time five of the women living here were in that age range. So four of us said yes!

Initial Interviews

Before the news crew converged on our home from New York and Atlanta, Jeanine called and talked with all four of us, starting with me. “Yes, we are all quite independent, each with our own jobs and schedule, our own bank accounts, our own food, and our own private room, much like ‘The Golden Girls’ TV show.

“No, we’re not a commune, and no, we don’t even eat together much of the time, unless two or more happen to fix their own meal at the same time (3-4 times a week) or we have a potluck (at least once a week). We also garden and go on hikes together, have movie nights, and have many wonderful, rich conversations with lots of laughter. And yes, there’s plenty of privacy!”

While Jeanine was very engaging and listened well, soon into our conversations it was clear to me that CBS wanted to report a certain perspective — one that emphasized the economic advantage of “seniors” living together. I was determined to expand this perspective. Our conversation went something like the following.

“Most of the women moved to Lotus Lodge because they couldn’t afford their own place, right?”

“No, actually, everyone chose to be here primarily because they wanted the social support. This 4400-square-foot-place originally was a single-family home, converted now to a triplex. Everyone rents a private room within one of the apartments and we live some hybrid between being neighbors and family. Together we have very meaningful relationships that we all really value.”

“But is it cheaper to live together than on one’s own?”

“Oh, yes. And every one here chose to live collaboratively — as the preferred choice, even though we each could have afforded to live alone elsewhere. We all really value the comfort of having others around, and we value our relationship with the Earth — we appreciate living a smaller footprint.

“In fact, if we had the funds, we’d design a collaborative home from the ground up, and we’d make the whole site sustainable. Plus, we’d look to inspire a lot of others to live collaboratively — of all ages. I really think this is the beginning of a wave of the future.”

She didn’t seem interested, so I decided to let it go. Every media has its own perspective. In our phone audition, all four of us “Golden Girls” had done our best to share a more personal and philosophical perspective on why we live together. It was time to trust and get ready for the big day.

Emphasis on Relationship

Knowing that we were about to be interviewed for national TV had me much more aware of our interactions, our space, and how we support each other. Things around resident Sherry were particularly relevant.

Sherry had lived here for nearly three years, and just six weeks before the scheduled interview, she had suffered a bad fall while in California and broken her left hip in two places, her femur (upper leg bone), and her left shoulder, and had cracked three ribs on the left side. Sherry’s return home — just three weeks before the filming — involved major adjustments at Lotus Lodge.

First, we needed to move all her things from upstairs and set up a room for her on the main floor. For me, this was done gladly. I remember placing her various art objects and other keepsakes around the room, trying to replicate the arrangement she’d had upstairs. Putting her slippers on the side of her bed and hanging her nightgown and robe nearby made me smile.

On Tuesday, the day Sherry was to arrive, her son Josh came over to do the moving and was surprised to see it all done. I was surprised also that it hadn’t even occurred to me to call this strong 33-year-old to help! Still, he was useful: he installed a special elevated toilet seat and some rails on the tub, and we talked about what special needs Sherry would have.

Julianne, Sherry’s youngest, had flown in from the Caribbean to be with her mother during her the first week back. From all evidence, both women felt much love and healing. After years of difficulty, Sherry told me, she and her daughter now were closer than ever. And Julianne really appreciated the love and support her mother experienced at Lotus Lodge.

After Julianne left, Sherry’s other daughter, Jessica, drove in from Charlotte and stayed for several days. Then her oldest son Jake, also from Charlotte, stayed for a long weekend. By the end of that time, not only was Sherry closer to her kids, they all were in tremendous appreciation of her life and relationships at Lotus Lodge.

Sherry must have mentioned this during her interview on filming day because Jeanine, the director, requested that Josh (the only offspring living close by) come to Lotus Lodge and be interviewed — giving his thoughts about his mother being here.

Action!

The day the filming crew arrived, interviewer Michelle Miller walked in holding her cell phone and looking distraught. One of her kids was ill at school back in New York, and she was trying to make decisions about what to do, who else to call, and how to manage it all from Asheville. I thought, “How perfect. She needs community!”

Throughout the day she screened her calls and answered several that were family related. I didn’t ask for details but felt a deep sympathy for her difficulty. It was one of the countless times I thought to myself, “Why are we so wedded to living so separately in single-family homes? Life could be so much easier and more fun if we all would collaborate more.” Again, I let it go.

Jeanine, Michelle, and the two men of the crew (Darrall who did sound and David the photographer, both from Atlanta) were wonderful and quite good at making us feel comfortable. From the beginning we all laughed together and teased each other. They were so friendly, in fact, that I had to keep reminding myself that what I said might be on national TV and tamping down my irreverent humor.

When it was my turn to be interviewed on camera — I was last — I was nervous; and so, instead of having too much humor, I got too philosophical. Somewhere in the middle of it I stepped on my soapbox and hopefully not on her toes when Michelle asked something like, “So you think that living like this is really beneficial, especially for people as they age and are on limited income, right?”

Recollections of her trying that morning to manage her child’s care from afar via the phone jumped out at me as I launched into a passionate lecture about how families with children need a collaborative lifestyle more than anyone. It went something like the following.

Buying Less, Having More

“It’s not that I think all people should live under one roof in the way that we do at Lotus Lodge,” I said.

“To me, adults living alone or with just a spouse in a single-family home is lonely, and it seems like a lot of work and money to maintain everything. Lawn mowers, sheds, tools, washing machines, vacuums, and many other things that neighbors buy separately can be shared.

“Together we can have high-quality tools and lawn care equipment in a shared shed, or an expansive library — with much less expense. And we can have much more fun doing projects like community gardens together. Living collaboratively, in whatever way that looks, is a way to downsize and live more lightly on the Earth, and still have it all — or even more.”

Michelle inserted, “Especially for seniors, right?”

“Actually, I think it’s even more important to live collaboratively for families with young children. When you have kids, your whole life is about keeping up with the myth of the ‘independent’ single-family home as the ideal, and parents typically are scrambling to get everything done and to make ends meet. It’s exhausting! Many parents today, especially mothers, are taking antidepressants and other drugs to get by. A better way involves more connection, people of all ages contributing to each other. Raising children shouldn’t be so hard!

“Raising and educating our children is perhaps the most important job any society has, yet in the US, it is one with the least financial reward and the most stress — for parents and educators alike. Divorce is high among couples with young families. I believe that two people just aren’t enough, and certainly neither is a single parent.

“We used to have extended families where older children, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandmothers, and grandfathers all were involved in the rearing of the younger ones. If a child became ill, many hands and hearts were glad to contribute. There was a whole group of people who knew, cared about, and taught each child what it is to be a caring, contributing person.

“Without this, look at what’s happening with our kids. Increasingly they are being diagnosed and drugged from kindergarten on. Many don’t see or connect with either of their parents during much of the day, and there aren’t grandparents or other extended family around. Young people need ongoing contact and meaningful connections.

“With so few adults involved in their lives in a long-term, personal way, kids increasingly turn to each other. Bullying and various forms of violence are big problems. Research has shown that both murder and suicide by teens are related to feelings of being unliked, lonely, and bullied for extended periods — including from middle-class, intact families, as the infamous Columbine shootings demonstrated.

“Helen Keller said that she wasn’t ‘human’ until her teacher taught her to communicate and relate with others. In other words, she wasn’t ‘human’ until she had meaningful relationships. We are relational beings, utterly dependent on each other for survival and for our humanity. It is from others that we develop our self-concept, our ideas about what’s possible, and our capacities to love and function in the world. We need to emphasize our relationships much more, starting from birth.”

Contribution and Self-Concept

Michelle added, “Yes, kids should spend less time with their electronics.” If I didn’t have so much compassion for her right then I might have felt a bit exasperated.

“That might help. And it is a shame for a parent to use television and video games as baby sitters. But sometimes there is little choice. She needs time to study her college courses or do other adult things. If there were more adults or older responsible people around — such as teens who contributed meaningfully, and grandparents — she wouldn’t have to choose between her own and her child’s needs. It can be a no-win situation.

“And think about it. For all the times she chooses in favor of her child at her own expense, don’t you think that on some level she resents the child and that the child feels like a burden to her? In situations like that, he is! I believe, at some level, that whole conflicted dynamic gets figured into the child’s deep sense of self-worth — or lack thereof — and it’s well known that many of our youth today have low self-esteem.

“Something that could be done immediately is to expect much more from our children. If they were taught from an early age how to clean and manage the home — to whatever their capacity, including such things as doing their own laundry, meal planning and preparation — everyone would benefit. Expecting kids to contribute at home and in the community isn’t child abuse, it’s establishing a relationship that tells them they are important, that they are wanted and needed, that they make a difference.

“From an early age, children want to help. We all want to make a difference. I think it’s a basic need that is grossly under recognized. Contributing is perhaps the most rewarding way we connect with each other and feel a sense of belonging and worth. But it takes time to teach young children how to sweep the floor well, to set the table, clean the bathroom, care for the dog, water the garden, and make meals.

“Again, we are social, relational beings. We need each other. The more we look to encourage contribution and collaboration from our family members, our communities — including our children and elders — the better for all.”

To help me wrap it up, Michelle commented, “So you see a big change in how everyone lives.”

“Yes! I see a housing revolution! I see our cities of isolated single-family homes becoming caring neighborhood communities where the fences are taken down, people are working together to provide what is needed, and everyone is nurtured and supported at all stages of life. I see new forms of housing where several families share large kitchens, dining areas, sitting rooms, libraries, media rooms, garden and outdoor areas, and yet each person and couple has plenty of private space.

“The difficulty we have in raising our kids, as evidenced by the amount of drugs prescribed to both parents and kids and the resulting difficulties kids are having these days, I believe is a big elephant walking through our collective living rooms. Kids and elders — people of all ages — don’t fit into the box of the single-family home. We need to get out of that box! We need to connect and collaborate within our communities. Our kids, our humanity, and our future depend upon it!”

Next!

At the end of the day, it was almost sad to see the crew go. I would have loved to talk with Michelle more about her parenting situation. It’s amazing how quickly we can feel connected with others!

I realized from it all (again) that my thoughts on community are quite different from most folks — including many of those in the “intentional community” movement. I find it interesting that of all the people CBS could have contacted in the country, they landed at my doorstep here in the Asheville area where many are exploring new options and innovations for better living.

As it turned out, the full day of filming was edited down to a 3.5-minute piece. While it didn’t include any of the complexity or depth of what was discussed or what went into creating our community at Lotus Lodge, they did capture the fun of living here. Several times they captured us laughing uproariously, as you’ll see below.

Women Responded

The CBS segment was aired on Wednesday, March 2, 2011. Even though the Early Show didn’t give our contact information, several women from around the country found us and called saying they were very inspired to consider collaborative living. A few of the women were quite passionate about it.

One talked non-stop for the first 20 minutes, telling me how it was my “destiny” to go out and help women live harmoniously in collaborative homes, or to live more collaboratively with their neighbors, and that I “must” do it! While a few inquired about living here at Lotus Lodge, most were interested in learning how to create some version of the concept in their own abodes.

The whole experience reignited my own passion for collaborative, caring lifestyles — something I have lived, studied, taught classes on, and written about for many years. What I realized is that it was time for me to write my message, my perspective — in all its complexity and, hopefully, with clarity — in my own book. It was time.

Pulling together the material for this issue of Itineraries has helped me become clear about the shape of future projects. My next challenge will be to write a book primarily for people in the second half of life which will focus on creating and maintaining shared households — a “how to” on setting it up, ownership models, membership selection, interview questions, lease agreements, community expectations and preference lists, assisted care, etc. After that I will expound more on community in terms of families with children and women and the feminist movement. The special focus of this next book will be on creating housing cooperatives and competent communities within existing neighborhoods.

Living in Champlain Valley Cohousing by Debbie Ramsdell

At Champlain Valley Cohousing (CVC), we have a 125-acre parcel of land with wetlands, meadows, brooks, ponds, and woods, most of which is preserved for wildlife corridors and farming. We live on 10 acres of it, roughly shaped in a rectangle, with homes all around a central green: 14 attached units and 12 lots for single-family homes (with five homes already built). There are fruit trees, birdhouses, and gardens in people’s yards, and it is very lovely.

It is easy to look out at the goings-on on the green, where there is a play area (including a pirate ship, a sandbox, and swings), pathways for walkers, picnic tables, and almost always people during the summer.

The other day I looked out and felt such gratitude as I watched different groups of children play and adults interacting, while an older man rode his bike along the periphery. Two of the dads here started a day camp for children (age 4-8) who meet twice a week in the summer. I enjoy watching them having a wonderful time.

Community Engagement

I am a member of the Membership Committee and help to plan activities. We have summer and winter solstice celebrations that include skits, poetry reading, drumming and dancing, a potluck meal, and a bonfire. We also organize hikes up local mountains and have a book group that meets monthly. In the summer we have frequent potlucks, bonfires, and even tents pitched on the green with members of all ages camping out together.

We have pie-baking events. and once a year we join the Charlotte Day Parade in July, wearing our “Cohousing is Happening in Vermont” tee-shirts that have our Web site on the back. We also have workdays once a month that require some organization and last for just three hours on a Saturday morning.

In addition, we have a lot of informal gatherings. Here they just happen. I might have my dinner plate and join someone else with his or hers, or go for a walk on the spur of the moment. There’s always someone to visit with. My young grandchildren love to visit because they have so many friends here.

History

I came here in 2002 when members were still in the planning stages. I had become a widow in 1999, was living alone, and joined CVC wanting a new option. We broke ground in 2005 and at first I was a member or chair of the Marketing and Membership Committee or Circle, as they are called in Dynamic Governance (DG).

I said that, “Yes, the people are great, the land is great, the children are great (I love it that we are intergenerational), the farm is great, the community of Charlotte is great, Vermont is great, but the greatest feature by far is that we govern ourselves by the Dynamic Governance (DG) system.”

I feel that our governing system is the backbone of our community. It is what enabled us to succeed in finding the people and resources needed to successfully create our community, and it continues to provide us with the strength and cohesiveness necessary to make CVC a success today.

Dynamic Governance Structure

DG is a hierarchy of interlinking Circles including the Top or Executive Circle, then the Managing Circle made of all the working circle chairs. Thus, every circle participates in management of the overall community — a major way we are interlinked.

At the next level are all the rest of the circles such as Operations and Maintenance, Marketing (now separate from Membership), Farm and Forest Circle, Design Review Circle, etc. People often are members of more than one circle, and various circles often welcome input from others. An ad hoc task force might include interested people from various circles.

Circle members elect their chair, and the position rotates fairly often. One responsibility of the Circle Chair is to see that an agenda for the next meeting is sent to all members of CVC in a timely manner and that the minutes of the meeting are sent out within 48 hours afterward. Agendas and minutes are distributed to the members by e-mail, and members are expected to keep current.

Circles meet on differing schedules from once a week to once a month, or as needed. For example, the Design Review Circle meets only when a new home is being built or someone wants to change paint colors on their home, or proposes a garden design for their personal property.

One of the side benefits I have observed from the use of DG is the growth that occurs in the individuals who take on leadership roles within the various circles. Everyone has the opportunity to become the leader of a circle, and many of the members participate in various circles at different times, as they see the need or a Circle sees a need for their input and invites them.

Hot Topics

A very appealing aspect of DG is that everyone feels equal in their thoughts and ideas on important issues in the community and that they are listened to; everyone has a chance to voice his or her opinion. If there is not complete consensus on an issue, there is a method of getting past an objection.

This happened once over determining our gun policy. We kept doing rounds, gathering members’ opinions and objections, during which there was a gradual change from the original opinions as everyone heard each other. Eventually a round of “no objection” was achieved.

Consultant John Buck helped with this and encouraged us to consent to a “good-enough” policy, instead of waiting for the perfect one and not decide anything at all. It’s better to have some policy in place, which can be improved upon later.

Last night (July 1, 2010) we had a meeting on another hot topic — determining our dog policy — and it turned out to be one of our best meetings ever. The Membership Circle that I’m in has three members and was responsible, and so we created a Pet Policy Task Force of three people. The Task force prepared by getting the pet policies of other communities and input from our community members. Everyone was welcome to attend, since the issue is a membership-wide concern.

In all, 10 people showed up and we had several reaction, discussion, and clarification rounds, during which everyone’s opinion was heard. The process was surprisingly uncontentious. In less than two hours we passed a policy that everyone was happy with, and they were very happy with how it all went. Amazing!

We Can Work It Out

As you can probably tell, I am very enthusiastic about DG and living here. Based on actual experience, there’s a feeling that problems will work out fine. One of our younger members originally balked at some of the features of our governance process. Now he is one of the strongest advocates and promoters of DG.

As in most groups, there are some members of CVC who participate very little in the community, which is a disappointment to others. However, this involves only one or two individuals, and the rest of us have learned to work around them. We also realize that we can’t be best friends with everyone, but most of us feel a strong common bond in desiring to live in the CVC community, and this binds us together.

I think CVC would be like a ship without a rudder if we didn’t have DG guiding us. Because of DG, I sense that we have fewer meetings than other intentional communities, that we accomplish more during them, and we have more ease in the process.

I think it is an excellent system of running a cohousing community, and I am very thankful to our founder for finding DG and John Buck to lead us through the process. For me, our community is ideal. I honestly can’t think of any place I’d rather live!

Debbie Ramsdell, lived in Charlotte for 46 years and has lived in Champlain Valley Cohousing since 2006. Her daughter and family live in Bristol, VT, a 30-minute drive away, and her son-in-law Simbo (from Guinea, West Africa) leads an African Dance and Drum troupe in which she is a drummer. She also sells old-fashioned wooden clothes drying racks that are made by Simbo: Her son and his wife live in Hawaii.

Embracing Elders and Living Well by Gaya Erlandson and Paul Kervick

From the outside, Living Well Care Home looks like a regular older home in the neighborhood. Even walking in, you’d never know it is a holistic, 15-room, Level III, residential care and assisted living facility.

Located in Bristol, Vermont, Living Well emphasizes organic nutrition, whole life care, and sustainability. They are the first nonprofit healthcare facility in the country to use Dynamic Governance (DG), a style of management based on cocreative input from all levels of the organization — including residents.

And they are receiving national and international recognition.

Within just four years of starting, back in 2004, Living Well received the Governor’s Excellence Award as the state’s Program Champion, recognized as an “extraordinary role model for healthy aging.” Residents of Living Well attended the awards ceremony, held at the Vermont State House, and actually gave a musical performance, with Governor James Douglas drumming along.

In 2009, Dee DeLuca, administrator and co-founder, was honored with the VHCA Administrator of the Year Award. In 2010 they’ve received two awards from the Vermont Department of Vocational Rehabilitation — both the employer of the year award for hiring the disabled and an employee for the accomplishment of obtaining a good job.

How did all this happen?

A Little History

Co-founder Paul Kervick reports, “In 2004 I received a call from Dee DeLuca, a friend and community activist, who was trying to relocate the elders who lived in a residential-care home that, after 20 years, was closing its doors. She wanted to know whether my wife and I would house one of them.” From that discussion, however, emerged the possibility of a community effort to continue running the facility — in a very new way.

“Elders are the story holders and wisdom keepers. I believe they are our county’s greatest underutilized resource. I had an existing 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation and saw a tremendous opportunity. Plus, the timing was right.”

Just prior to this, Paul finished years of work on a much larger project. It was to create a new paradigm sustainable model community within the city of Burlington, Vermont on the campus of a former private college.

The vision included housing for the homeless, ecological renovation of several buildings, organic gardens, green energy, a holistic/integrative medical healthcare center, creative arts performance spaces, and programs involving numerous organizations, both private and nonprofit. “The project went by the wayside but we ended up with a large network of like-minded people and relevant resources.”

Providence

In less than three weeks, Dee — a chief inspiration and investor in Living Well — gathered enough money from a small group of local community members in order to secure a loan from a local bank. The investors set up a real estate company that rented the facility to Living Well and operated under the umbrella of Paul’s nonprofit. “We became the first holistic residential care facility in the State of Vermont.”

It so happened that the International Sustainable Communities Conference was held in the area the following month, and because Paul’s nonprofit was one of the sponsors, his organization was able to offer a presentation.

During the conference, which had 600 attendees, “we described the new project, shared our holistic approach to aging, and had John Buck introduce Dynamic Governance. We did visioning, held Open Space meetings, and gathered many creative ideas.”

Afterward, the Implementing Circle was established using Dynamic Governance principles, and others were invited to participate. Often facilitated by DG consultant John Buck, members met with architects, explored sustainability goals, created a vision, put together a business plan, established a strategic plan and operating protocols, and christened the venture Living Well Community Care Home.

Implementation

Knowing the residents would benefit tremendously from a holistic approach, Paul and Dee were passionate (still are) about the project and thought their ideas would be easy to implement. “What we didn’t realize is that, in addition to asking the staff to change their well-established behaviors, we were asking them to make some major shifts in consciousness. It’s been humbling.”

An important aspect is that it be holistic, starting with the food. Living Well has an arrangement with a local CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) and a food co-op and thus is able to provide organic, healthy meals at a good price.

In addition, they established organic gardens in their backyard to help supply their own food in season. Although people at the Department of Health and Human Services were impressed from the beginning, some of the staff actually reported the facility anonymously for “depriving” residents of their Wonder Bread and candy!

Mysteriously, toxic cleaning products that had been removed would reappear. Finally one worker, who chain-smoked and had the language of a sailor, objected loudly. She claimed that after 30 years, she knew what “clean” was by the smell — of bleach. Paul comments, “They felt they weren’t able to do their job!”

Opportunities to Improve

Perhaps most challenging for staff to learn was the use of DG. They were used to giving or receiving orders, often with harshness, not sitting in circles with all levels of staff and residents making decisions together! The idea that everyone’s input is valued — in other words, that everyone is responsible for the whole — was met in the beginning with great suspicion and even disdain.

The consent process of DG, however, welcomes objections as opportunities to improve. From the comments made by staff, the founders decided to offer them training programs on the importance of healthy food for improved cognitive and physical functioning, and to show how toxic chemicals affect brain cells. Staff also were reassured that they would not be fired if they offered new solutions, as everyone’s ideas are valued when utilizing DG.

In the meantime, art was put on the walls, a feng shui specialist consulted, bright colors added, and often music is heard — either from players or from residents drumming and singing. And while there are plenty of “sweets” such as cakes and cookies on the healthy menu, virtually no refined or artificial sugar is used. The smell of homemade, 7-grain bread often fills the air. Everything possible is purchased locally.

Residents Show Improvements on all Levels

Within six months, many residents evidenced noticeable improvements. One woman who was thought to have severe dementia picked up the phone one day and had a lucid conversation with her family for the first time in years. Another woman, who mostly had sat in her room alone, got up and played the piano. No one knew she had been a piano teacher.

Living Well’s holistic healthcare approach (rather than disease care) involves having a naturopathic doctor visit once a month, and she serves on the Board of Directors. Living Well was the first to apply an Integrative Medical approach to residential and assisted living in Vermont.

Early on, the naturopath indicated that the four residents diagnosed with a particular illness could be treated with a simple herbal tincture that costs $60 for a four-month supply — for all four people. This is compared to the chemical pharmaceutical costing $1000/month — for each.

Before long, all four residents were able to get off of the expensive medication, plus they no longer needed the secondary prescription for the side effects from it. Other residents also started to show visible improvements in the range of motion in their hands, arms, hips, and even better blood pressure. And creativity began to blossom.

Paul comments, “Most residents are much more social and active in general. It’s as if they have come out of a sleep.”

Self-Determination and Contribution

One might think that people with dementia and various physical issues wouldn’t be interested in contributing or able to participate effectively in DG, but they seem to thrive on it. The Resident Circle, for example, meets regularly and actively discusses whatever is important to them — whether it be the menu, how services are provided, what activities they want, or how to measure success.

As a result of DG and their own decision-making, residents participate as desired in the daily routines and house chores, including meal preparation. One resident was leaving the refrigerator door open, however, resulting in food spoiling and energy wasted. This problem was solved when, during a Resident Circle meeting, another resident offered to check the door frequently — especially when that person, her friend, is using it.

The Resident Circle also elects one of their members to represent them in the Staff Circle. This representative checks with all of the elders every month and makes sure s/he understands the issues and concerns to be brought up in the Staff Circle. Resident input and daily participation is a vital part of the community.

Interfacing with the Larger Community

The music making started when some youth came by in 2006 and were allowed to camp in the back yard, in exchange for teaching art and drumming to residents. “We heard that the memory of people with dementia has been shown to improve from drumming. Residents really got into it, even those whose hands initially could barely curve around the edges of a tambourine,” says Paul.

After a few months, residents decided to create a band and began to write their own music; they would sing and chant along with the drumming, and it sounded good! Soon they started getting invitations to perform — including at the 4th of July parade in Bristol — during which they drummed for three hours while riding on a float, and at a recent Body-Mind-Spirit festival as well as other care facilities.

As arranged with a nearby high school, “at risk” youth do their community service hours at Living Well. Some students have maintained these relationships and continue to volunteer, valuing the friendship, support, and wisdom from these elders.

Another activity seen at Living Well is art. Citizens of Bristol can come in and take art classes, and residents have had art exhibits locally. Paul states, “We focus on the beauty and wholeness of people. Our job is to build connections, connections to what each individual’s passion is about, with how to share it, and how the community can support that. Everyone benefits.”

Going With the Flow

After about a year, the workers seemed to settle in with the new ways of doing things, including being part of a decision-making team that operates in transparent, collaborative, and supportive ways. Important innovations have resulted from both staff and residents. The idea that everyone’s input really is valued has been learned experientially, over time.

A turning point in this was when the Management or Staff Circle decided to have the staff determine its own work schedule. Previously a point of contention, the schedule then began to be set up by workers themselves and include swing shifts during busy times making it easier to cover the required 24/7 care. From this, staff attitude toward DG improved tremendously.

A few of the workers did leave due to their own life changes, such as getting married, but none were fired. Interestingly, the new workers that have come to Living Well are more open to the perspective and methods used. Paul reports that they have been much easier to train, in part because the initial staff helps considerably.

Collaborative Coherence

Many people who become Direct Care Workers come into this poor-paying field due to lack of education and challenging life circumstances. “We’re trying to support staff to live healthier — eat better food, exercise, etc., and to be empowered to create better futures.

“We have an arrangement with a local bank, for example, to give workers up to a $1000 loan, after being employed here in good standing for one year. Once the loan is paid off, if desired by the employee, the bank will continue to take out the same amount as the payment was each month, and help him or her apply it to an educational fund or savings account. The bank also helps the employee learn about good financial habits and empowering sound financial health.”

Paul explains, “The buzz word or phrase in the industry is ‘culture change’ but it’s more than that. We need to shift consciousness, to be aligned with universal principals, to move into collaborative coherence rather than ‘power-over’ control. We are a living system within interconnected living systems. We start with the heart and expand out.

“We’re bringing all of this together in a business. Living Well is a vehicle through which we are manifesting these principles and sharing them with others. I’m a midwife. We all are. We’re here giving birth to ourselves, being present and sharing that with our community.”

Economically Sustainable

In 2009, after just five years in operation, the nonprofit Living Well was able to pay off investors and get excellent terms on a new loan from the VT Community Loan Fund and thus purchase the property. Because of this, they are in a better position to get grants for such things as having a community garden, solar and geothermal heat systems, and other renovations. They also have two Direct Sales Marketing businesses, both of which benefit the health of those at Living Well first.

One is Kangen water. Whether many of these machines are sold or not, having one dispensing “living water” to residents and staff is seen as vital to everyone’s health. The other business is Asea, a product that reportedly supplies “redox molecules” to protect, repair, and replace other body cells as needed.

According to Paul, “Redox molecules are what signal the body’s immune system to activate. The problem is that most people in their 50s and 60s, produce just 10-15% of what they did when young. Without this redox communication, there is greatly reduced effectiveness in maintaining health — even with a healthy diet.”

A measurement of financial success is the overall expenses of the facility and resulting affordability for residents. Paul reports, “To be financially sustainable, most assisted care facilities need to have a minimum of 2/3 of the residents be either private pay or have private medical insurance, and the rest can be low income or paid by Medicaid. We have reversed those numbers.”

Earlier this year the Deputy Secretary for Vermont’s Health and Human Services Agency called and spoke with Paul and other state officials for over an hour. Intrigued, he asked to visit the facility. He brought 10 people to Living Well and expressed great praise.

It turns out that the man was a direct care worker himself many years before and, from this visit, he committed to helping Living Well connect with the appropriate University of VT and other state officials so as to get funding and volunteers to do research and document/prove what is happening at the home.

Future Outlook

From their documentation and great success, founders of Living Well have received calls from people from around the country wanting to know what they are doing. Current plans are for Living Well to cooperate (using DG) with two other care facilities who together share resources (garden produce, food co-op membership, healthcare staff, transportation vehicles, etc.).

The idea is to create a cluster of three such facilities in close proximity and thus reduce expenses even more, while increasing the options and quality of care for residents. It is expected that this model will be widely replicated.

Paul says, “We’re really midwifing a new social system’s approach for health and vital aging in community.” While that may seem like a big claim, I believe they actually are doing much more.

Beyond being a residential care facility, Living Well is a demonstration of living the universal principle of oneness — from communicating molecules within cells, to collaboration among staff, residents, and the greater community, to cooperating with nature and benefiting global economics.

From it we can witness the truth of living systems interconnected with all other living systems. And we can experience the truth of a world of abundance, creativity, love, vitality, and mutual support, on all levels. In other words, we experience a shift in consciousness.

I would love to see these practices implemented elsewhere — in other community settings. I can see it transforming community-based business practices, local government, and Transition Town efforts — the grassroots network of communities that are working to build resilience in response to peak oil, climate destruction, and economic instability. We all deserve the benefits of Living Well.

Paul Kervick, MS, is a visionary, social architect, educator, minister, husband, father of four adult children, and has two grandchildren. He is co-founder/Director of Awakening Sanctuary, Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) educational and charitable organization and its major program, the Living Well Care Home, in Bristol, Vermont.

Paul left his family business in 1979 to move to Vermont and begin pursuing his love of creating new models of holistic health care and in 1977 cofounded and managed New Beginnings, Inc., the first birthing center in New England. He lives with his wife Julie in Shelburne, Vermont.

Five Innovative Community Concepts by Gaya Erlandson

Paradoxically, a group of humans becomes healing and converting only after its members have learned to stop trying to heal and convert. Community is a safe place precisely because no one is attempting to heal or convert you, to fix you, to change you. Instead, the members accept you as you are. You are free to be you. And being so free, you are free to discard defenses, masks, disguises; free to seek your own psychological and spiritual health; free to become your whole and holy self.

— Scott Peck

In the process of my research into interesting and unique communities that welcome elders, I discovered a very impressive and heartwarming movement — one that addresses the often desperate needs of orphaned children needing adoption or foster care with the commitments of mid-lifers and elders willing to parent and grandparent them in village-like settings. Below you will find brief descriptions of three inspiring communities — Hope Meadows, Treehouse, and Bridge Meadows — that are creatively addressing this challenging social problem.

Next, we profile a more recent movement to build retirement “villages” where virtually every need or desire is met for members. The village concept, pioneered in Beacon Hill Village, allows elders to age in place and is a viable alternative to assisted-living facilities for those who can afford a more upscale, cosmopolitan, and minimum-stress community life.

Then we have a glimpse into a very interesting community that has been in existence since 1966, just 30 minutes outside of New York City. Based on the teachings of Rudolf Steiner, Fellowship Community is a village in the true sense, with several businesses and meaningful work opportunities for young and old alike.

Hope Meadows

A very holistic approach was started in 1994 when Generations of Hope Development Corporation, Inc. established Hope Meadows, an intergenerational neighborhood for families seeking to adopt foster children.

Hope Meadows is a five-block small-town neighborhood where neglected and abused children who have been removed from their biological parents find a permanent and caring home, as well as grandparents, playmates, and an entire neighborhood designed to help them grow up in a secure and nurturing environment. It is a place where three generations care for and learn from each other.

Reinventing Retirement

Hope Meadows seniors, who serve as “honorary grandparents,” agree to volunteer at least six hours per week. In turn they receive reduced rent on spacious three-bedroom apartments. “The seniors are absolutely integral to the healing of these children,” emphasizes Hope Meadows’ founder Brenda Krause Eheart, “and the children provide real meaning and purpose in the daily lives of the seniors.”

Hope Meadows Parents: A Commitment for Life

Hope Meadows adoptive parents go through stringent screening and background checks, including fingerprinting and in-depth interviews. Only 10 per cent of all the applicants from potential parents are accepted. The parents must be licensed by the state and go through rigorous training, and they expect to adopt the children that come to them. Hope Meadows boasts an impressive 90 per cent adoption rate.

Background

Under the leadership of Brenda Krause Eheart and Carolyn Casteel, Hope Meadows has evolved into a neighborhood where all of its residents work to meet one another’s needs. It is the first example of what is now referred to as a Generations of Hope Community or GHC.

A GHC is a geographically contiguous intergenerational neighborhood, where some of the residents are facing a specific challenge around which the entire community organizes (e.g., youth exiting juvenile justice, young mothers re-entering society after incarceration or drug treatment, homeless families).

Intergenerational Community as Intervention

The term Intergenerational Community as Intervention (ICI) refers to the distinctive strategy used in GHCs to facilitate and support naturally emergent alliances, relationships, and enduring commitments across generational lines. In a GHC, professional services become subordinate to the relational support and services — the intervention — provided by the community.

GHC socially challenged residents, however, are not viewed as problems-to-be-managed, but as ordinary people requiring the same embeddedness in family and community that we would want for ourselves. All residents are viewed as if they were members of our own family and decisions made accordingly.

Professional Staff

The expertise of professional staff is considered essential for a wide range of managerial and programmatic functions. Staff practice is considered most effective when characterized by relationship building and “consent” rather than control. There is, however, no mention of the use of Dynamic Governance (yet).

Treehouse Foundation

Treehouse Community began by partnering with Beacon Communities in 2003 in order to build a multigenerational village where people connect daily in meaningful ways, creating a rich tapestry of relationships.

Treehouse opened in June 2006 in Easthampton, MA, and now is an award-winning community located next to the 100-acre Nonotuck Park and near Mt. Tom. Over 100 people ranging in age from 1 year to 90 years live in this innovative intentional village. It is for families who are adopting children from the public foster care system to live with caring neighbors, including elders who act as “honorary grandparents.”

“We experience exceptional community connections at Treehouse. It is demonstrated when elders offer writing workshops to children and adults, sew beautiful quilts for children, take kids to school, offer to be their mentors, teach them how to cook, and host sleepovers. We see it when parents care about each other, cook together, laugh about their life experiences, and support each other through times of learning. It is evident when children engage with their peers and reach out to adults in the neighborhood.”

The design of the neighborhood resembles a traditional village center with walkways, play areas, friendly front porches, and lots of room to run and grow for all ages. There is a Community Center with a library, kitchen, and gathering space/dining hall which acts as a multipurpose room for weekly pot lucks, movie nights, game nights, community activities, and much more.

The Treehouse community offers attractive rental homes, including 48 affordable senior cottages, for individuals over 55 who want to live in a supportive, caring neighborhood. There are 12 rental homes for families, including grandparents raising grandchildren, in two-story 3-, 4-, and 5-bedroom townhouses. Applications for elders and families are always welcome.

Thirty-three market rate homes will be available on Button Road and Treehouse Circle. People of all ages have expressed an interest in owning a home at Treehouse — folks interested in cohousing, people downsizing, former teachers and social workers who want to contribute to the success of this innovative program, foster and adoptive parents who want home equity, and people from all over the country who have heard about Treehouse and want to be a part of this new way of living.

Bridge Meadows

Similar to Hope Meadows and Treehouse Community, Bridge Meadows has the mission of developing and sustaining intergenerational neighborhoods for adoptive families of foster children that promote permanency, community, and caring relationships, while offering safety and meaningful purpose in the daily lives of older adults.

The Bridge Meadows team broke ground on the two-acre site in June 2010 at a groundbreaking ceremony attended by over 200 people. The community will house adoptive parents and elders who want to be surrogate grandparents for foster children who will become adopted. While the whole age spectrum will be served, the focus will be on the those children who often remain in foster care — children 8 years and older or part of sibling groups. The community will also be open to grandparents or aunts and uncles who are raising the children who have been in foster care and now are in need of a loving, permanent home. The community will be rich with services including recreational, educational, and counseling services on site.

Inviting Elders

Elders (55 years and older) who qualify for low-income housing will live in the 27 affordable housing apartments, and adoptive parents will live with the children in the nine family homes. There is a community center, courtyard, play area, library, computer room, and several gardens. A local elementary school and two parks are just two blocks away, and the property is on a bus line.

Executive Director Derenda Schubert reports that she has received a lot of interest. “For over a year,” Schubert says, “I have been receiving calls from the elders…People are really wanting a sense of community.”

We are family

The commitment of families who will become part of the Bridge Meadows community is huge. The obligation is lifelong and collaborative. Each generation will bring inspiration, dedication, and caring to the process. Here, the family begins its journey toward healing the wounds of abandoned childhoods and nurturing the hope of a bright future.

The Beacon Hill Village Model

The “village movement” is taking the country by storm. All across the country residents are creating intentional communities where people (aged 50 and above) who buy into a membership program receive access to a variety of services which allows them to age in their own homes. Currently, 50 Villages are operating across the country, and one has opened in Australia.

The concept was pioneered by Beacon Hill Village, named for the Boston neighborhood where it is located. Founded in 2001, it was created by a group of long-time Beacon Hill residents as an alternative to moving from their houses to retirement or assisted living communities.

Their array of services and benefits is impressive. Concierge service provides almost anything — pets and plants are taken care of, dinner or groceries delivered, gardens weeded, pictures hung, light bulbs changed, furniture rearranged, rides provided, bills paid, rooms painted, or a computer geek, personal trainer, or massage therapist brought to your home, to name a few of the services available.

Health and Wellness

There’s also a fitness center with various classes and walking groups, nutrition information, prescription drug coverage, health and long-term care insurance, Medicare plus supervised home health care professional, walking companions, neighborly visits, medication reminders, and even more extensive geriatric care management. All support residents’ health and wellness.

Program

There are various day trips — to museums, concerts, operas, botanical gardens, and social gatherings. These include private talks and discussions with local notables from the academic, cultural, and political communities.

Fellowship Community

Founded in 1966, Fellowship Community, though it welcomes all ages, is centered around the care of the seniors. About 150 seniors, children, and coworkers live in a rural setting of farm, woods, and orchards about 30 miles northwest of New York City.

Of particular note is that the community is organized according to the teachings of Rudolf Steiner. The architectural design of the community seems to be influenced by sacred geometry, with the central area surrounded by concentric rings of buildings and activities.

I happen to be a fan of sacred geometry and while I have yet to see a thorough description of the design used, I am intrigued. I believe that such geometries are quite beneficial to our well-being on all levels.

Elders in the Center

Hill Top House is the heart of the Fellowship Community — literally in the center. With 34 beds, it is where those needing the most care live. During the day, especially at mid-morning or mid-afternoon at “snack” times, it does not look like a care facility. The place is busy with people of all ages. Those in the facility are taken up in the flow of community activities and are a part of the ongoing life of the community.

The laundry, mail dispensing activity, bathroom, medicine dispensing room, telephone, Snack Foyer, and the Goethe room all are “central.” This brings life and activity into the midst of the most inactive person’s daily life. The basement of Hill Top House has a therapeutic center for massage, therapeutic baths, dentistry, podiatry, and ophthalmology.

All Ages Contribute

There are nine major work areas in the Fellowship including a farm, pottery, weaving workshop, auto maintenance garage, print shop, medical complex, and the administration facilities, etc. What is so important is that most individuals, of all ages and capacities, can be busy in worthwhile and productive activities. Different levels of ability and skill are needed and can be used. The result is that there is something worthwhile for everyone to do.

One of the 99-year-old members made some pottery, for example, which was sold in the gift shop. At the other end of the age spectrum, a young three- or four-year-old may make morning rounds with an older coworker in the care setting, bidding good morning to a “grandmother” or “grandfather,” watering plants, and/or emptying waste baskets.

I believe that teaching youth the skills and discipline to contribute is extremely important. Youth not only learn real-life skills but develop a sense of healthy self-esteem through relationships. As a psychologist, I feel that this connectedness is necessary for proper development. I would love to see more communities incorporate such relevant, experiential, and relational education for all youth.

At Fellowship Community, those who are full-time coworkers are usually in mid-life, but they do not have to be — it all depends upon health, capacity, ability, and the willingness to serve. For the most part, coworkers are encouraged to live in, but the community could not be sustained without help from those who do not live within the confines of the community.

There was no mention of their governance system on the Fellowship Web site. I, of course, would recommend the use of Dynamic Governance were you to build a similar community.

Visitors and Work-A-Longs

Fellowship Community welcomes visitors. Those who come for extended visits — whether individuals or families — have the opportunity to get to know the community through a “work-a-long.” Please contact them for either a tour or stay.

Books of Interest: The Abundant Community, a review by Gaya Erlandson

The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods by John McKnight and Peter Block (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2010).

This easy-to-read book begins with a fascinating discussion of how consumerism has impacted the family and community and how it is too often applied as a cure for social ills. When service organizations attempt to help make a community safe, for example, they tend to look for what funds, governmental programs, policies, and social services can be secured instead of what existing local resources and social capital can be leveraged.

In addition to turning us into consumers and clients, this process makes us focus on deficits. To get funding, residents of challenged neighborhoods increasingly must define their situation as intractable and themselves as incapable. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Although well intended, the providers of such services unwittingly contribute to the very problems they seek to remedy. While acknowledging that much good has come from various social programs, the authors urge new, more sustainable approaches.

People as Problems or People as Assets

Instead of deploying experts who evaluate “stakeholders” according to their deficits and what isn’t working, McKnight has spent years developing what he calls “assets-based community building.” This is where experts find and work with residents who can catalyze engagement of their neighbors based on their strengths or assets. The gifts, talents, wisdom, interests, resources, etc. of individuals are identified and then matched with those of others for mutual benefit. A teenager interested in auto mechanics, for example, can be mentored by one neighbor, while the teenagers teaches a different neighbor computer skills.

In the process, everyone’s value is affirmed. A central premise of a “competent” community and citizen versus consumer approach to community building is that everyone, no matter what age or handicap, has something to contribute. The experts remain in a supportive role as needed, while residents build competence within their community through relevant exchanges, cooperation, and meaningful relationships. Developing relationship skills and collective resourcefulness allows everyone to shift to an attitude of possibility, personal worth, and the reality of abundance.

The properties and capacities are abundant and exist as a potential in everybody. They await a nurturing context in which to be manifested.… the properties and capacities that make up a competent community exist in human nature (p. 68).

In this weak economy where budgets of local governments and nonprofit organizations have been cut, it is especially heartening to read the message and methods for mutual reliance offered in this book. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in community resilience.

The Authors

For nearly three decades, John McKnight has conducted research on social service delivery systems, health policy, community organizations, neighborhood policy, and institutional racism. He currently directs research projects focused on asset-based neighborhood development and methods of community building by incorporating marginalized people. John serves on the Board of Directors of numerous community organizations including the Gamaliel Foundation and The National Training and Information Center and is codirector of the Asset-Based Community Development Institute at Northwestern University.

Peter Block is an author and consultant. His work is about empowerment, stewardship, chosen accountability, and the reconciliation of community. He is the author of Flawless Consulting, Stewardship, The Answer to How Is Yes, and Community: A Structure of Belonging.

From the Guest Editor, Janice Blanchard…

Betty Friedan’s 1963 watershed book, The Feminine Mystique, defined — to the great relief of many American women — “the problem that has no name.” By every societal measure, women living the mid-century, middle-class American Dream should have been thrilled with their roles as suburban housewives and mothers. The problem was, Friedan revealed, that many felt dissatisfied with their lives and longed for something more meaningful than maintaining homes and caring for their families.

First, as a family caregiver, and later as a gerontologist, I experienced similar nagging feelings about aging in place being lauded as a panacea for institutional care. Given the literal and figurative price of living in a nursing home, however, what was there to dispute? Besides, research confirmed overwhelmingly, most Americans wanted to age in place! Like Friedan, however, I could not reconcile the discrepancies between people’s ideals and what is real for so many elders.

The reality is millions of older Americans struggle physically, financially, and emotionally to stay in homes and communities not designed to accommodate their changing needs. Without meaningful social connection and support, many suffer the same three plagues that afflict residents in nursing homes—loneliness, boredom and helplessness. In the aftermath of 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina in which elders at home disproportionately died, the question became inescapable: Isn’t there a better way to care for our elders than sentencing them to institutions or leaving them to age in place?

With this issue of Itineraries, my pilgrimage with Second Journey comes full circle in raising and answering this question. In May 2005 I attended Second Journey’s Visioning Council at Bill and Jude Thomas’s Summer Hill Farm in upstate New York. About two dozen visionaries gathered to contemplate innovative solutions to creating community in later life. We discussed institutional long-term-care facilities at one end of the spectrum, and “aging in place” at the other. We also discussed new models of communities that were emerging between these two extremes. We categorized the features of the “physical environment” — the tangible aspects of community design, such as the site plan and orientation, unit design, walkability, and incorporation of green and universal design principles — and the “social software” — those aspects of a community that nurture social, spiritual, emotional, creative, and civic life — that we believed exemplified such communities. And we gave a name to this new paradigm of intentional communities — communities created by small groups of people committed to helping elders stay in their homes and stay meaningfully connected to their communities; we called it “aging in community.”

It is exciting to see how far we have come in seven years! Google “aging in community” and you will find 57,800 references to articles, initiatives, and research in this area. In this Itineraries issue, we are delighted to share some of the wisdom and experiences of our colleagues and friends who are blazing this trail together. From essays that describe the vision of aging in community, to specific programs you can adapt to your neighborhood, we hope these writings will inspire you to create ways to age at home while nurturing and deepening a meaningful connection to community.

Moving Beyond Place by Bill Thomas

In 1519, the Venetian scholar Antonio Pigafetta was among those who accompanied Captain Ferdinand Magellan on the three-year voyage that became the first known circumnavigation of the earth. During his travels, Pigafetta kept a detailed diary in which he noted that the lifespan of the average Brazilian Indian was between 124 and 140 years (a longevity he attributed to the Indians’ retention of what he called a primitive innocence similar to that of the Biblical patriarchs).[1]

The standard for exaggerated claims had been set by Christopher Columbus 30 years earlier. In one of the explorer’s early letters he gushed over the seemingly limitless supply of food available in the New World, calling it “a veritable Cockaigne” or land of plenty.

Such observations were welcomed by rich and poor alike because they offered hope at a time when few people lived past the age of 40 and devastating famines were a common occurrence. Pervasive scarcity, back-breaking labor, and the prospect of early death led people to imagine a land where food and good health came effortlessly — to everyone. They dreamed of a utopia called Cockaigne, in which there was no need to work, the streams ran with water that restored the full bloom of youth, and the houses were roofed with meat pies.

Today, of course, the fanciful legends of Cockaigne can seem juvenile, encouraging us to believe that we have outgrown the need to console ourselves with imagined utopias. But such is not the case, certainly for many people growing old now.

Today’s Fear: Old Age in an Institution

The paradox of modern societies is that they provide the stability and affluence that enable many people to grow old, while at the same time denying older people a suitable role within the social order. Old age does not occur in a vacuum. How we define, experience, and perceive old age is influenced by a number of complex and interrelated factors, including social policies, politics, demographics, economics, and cultural values, as well as class, gender, and race/ethnicity. While theories of aging evolve over time within gerontology, it is apparent that social policy and public opinion are often slow to catch up. In public discourse and policy, aging is still largely defined by a biomedical perspective that emphasizes dependency, loss, and decline. Not surprisingly, the proposed solutions are rooted in the same soil. As a consequence, more than 70 percent of long-term-care dollars are spent on skilled nursing facilities, or nursing homes, that conform to the medical model.[2]

At the beginning of the past century, an American could reasonably expect to die at home, surrounded by loved ones and consoled by the most familiar of surroundings. Today, most older adults die in unfamiliar and impersonal hospital and nursing home environments. While a relatively small percentage of older adults find themselves living in nursing homes on any given day (5 percent of the population over age 65), the risk for a 65-year-old of entering a nursing home for some period of time is 46 percent and increases with age. With the survival rate increased to age 65, it is estimated that the number of 65-year-olds who will spend some time in a nursing home will double by 2020.[3]

People fear nursing homes. Indeed, when asked what they fear most, older people ranked loss of independence and placement in a nursing home above the fear of death.[4]

Aging in Place: Still “Dreaming of Cockaigne”

This brew of fear and loathing inspires millions of older Americans to dream of growing old in their longtime homes, or “aging in place.” Indeed, the ideal of growing old in one’s own home has developed into a powerful idealized counternarrative, the opposite of a dreadful old age cursed with indignity, a loss of autonomy, and the looming terror of institutionalization. The power that animates “aging in place” as a concept is its implied promise of freedom from that which we fear most. Rather than experience a loss of independence, we remain masters of our own domain. Instead of being cared for by strangers, we are sheltered within the bosom of our families or at least come to rely on a trusted homecare aide. Instead of being placed in an institution, we stay safe, secure, and comfortable within the walls of our own homes. This is the most consoling of all the ideas that we associate with old age. We have come to believe that in all times and in all ways, “home is best.” Indeed, some 92 percent of Americans age 65 and older who participated in 2000 in an AARP survey said they wanted to live out their lives in their current homes; even if they should need help caring for themselves, 82 percent said they would prefer not to move from their current homes.[5] With this idealized notion of the old age that awaits us, we are still “dreaming of Cockaigne.”

The bitter truth is that an older person can succeed at remaining in her or his own home and still live a life as empty and difficult as that experienced by nursing home residents. Feeling compelled to stay in one’s home, no matter what, can result in dwindling choices and mounting levels of loneliness, helplessness, and boredom.[6] This difficulty is often compounded by the fear that someone (a state official or even a friend or family member) will discover the true state of affairs and enforce the ultimate sanction. Because it is fixated on a location (the private home) and pays little heed to the factors that make up actual quality of life, commitment to aging in place can turn out to yield benefits that are as mythical as those of Cockaigne, and may actually do harm.

Aging in Community: A Third Way

Our culture has constructed a continuum that positions institutional long-term care at one end of a spectrum, and an idealized vision of aging in place at the other. The challenge is to escape this false choice. An increasing number of Americans are searching for, and finding, a third way.

Historically, American cultural values of independence, self-reliance, and individual responsibility have supported the notion that elders can and should age in place. TheNew York Times columnist David Brooks recently challenged this ideal:

This individualist description of human nature seems to be wrong. Over the past thirty years, there has been a tide of research in many fields, all underlining one old truth — that we are intensely social creatures, deeply interconnected with one another, and the idea of the lone individual rationally and willfully steering his own life course is often an illusion.[7]

The United States faces a range of issues that must be addressed cooperatively. Global warming, a faltering economy, a troubled healthcare system compound the challenges that come with an aging population. New responses to these challenges, from senior cohousing to shared households to cooperative urban “villages,” point to the emergence of a new doctrine: People working together can create mutually supportive neighborhoods to enhance well-being and quality of life for older people at home and as integral members of the community. This is the essence of “aging in community.”

We use the word community to refer to a small group of people who voluntarily choose to rely on each other and to be relied upon over an extended period of time. Aging in community presumes that those who embrace it have a high degree of interest in a way of life that offers daily opportunities for social connection in the context of smaller, clustered, village-like settings, whether urban or rural. The qualities of aging in community are highlighted below.

The Qualities of Aging in Community

Inclusive — People of all ages, race/ethnicities, and abilities, especially elders, are welcome.
Sustainable — Residents are committed to a lifestyle that is sustainable environmentally, economically, and socially. Size matters. People need to know each other, and scale determines the nature of human interaction. Small is better.
Healthy — The community encourages and supports wellness of the mind, body, and spirit and, to the same degree, plans and prepares programs and systems that support those dealing with disease, disability, and death.
Accessible — The setting provides easy access to the home and community. For example, all homes, businesses, and public spaces are wheelchair-friendly and incorporate universal design features. Multiple modes of transportation are encouraged.
Interdependent — The community fosters reciprocity and mutual support among family, friends, and neighbors and across generations.
Engaged — The community promotes pportunities for community participation, social engagement, education, and creative expression.

The concept is focused on building vital communities that engage people of all ages and abilities in a shared, ongoing effort to advance the common good. A useful analogy envisions the people who populate an “aging in community” setting as bricks and the relationships that develop between them as the mortar. Together, the bricks and mortar create “social capital.” In this society, the value (rising and declining) of financial capital is measured obsessively, while our stock of social capital earns surprisingly little attention. It is the web of informal, voluntary, reciprocal relationships found within the mundane routines of daily life that forms the core of any society’s social capital. Aging in community embraces strategies that help people intentionally create and deploy the resources of social capital alongside financial capital resources.

The current practice of institutionalizing elders in need of care is undesirable because it consumes large quantities of financial capital while it also destroys reservoirs of social capital. Aging in place, with its dwelling-centric approach, relies heavily on dollar-denominated professional and paraprofessional services while offering older people little or no opportunity to create or deploy reserves of social capital. Aging in community presents a viable and appealing alternative to both approaches.

Types of Communities

Today, as 78 million boomers turn 60 and beyond, we stand at a crossroad that will redefine the second half of life. The vanguard of this generation is already at work redefining core elements of the experience of aging. One facet of this cultural revolution in aging is the emergence of so-called intentional communities that address a constellation of desires — for a sense of place, sustainability, shared values and goals, diversity, and respect and support for elderhood as its own distinct life phase — a phase of life that lies beyond adulthood.

As work and family responsibilities shift and retirement looms in the future, some boomers are reflecting back on the peak experiences of their youth. They lived together in a variety of household settings with friends who shared the daily rhythms of life and who really cared for one another. Boomers bonded in ways unheard of by their parents with unrelated people outside their families.

A growing number seek to rekindle this vision of building custom communities with select friends and kindred spirits. Recent research found that about a quarter of boomers interviewed are interested in shared housing (“private living units with communal living areas”), and a third indicated interest in a “clustered living community” with a campus-like setting, private space for residents, and such shared amenities as a dining room, library, and laundry (this form of living is also referred to as cohousing). Some yearn for an urban, intergenerational, and diverse community, while others seek rural, back-to-the-land places.[8] The boomer generation is likely to do for aging services what they did for the ice cream industry 40 years ago. Three flavors will no longer be enough.

Intentional Communities

“Intentional communities” are planned residential groupings, usually founded on similar spiritual, social, or political beliefs or other shared values or goals. Resources and responsibilities are often shared, although the degree varies significantly among different community models. Intentional communities include cohousing, communes, ecovillages, ashrams, kibbutzim, and cooperative housing. The fastest growing type of intentional community is cohousing, an arrangement of resident-designed-and-managed housing, usually in developments of about 30 homes that include shared facilities, require residents to share responsibilities and resources (but not incomes), and are not necessarily devoted to any particular age group. The concept was imported from Denmark in the early 1990s. From about 16 communities in 1995, the number of cohousing communities in the U.S. had grown to about 113 in 2008, with 111 currently in the planning stages, including several senior cohousing communities designed by and for adults 50 and older.[9]

Elderspirit is one of the first senior cohousing communities, founded by former nuns who left their order in the 1960s over philosophical differences. Without the safety net of the convent, in retirement they wanted to build their own community dedicated to personal growth, mutual support, and spiritual deepening in later life. Elderspirit has 29 units. Residents are of mixed income levels and must be at least 55 years of age. The development is built along the scenic Virginia Creeper Trail, within easy walking distance of shops and downtown Abingdon, Virginia.

Hope Meadows is a mixed-income, intergenerational community in Rantoul, Illinois, founded in 1994 and dedicated to addressing the challenge of children living for years in foster care without permanent families. Hope Meadows illustrates that ordinary people are capable of extraordinary compassion, caring, and love, regardless of their age, class, or ability. The resident seniors serve as honorary grandparents and agree to volunteer at least six hours per week in exchange for reduced rental housing. Even more than their volunteer work, it is the caring relationships they develop with the children and other adults that has been identified as a key factor in healing the children and providing stability to the community, while also enhancing the lives of the elders. As the older residents age, the community is helping them to continue to live in their homes and stay connected.

Spontaneous Communities

Notably, the U.S. is home to many successful communities that developed spontaneously in already established places. Within small towns and suburban and urban areas in every state, one can find a community in which traditional ideas about caring for one’s neighbors still prevail. Often, however, as people age they may require more specialized support than other residents are able to offer on a regular basis. Established communities are developing new capacities to deal with this challenge.

The Beacon Hill neighborhood in downtown Boston is such a community. In 2001, several friends and neighbors came together to create a plan, the Beacon Hill Village, to help each other stay in their homes and remain meaningfully connected to the community. The Village model uses a nonprofit organization to vet and organize programs and services for older adult residents. To help defray costs, the organization charges residents a yearly membership fee, with discounts for those in financial need. Beacon Hill Village has received considerable media attention in recent years, resulting in thousands of inquiries about replicating the model. According to the Village-to-Village Network, 90 affiliated villages are “open” (as of August 2012), with another 130 in development, located in 38 states and the District of Columbia.

The Trillion Dollar Question

While our culture seems to revere the notion of aging in place, our public policy continues to favor institutionalization for those requiring long-term-care services. The conflict between what people say they want (to receive services in their own homes) and the way their tax dollars are spent has become especially acute. This situation exists despite studies showing that, on average, it costs about half as much to maintain an elder at home as compared to placement in a nursing home.[10] Given that three-fourths of the nation’s long-term-care budget is spent on nursing homes, and Medicaid is the largest source of payment for that care (about half), the need for a rebalancing of the public funds committed to meeting the needs of frail elders becomes clear.

Because of its intense focus on independence, the concept of aging in place leads, rather directly, to an emphasis on the dollar; paid professional services are required to provide care that will allow individuals to remain in their own homes. The combination of an aging society with the enshrinement of the private home as the only acceptable locus for aging yields cost projections that boggle the mind. Consider the following: The post–World War II generation that is now approaching old age has about 70 million members. If we imagine making a trillion dollar investment in the care of that generation, simple arithmetic tells us that that provides a per capita amount of just under $15,000 dollars. That is not $15,000 a year but rather for the entire period that members of this generation will need care, barely enough to cover two years of in-home supportive services in 2005.

The cost of an independence-based public policy, centered on the concept of aging in place, lies far beyond what our society can afford. At the same time, the use of mass institutionalization to cope with the needs of frail older people is gradually being seen as morally unacceptable. It is in this context that a third way becomes increasingly attractive. We need a public policy that facilitates the blending of financial resources (such as personal savings, pensions, and money from government programs like Medicare and Social Security) with social capital (which is created and maintained by healthy families and communities). For this blend to occur, we will have to confront and overcome deeply held and highly negative preconceptions about age and aging.

Conventional wisdom holds that the aging of America is, by necessity, a bad thing. The inventory of losses and unwelcome burdens is long and has been detailed in scholarly journals and the mainstream media. Omitted from these calculations, however, is an accounting of what age and aging contribute to everyone. The virtues of aging remain invisible.

Occurring parallel to this phenomenon of a rapidly aging society are shifts in family patterns (particularly the trend toward smaller family size, childlessness, alternative families, and divorce); increased mobility of families; the growing number of women in the workforce; increased life expectancy past the age of 85; spiraling healthcare and long-term-care costs. Another factor is the increased social acceptance of age-segregated communities.

Still, new opportunities and hopeful paradigms are emerging: an increased interest in civic engagement in older adults; a conscious-aging movement that promotes a new vision of elderhood; and examples like Hope Meadows that show intergenerational community as a tool that can be used to address social challenges that young and old face.

At its most fundamental level, human longevity creates the possibility of multigenerational families and communities that contain three and sometimes even four or more generations. Because it is the multigenerational transmission of culture, values, and wisdom that is most essential to our humanity, strategies that strengthen interaction and ties between generations contribute enormously to our stock of social capital.

The concept of aging in community is presented here as a useful successor to the concept of aging in place because the former shifts the emphasis away from dwellings and toward relationships. As the models described above demonstrate, the aging-in-community idea will be replicable across the spectrum, from rural to urban. With a high value placed on economic sustainability, it is critical to explore ways to extend the opportunity to age in community to the broadest possible segments of the population.

United by the intention to create innovative alternatives to current housing choices, the new movement for aging in community promises to inspire the entire national conversation about aging and to engage the skills, spirit, and imagination of architects, planners, builders, and community activists of all ages.

William H. Thomas, M.D., is an international authority on geriatric medicine and eldercare from upstate New York. He is the founder of the Eden Alternative, a philosophy and program that has helped de-institutionalized nursing homes in all 50 states and worldwide over the past 20 years. A self-described “Nursing Home Abolitionist,” he is also creator of the Green House®, a radically new approach to long-term care where nursing homes are torn down and replaced with small, home-like environments where people can live a full and interactive life. He is the author of What Are Old People For? How Elders Will Save the World and Professor of Aging Studies and Distinguished Fellow, Erickson School, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD. Access the video, “Elderhood Rising: The Dawn of a New Age,” at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijbgcX3vIWs.

Janice M. Blanchard, M.S.P.H., is a gerontologist and nationally recognized writer, speaker, and consultant on aging issues. For 20 years she has worked on the cutting edge of public policy and programs promoting a new vision of elders as valuable members of our communities and of elderhood as a distinct phase of the human life cycle. Renowned for her seminal work in “aging in community,” Janice consults with government, non-profit, and private organizations to develop innovative housing and community-based solutions that strengthen the fabric of our communities, for all ages and all abilities — especially our elders.

An Artist Colony Where You Never have to Go Home by Tim Carpenter

I grew up near Yaddo, an artist colony in Saratoga Springs in upstate New York. Saratoga Springs is known for three things — its racetrack, its mineral springs, and the arts. What a heady gumbo of neighbors — semi-connected mobsters and lowlifes, water-loving hippies, and — my favorite — artists. Small town that Saratoga Springs was, you always knew when the famous artists were there — Capote, Baldwin, Picasso, Highsmith, Puzo. It had a profound effect on me as a youngster.

Flash forward to the late ‘90s when I was just starting to work in senior housing and on the verge of forming a nonprofit that did outreach to that population. My epiphany came at a breakfast meeting of the Senior Housing Council in South Orange County. The guest speaker was a gentleman named Bill Thomas — a medical doctor who had invented something he called the Eden Alternative. It sounded promising — and sitting there — after having gotten up at dawn and driven miles and miles across the Los Angeles sprawl — I thought, he’d better deliver.

Dr. Thomas blew my mind. He spoke about something he called intentional community. It was my first exposure to the concept, and my instructor was a real master. He described an assisted living community for seniors that included raised gardening beds and a shop out back for people to tinker on projects. Nothing extraordinarily radical in these suggestions. What was radical was how he arrived at what amenities to include. Predict who was likely to live in the facility, he urged us. Ask what are the values of the surrounding community. Create an environment that reflects them.

So I started thinking… I had logged miles to get to this breakfast. The plan for my new nonprofit was to serve communities that required similar punishing treks — miles and miles on some of the most unforgiving byways in America. Bill’s idea of intentional community presented an opportunity for me to indulge two of my baser, but treasured, instincts: my inclination to “borrow” shamelessly someone else’s terrific ideas and my unadulterated self-interest. I wanted to create a residential community where — based on their shared values — I could predict the type of people who would populate it. And I wanted to create it close to my office in Burbank.

Burbank — “beautiful downtown Burbank,” as Carson used to quip on The Tonight Show— was home to an enormous population of retired professionals of a certain stripe — artists and entertainers. I’d grown up, as I said, near an artistic community that attracted artists from varying disciplines; they’d come to feed their souls, work on a project for a few months, talk with other like-minded searchers, and then go home. What, I asked myself, still sitting in the room and Bill still talking — what if they never went home? I wrote down “The Burbank Senior Artists Colony” in large letters on my pad below the copious notes of Dr. Thomas’s ideas that I’d scribbled down. Then I drove the many frustrating miles home to pursue a dream.

After cold-calling the city of Burbank, many meetings, lots of collaboration, and the partnership of a lifetime — with the visionary John Huskey of Meta Housing Corporation — the Burbank Senior Artists Colony (BSAC) opened in May of 2005, developed by Meta like no other developer could have developed it. It boasts 141 units, residents of all artistic skills, both professional and newly acquired, and a rich variety of physical amenities that include a theater, arts studios, computer media lab, outdoor performance spaces, classrooms, and other bells and whistles intended to spark creativity. The physical amenities are more than matched by what we at EngAGE call the intellectual amenities: college-level classes provided onsite by professional artists and groups of residents who come together to create art shows, plays, films, and other forms of expressive neighborly lunacy.

It’s the kind of place I’d move to grow up in, not grow old in. Trust me.

Our COO, Dr. Maureen Kellen-Taylor, a lifelong artist and influential shaper of the creativity and aging movement, designed our arts program, EngAGE in Creativity, bringing her own rich personal and professional skill set to the task. Maureen was given the California Arts Council Directors Award a few years ago for a lifetime of achievement in the field.

I tell the following story often to help listeners understand the power of BSAC — the creativity it nurtures and the beauty that emerges when a late-blooming risk taker dusts off her dreams and takes them for a test ride.

Before moving to the Burbank Senior Artists Colony, sixty-something Suzanne Knode had not had an easy time of it — a single parent who had worked hard, neglected her own needs, and had recently suffered a traumatic accident that created physical struggles for her as well. After moving in, Suzanne attended an EngAGE writing class; she had never written much before, did not think of herself as a writer, but felt a tickle in her that she might have a story or two to tell.

She wrote a short screenplay as a class assignment. It was called Bandida, and it tells the story of an older woman who takes a senior bus. When the bus stops in front of a liquor store, the woman and her tennis-ball-shoed walker are lowered down on the handicap lift. She ambles inside the store, dons a mask (à la the film Scream), pulls a gun, and starts to rob the place. During the course of the crime, she develops a relationship with the older Armenian shopkeeper behind the counter, and he lets her get away with the crime in the end. The screenplay is funny and touching and real — not easy to pull off for a fledgling playwright.

It was such a good piece of writing, we decided we’d try dipping our toes in the filmmaking business. We raised a little money, hired a director, recruited the cast from the residents of our communities (even the hair and makeup folks were residents), and “rented” the liquor store across the street in which to shoot it. Since EngAGE also produces a radio show called Experience Talks, we were already in the radio business. Darby Maloney, one of our producers, pitched the idea to Ira Glass, hoping the story would end up on This American Life, Ira’s world-renowned show.

Well, he liked it. A lot. And the making of Suzanne’s film along with her own personal story of reinvention was profiled, not on the radio show that Ira produces, but on the soon-to-be-syndicated national television show This American Life on Showtime. It’s a beautiful piece on taking risks and living life as we get older.

Suzanne’s own debut viewing of her movie was at the El Portal Theater in the NOHO Arts District of Los Angeles, and she shared it with an audience of 350 film lovers. The film had been juried into the competition at the NOHO Film Festival, and Suzanne got a standing ovation when she walked onstage for the audience talk back.

Suzanne is now working on several new film and stage projects and has also taken up painting in an EngAGE art class. She mentors at-risk teens at the school next door. Here is what she said about her changed life when profiled on theExperience Talks radio show: “I couldn’t believe that there would be a community for me at this time in my life. I didn’t think I’d be able to find something new inside of me. You know that same feeling when you got out of school and the whole world was open to you? Now, all over again, the whole world is open to me.”

The moral — at least for me — to the story: I want to be Suzanne Knode when I grow up. She’s a rock star! But I also want to be Teddi Shattuck, an amazingly talented painter (and my art teacher), who at BSAC has also discovered she’s a writer and actress. (You can read her own telling of her story in this issue.) And I want to be Sally Connors, a resident who has achieved dream after dream as a writer, an actor, and a singer since she moved into the community.

I want to be Walter Hurlburt who — simply because he can — spends most waking moments painting and attending almost every class of every variety. I want to be Dolly Brittan, who moved to BSAC from South Africa, after her husband died, and discovered she was an artist — a sculptor, painter, poet, and actor. She also started teaching again and mentoring children in desperate need of a guiding hand. Then she fell in love again, marrying the man who taught her sculpting class; and no one was more surprised about all this happening than she was.

What do you do when you find a model that works so well? You share it, of course. Meta Housing has scads of new initiatives at various stages: The Long Beach Senior Arts Colony will open near the end of this year — 200 units of housing for artists and artists-to-be open to discovering their till-now hidden talents. Long Beach will be the first 100% affordable senior arts living center. Bigger, improved, amazing.

The NOHO Senior Arts Colony opens this autumn in the North Hollywood Arts District not far from where Suzanne’s film premiered. And this one has a live, open-to-the-public theater in the lobby, complete with box office and marquis, an 80-seat, state-of-the-art house operated by the award-winning troupe, The Road Theatre Company. Road Artistic Directors Taylor Gilbert and Sam Anderson will partner with EngAGE to provide high-end theatrical programs for their residents, while they stage their own annual season in their new space.

John Huskey and his team at Meta Housing have constructed thousands of units of senior (and family) housing, and John prides himself on breathing life into what could be just sticks and bricks. EngAGE now provides programming in 30 housing sites in Southern California serving nearly 6,000 seniors — and I owe it all to my mentor and partner, Mr. Huskey. Bill Thomas and I have since become friends and colleagues — Janice Blanchard, editor of this issue, introduced us — so my own creative aging in community has been blessed with a splash of good fortune which has allowed me to work with and develop relationships with the people I admire and try to emulate. Not a bad way to create a community in which to grow older, with intention. Now I just need to develop a senior colony based on rock and roll — then all will be right with the world.

Tim Carpenter is the founder of EngAGE and host/producer of the Experience Talks radio show. EngAGE is a nonprofit that changes aging and the way people think about aging by transforming senior apartment communities into vibrant centers of learning, wellness, and creativity. Experience Talks is a radio magazine that shines a light on the value of experience in society, airing for 250,000 listeners on Saturdays at 8 a.m. Pacific on KPFK 90.7 FM in Los Angeles and streaming live worldwide on the Web at www.kpfk.org. The show is syndicated by the Pacifica Network to up to 100 cities nationwide. Tim serves on the board of the National Center for Creative Aging. In 2008, Tim was elected an Ashoka Fellow for being one of the top social entrepreneurs in the world, and in 2011 he received the James Irvine Foundation Leadership Award.

Reweaving the Social Fabric of Our Communities by Janice Blanchard

We are all longing to go home to some place we have never been — a place half-remembered and half-envisioned we can only catch glimpses of from time to time… Community means strength that joins our strength to do the work that needs to be done. Arms to hold us when we falter. A circle of healing. A circle of friends. Someplace where we can be free.

— Starhawk

Aging in Community is not new. Throughout most of human history, elders have aged in community — at home and as integral members of their communities. Humans, as social animals, have depended on cooperation and caring for one another for survival. The sharing of basic resources such as food and shelter and the commitment to help each other, often to include nurturing and caring for our young, elders, sick, and disabled, have contributed significantly to our evolution as a species. In turn, elders have played essential roles as teachers, spiritual advisors, healers, and as the bridge between the past, present, and future.

The Fraying of Our Social Tapestry

Over the past century or so, numerous factors and trends have converged that have negatively impacted our relationships with our family and friends, our neighbors and community ties, with our work and “free” time, and with our elders. Consequently, the social fabric of society has become worn and frayed. As our relationships have unraveled, our nation has become increasingly polarized and radicalized in political and religious viewpoints, particularly with regard to moral issues, including our obligation to elders. Income has surpassed race in segregating communities, and while the income of the middle class has shrunk to an all-time low, the gap between rich and poor has become staggering.

Close personal friendships and social networks — key to psychological well-being, community health and social capital — are likewise shrinking. Americans report one-third fewer friends than two decades ago, with 25% having no one to confide in, and with well over half reporting that they know only some (29%) or none (28%) of their nearby neighbors. The disintegration of intimate social connections is particularly poignant among older adults, as divorce and suicide rates soar to the highest of any age group. America is only a few percentage points away from being predominately a nation of singles — only 51% of adults are currently married according to 2010 census data, compared to 72% in 1960. Single-person households are skyrocketing, with about 28% of all households now consisting of one person, and a startling 40–50% of all households occupied by singles in cities like Atlanta and Washington, DC. This is not just a result of young people delaying marriage and children; one-third of single households are persons aged 65 and older.

The decline in American civic engagement, social interaction, and social capital has been well documented over the past several decades. Our social compact — the implicit agreement with our government, strengthened through Congressional laws, to provide economic, health, and social security for our children, elders, disabled, and others in need — has become a topic of current political debate. Ageism, in the workplace and on the street, is on the rise. For elders today and boomers turning 66 years old at a clip of 10,000 a day, the golden age of retirement has become a tarnished future at best.

Rebuilding Communities Through Caring Relationships

Despite this bleak picture of social cohesion and interpersonal relationships, there is hope. There are a growing number of movements afoot that empower individuals to take steps to mitigate these forces in their own lives and in their communities. Positive change is within our grasp — and it happens one person, one family, one neighborhood, one community at a time. It begins with caring for ourselves and expands by forging new relationships of caring for one another. Caring relationships manifest through acts of kindness, concern, empathy, nurturance, and understanding for another.

Notably, caring relationships between family, friends, and neighbors cannot be replaced by the caring of institutions or professional services. According to John McKnight (1995).

Service systems can never be reformed so they will “produce” care. Care is the consenting commitment of citizens to one another. Care cannot be produced, provided, managed, organized, administered or commodified. Care is the only thing a system cannot produce. Every institutional effort to replace the real thing is a counterfeit. Care is, indeed, the manifestation of community. The community is the site for the relationships of citizens. And it is at this site that the primary work of a caring society must work. (p. x)

Caring relationships are at the heart of aging in community — and a cornerstone for livable communities for all ages and abilities, as well as a great society. Central to the concept of aging in community is the deliberate consciousness to be “a darn good neighbor.” Relationships between community members tend to be informal, voluntary, and reciprocal, and therefore, sustainable over time. Aging in community promotes social capital — a sense of social trust and interdependence enhanced over time through positive interactions and collaboration in shared interests and pursuits.

Aging in community is philosophically rooted in the “conscious aging” movement that views elderhood as a distinct phase of the human life cycle, with its own gifts and challenges. In aging-in-community projects, the wisdom and experience of elders are honored and opportunities promoted to share this with others in the community. Key to the model is an asset-based community-building approach that taps into individual and group interests, skills, and experience to address the challenges and needs of both individuals and the community.

Aging-in-community projects tend to be made up of local individuals drawn together as a group to address an issue or simply to create a better way of living. Two major axes describe where aging in community takes place. The first axis is the “physical environment” — including new neighborhoods, retrofitted old neighborhoods, apartment or condominium buildings, cohousing communities, housing cooperatives, shared housing, affinity-based housing (e.g., Burbank Senior Artist Colony), and other physical housing and neighborhood structures that are the basis for defining the geographic parameters of the community.

The second axis is the “social software” — the intentional design and enhancement of social relationships, even the incorporation of programs and services — that will improve the quality of life of all residents and ultimately will contribute to the elders’ ability to remain in their own homes or residences of choice and connected to their communities. Examples of social software include community-based health services such as Eden at Home, the Nurse Block Program and Share the Care, cultural enrichment programs like the Circle of Care Project and Elders Share the Arts, civic engagement programs such as the Experience Corp and Connecting Generations, community-building programs such as Community Gardens and Farmers Markets, and so forth.

To the degree that both the physical environment and the social software are brought into alignment from conception, the probability of creating the hoped-for outcome of a supportive neighborhood that enhances an individual’s well-being and quality of life at home and as an integral part of the community across the age continuum exponentially increases.

Key Ingredients for Aging-in-Community Projects

While aging-in-community projects can theoretically occur in any geographic location or social grouping, such as within a church or synagogue, there are some core principles and beliefs which appear to be vital to their success, as outlined in Table 1 below. Central among them is a core group of people who are willing and able to take leadership of the project. While occasionally this leadership has come from outside sources such as non-profit organizations, some of the most long-term success stories have been initiated by elders themselves from the communities they live in or want to live in, as in the case of cohousing, shared housing arrangements, and the Village model.

A great deal of the assistance elders need to stay in their homes and connected to the community are activities that most people are comfortable providing, such as transportation, picking up prescriptions or groceries, home visits, assistance with light housekeeping, and yard work. Likewise, there are many activities that elders can do for others in the community, such as walking younger children to and from the bus stop, editing the community newsletter, cooking a meal for a single working mother, and skills they did before retiring, such as bookkeeping or legal advising.

Thoughtful consideration and discussion should be given to the type of care individuals and the community are willing to provide, particularly around personal care, the type that often will make or break an elder’s ability to remain in their home. Sometimes community and family members are willing to do whatever it takes; in other instances when personal care, such as bathing, dressing, and toileting, is needed, the expectation is that the elder will hire home health services. Notably, in most cases, the care that is needed does not require a professional — no more than a professional is needed to care for the personal needs of an infant. Still, the nature of personal care often makes this the most difficult conversation and topic of negotiation, and one that needs to occur preferably before the need arises.

Once the commitment and leadership have been solidified, there are numerous templates and resources that communities can adapt to identify the strengths and needs of their community (see, for example, the Second Journey’s Creating Community in Later Life: A Resource Guide). Starting with one or two goals and picking low hanging fruit can create a sense of progress and accomplishment. For example, if one of the concerns of residents is that no one will know if an elder is incapacitated and needs assistance, create a “smoke signal” program — have the elder leave the porch light on at night and turn it off in the morning. If the light is still on at 9:00 a.m., that gives the next door neighbor the signal that something might be wrong and the consent to come knock without fear of prying.

The Future of Aging in Community

Across America, as baby boomers celebrate their sixtieth decade birthdays and welcome grandchildren, even great-grandchildren, into the world, it finally is sinking in — we are getting old. Despite the media pondering whether 60 is the new 40, the fact is, we are entering retirement age. For many, for the first time in decades, our lives are wide open. There are no familiar roadmaps and few role models to follow into this new terrain.

Baby boomers, who have by mass and method redefined every other period of their life, are likely to redefine the third age — elderhood — including innovative housing arrangements and supportive networks to navigate the roads of later life. As work and family wind down, some boomers are beginning to reflect back on the peak experiences of youth, when often we lived together, in a variety of households with friends who shared the daily rhythms of life and who really cared for one another. Boomers bonded in ways unheard of by our parents, sharing personally, intimately, deeply with unrelatedpeople outside our families. We bonded in ways that lasted, and we created — sometimes intentionally, sometimes spontaneously, but always authentically — communities of caring and love that resulted in enduring influences long after the physical disbanding of the groups themselves.

A growing number are beginning to rekindle this vision of building custom communities with select friends and kindred spirits. Research reveals that about a quarter of boomers are interested in “building a new home to share with friends that include[s] private space and communal living areas.” Some seek their own version of 50+ active adult living communities, with people their own age, background, and interests. Others are looking for an intergenerational, diverse community of all different walks of life. Some seek rural, back-to-the-land places, while others still yearn for the cultural richness of urban living. One thing is certain. For a substantial number, it won’t be Sun City Centers. Like they did with ice cream, boomers will create a thousand flavors of housing and communities to live out the rest of their lives.

Table 1. Aging-In-Community Beliefs, Values, and Assumptions
The following beliefs are integral to creating aging-in-community projects:

Aging is a normal part of life; it is not a problem.
Most people prefer and benefit from living in intergenerational neighborhoods (senior housing can be part of the larger neighborhood).
Good neighbors balance independence and interdependence.
Being good neighbors enhances the feeling of belonging to a community.
Everyone in a community has something to give and benefits from receiving from others. Good neighbors value reciprocity because giving and receiving strengthens social ties and provides meaning and purpose.
Informal relationships over time build trust, connectedness, and social capital which, like financial capital, can be intentionally earned, stored, and expended to meet our needs.
Most of the help people need can be provided by good neighbors, friends, and family.
Not everyone works full time away from home; therefore, help is often available when needed, especially when planned in advance.
The opportunity to get to know and help others can be enhanced with periodic community get-togethers where information and resources can be shared and planning can occur.
There is leadership and a core group who are willing to take action to support neighbors aging in their homes and staying connected to their communities.
Providing a broad range of care options as well as senior-friendly services (e.g., plumbing and electrical) can be enhanced by partnering with organizations within the larger community.
Each community (and individual) will have to address the threshold of the level of care that they are willing and able to provide to neighbors with physical, mental or cognitive impairment.
(Blanchard, McCarthy, Thomas, and Stambolian, 2011. Unpublished manuscript.)

Connected to the Community: Current Aging-in-Place Choices by Susan Poor

As we age, our needs and interests evolve and change, so our choices of housing should be wide ranging, as should be the spectrum of activities and services.[1]

Most older adults wish to remain in their homes and communities as they age. Today, just 10% of older adults live in supported environments of some kind, with the remaining 90% living in “traditional” housing with no external assistance.[2] By choice and perhaps economic necessity, the large majority of older adults will continue to live as independently as they can for as long as they are able — and will need a range of services and supports to achieve this.

Successful aging in place requires coordination — and ideally integration — at the intersection of housing, health care, non-medical long term services and supports (LTSS), and technology. LTSS components are the services and practical supports that, when absent, may limit peoples’ ability to live independently or encourage them to neglect their medical plan of care, which can lead to poorer health. The supports include such things as caregiving assistance, transportation, grocery shopping, home modification, prepared meals, connection to the larger community, and social capital. This article profiles a number of options that are allowing older adults to age in place, connected to their communities.

Aging: The Big Picture

The American population is aging and living longer. Baby boomers — the oldest of whom began turning 65 in 2011 — can expect to live into their 80s and 90s, giving them a 20-30-year period of phased retirement, encore careers, volunteer activity, and perhaps roles in raising grandchildren, supporting their children, or being caregivers to family members and friends.

As they age, nearly all will have at least one chronic condition, and many will have several. If their health declines, it will likely occur gradually over time, with intermittent periods of inpatient care and more intense medical needs. Some conditions, such as high blood pressure and arthritis, which occur in half the population, will be readily managed in home settings. Advanced stages of other diseases (e.g., dementia, cardiopulmonary disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes, obesity-related conditions) will require intensive care management and a range of medical and non-medical services to support patients and their caregivers. These realities notwithstanding, 85 percent of Medicare beneficiaries with three or more activity limitations still live in traditional housing.[3]

The majority of boomers, like their parents, own their own homes. Some will live with other people; some (primarily women) will live alone or become widowed or divorced during these years. Yet for many, homes have lost value, and retirement savings have diminished due to the 2009 real estate and economic crisis.

Homes may also need basic maintenance as well as modifications in response to owners’ physical needs. While estimates vary, the Employee Benefits Research Institute reports that in 2012, 64 percent of retired Americans had less than $50,000 in their retirement accounts.[4]

Other data indicate that nearly half of middle-income workers will be poor or near poor in retirement.[5] Some may benefit from reverse mortgages, annuities, and other vehicles for increasing their economic security. But poverty will disproportionately impact the heath care, housing, and economic security of low-income and minority individuals and their families.

While nearly all will be covered by Medicare, many will be shocked to learn that Medicare does not cover either residential or community-based long term services and supports (LTSS) and that their access to nursing homes or community-based alternatives means spending down to become Medicaid eligible. They will need, on average, three years of assistance, including one year in a nursing home (currently about $87,000/year) and two years of paid care at home (currently about $36,000/year).[6] As is true today, family and other informal caregivers (e.g., friends and neighbors) are likely to provide the majority of the care older adults will receive.

Aging in Place Considerations

Aging in place has generally meant aging independently while living in the place of one’s choosing for as long as possible. What the overview above makes clear is that aging in place, in the community, is not only the preferred choice of older adults; it may be theonly affordable and available option for many seniors. While publicly funded systems and services exist for those with low incomes, the same supports do not exist for the middle class. Even if older adults wish to move, most will not qualify for subsidized housing and will find other options, such as Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs) and assisted living, costly. The challenge of the future is therefore to enableaffordable independent living in peoples’ own homes, as the need for services increases and at a time when it is clear that the federal and state governments are not going to lead these efforts for middle-income seniors.

Increasingly, aging in place incorporates the idea of “aging in community” and the necessity of “housing with services.” Aging in community expands the concept of aging in place by including active engagement of older adults in planning and implementing services and supports, maintaining meaningful connections to the surrounding community, and having control over housing and other choices. We must weave together housing with health care, LTSS, and technology so that people have both a place to live and healthcare coverage and the non-medical services and supports that buttress independent living and enhance the success and efficacy of medical interventions.

The role of technology cannot be underestimated in achieving these goals. Advancements in technology for social connections, communication with medical personnel and family, brain fitness, arranging in-home services, diagnosis, medication management, health monitoring, receiving medical services at home, etc., will be groundbreaking in upcoming years. Finding balance in the “hi-tech/hi-touch” equation will play out over a long period of time.

A New Vision of the “Continuum of Care”

Today’s seniors — including baby boomers who have experienced the aging of their parents — are searching for and creating alternatives to the traditional forms of long-term care (skilled nursing facilities, assisted living, or continuing care retirement communities). These settings are increasingly seen as institutional and out of sync with consumers’ preference to age in their own homes and stay meaningfully connected to their communities. That said, there is a “culture change” movement afoot that is impacting institutional long-term care facilities and encouraging a shift in focus from the needs and ease of the institution to those of the resident and family. Key to this transformational shift is emphasis on “person-centered care” or “resident-directed care.”

Person-Centered or Resident-Directed Care is an ongoing, interactive process between residents, caregivers, and others that honors the residents’ dignity and choices in directing their daily life. This is accomplished through shared communication, education, and collaboration. Relationships developed as part of this process benefit all involved, creating a community that affirms the dignity and value of each individual who lives and works in the nursing home.[7]

The current and ever-expanding spectrum of choices for places and support services for aging — ranging from the medical model of skilled nursing facilities to emerging models of programs that support aging in place in one’s own home — is almost mind-numbing. Following the conclusion of this article, you will find a descriptive compendium that includes examples of transformational change occurring within the more traditional models of long-term care settings as well as within the community.

Thinking About the Future

No sector of the U.S. economy will be untouched by the doubling of the age 65+ population over the next 30 years to 20 percent of the population — 80 million people, one in five of us. Twenty-two percent of the older population (19 million people) will be age 85+, half of whom will have dementia. Is the near universal desire of older adults to age in their homes and communities a pipe dream or the only affordable option we have as a society?

It is more affordable if we “operationalize” the value of non-medical LTSS. Vermont’s Blueprint for Health recognizes the difference between evidence-based medicine and evidence-based health. Leaders there discovered that evidence-based medicine doesn’t work, because physicians have limited, if any, knowledge about obstacles patients live with at home and in their communities that keep them from doing what physicians recommend. In an evidence-based health model, community health teams that include physicians, nurses, social workers, and behavioral health counselors help tie medical care together with real-life issues such as transportation, insurance problems, housing, and unemployment. Based on its evidence-based health approach, Vermont has seen reductions in hospital admissions, emergency department visits, and lower monthly costs per person.[8]

Isolation is another factor that, when left unchecked, can have a severe impact on health status and therefore costs. Data show that social connections — friends, family, neighbors, or colleagues — improve our odds of survival by 50 percent. Low social interaction is equivalent to smoking 15 cigarettes a day, equivalent to being an alcoholic, more harmful than not exercising, and twice as harmful as obesity.[9] Further, receiving social, non-medical supports decreases morbidity and mortality rates and increases life expectancy, self-efficacy, adherence to medication regimes, and self-reported health status.[10]

To extend the resources available to upcoming generations of older adults, it is critical that housing, health care, and LTSS models be linked (and enhanced by technology) to take advantage of low-cost “aging in place, connected to community” models such as Villages, NORC SSPs (Naturally Occurring Retirement Community Supportive Services Programs), TimeBanks, grassroots caregiving models, neighborhood associations, block captain approaches, and church and other faith-based networks. All of these models have strong civic engagement, volunteers, and mutual assistance cultures that can strengthen communities while supporting the individuals who live in them.

We will need many innovative housing and LTSS choices for the burgeoning older adult population. We cannot ignore the need for consumer direction, safe dwellings, and holistic, humane settings for those needing skilled or custodial care in group environments. But we can greatly expand the range of non-medical LTSS by shining a brighter light on the wealth of social capital that exists in most communities and inspiring the creation of innovative ideas and solutions.

A Compendium of Options

Skilled nursing facilities, formerly called nursing homes, are nursing and healthcare facilities licensed by the state which provide a residence for elders who need skilled nursing and assistance with LTSS. Many provide additional services such as dental care, mental health care, dementia care, pain management, and palliative care. Medicare covers short-term rehabilitation stays but does not pay for elders who have longer–term needs. For those with long-term acute or chronic healthcare needs, they will have to pay out of pocket until they “spend down” their assets to become eligible for Medicaid, which covers costs for those who are low-income. Long-term care insurance can also be a vehicle for covering costs for a time period specified in the contract. In 2011, the average annual cost of a private room in a nursing home was $87,235.

Assisted living facilities provide a residence to elders who need some support with such activities as dressing, bathing, or cooking, or who want a more supportive environment (e.g., dining room meals, planned social activities, transportation), but who do not require skilled nursing care. Smaller settings for up to six people may be called adult foster care, adult family homes, supportive care homes, and board and care homes. Most assisted living facilities only accept private pay or long-term care insurance. A few states offer fee-waiver programs for low-income elders. Assisted living costs in 2011 were about $3,500/month or $42,000/year.[11]

Congregate care facilities combine private living apartments with centralized dining services, shared common spaces, and some LTSS, including meal preparation, housework, and outside the facility shopping and healthcare appointments. Some contract for healthcare services, but congregate facilities are not licensed to provide care services such as bathing, dressing, and toileting. Congregate care is an industry segment between independent living and the health-related services of the assisted living facility. Costs are slightly less than those of assisted living.

Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs) provide a continuum of care as a resident’s health changes, from independent living apartments, to assisted living, to skilled nursing care, although not all residents move through the continuum. Most CCRCs require a one-time entrance fee ranging from $250,000 to upwards of $700,000 and monthly service fees of $2,000-$4,000 or more. CCRCs typically offer at least one of three contract types: 1) life care (Type A) where the entrance fee is nonrefundable (or refundable on a declining balance approach) while monthly fees are fixed regardless of the level of care the resident requires; 2) modified life care (Type B) where the entrance fee is usually refundable in part and the resident is entitled to some period of free care (e.g., 60 days) or at a reduced cost when the resident moves to a higher level of care; and 3) fee for service (Type C) where the entrance fee is almost always refundable but the resident pays market rate if a higher level of care is needed. Many CCRCs accept Medicare in the skilled nursing section of the community, and some are beginning to address residents with long-term-care insurance, but otherwise no third party reimbursement is available to cover the fees associated with CCRCs.

Green Houses® are small, home-like, skilled nursing facilities for six to ten people that focus on a holistic approach to care and services. They are designed to provide an alternative to institutional long-term care, with an emphasis on honoring seniors’ dignity, privacy, and autonomy by providing meaningful activity and relationships, independence, and improved quality of care. Green House architectural hallmarks are an open kitchen, a hearth, a single dining room table, and lots of natural light, creating a home-like atmosphere rather than the often more sterile environment of a large nursing facility. The organization and philosophy of care of these homes are transformative, with an emphasis on creating a small, intentional community and an emphasis on person-centered care. The costs are comparable to those of nursing homes; currently about half of Green House residences are covered by Medicaid.

Alternative Assisted Living Facilities are a small but growing number of assisted living facilities that are embracing a more holistic care model in response to consumer demand for person-directed care. For example, in Oregon, Elite Care’s Extended Family Residences provide resident-directed assisted living in a home-like environment. Embedded in their philosophy is a culture of mutual reciprocity, family involvement, and engagement of residents who might otherwise need to be in a skilled nursing facility due to high physical care needs or dementia.

Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly is the only federally funded housing program specifically for low-income seniors, although other subsidized housing programs do include older adults. Section 202 Housing provides secure, barrier-free, and supportive housing that can accommodate residents as they become more frail. Services commonly available include transportation, assistance with housekeeping and meals, and some social and health services, usually provided in partnership with other community providers.

CCRCs Without Walls — also called Continuing Care at Home (CCAH) models — are less expensive alternatives to “brick and mortar” Continuing Care Retirement Communities. Sometimes managed by staff affiliated with existing CCRCs, these home-based programs offer the continuum of care concept to community residents who do not wish to live in a CCRC or can’t afford to, but who want access to services such as home health aides, visiting nurses, and transportation that could delay or even prevent the need to move away for care. Care Coordination is a key aspect of these community-based plans. Like CCRCs, there are both “Type A” and “Type B” continuing-care-at-home plans. Type A plans typically offer unlimited lifetime coverage and require up-front entrance fees ranging from $20,000 to $70,000, and monthly fees from approximately $250 to $800 per month. In Type B plans, the subscriber shares some portion of the financial responsibility for care and, as a result, fees are significantly lower. The entrance fee, which can be paid over time, is typically equivalent to the total fees for a full year and ranges from $3,000 to $7,000 depending on age at enrollment. Type B plans are especially appealing because subscribers don’t feel as though they are paying for something that they may never use. Like the Village model, most CCRCs Without Walls seek to promote a sense of community through organized events, from exercise classes and book clubs to theater nights and museum tours. There are currently CCAH plans operating in ten states, including the District of Columbia.

Villages are consumer-driven, grassroots, membership-based organizations that empower older adults to remain active and engaged in their communities as they age. Villages offer members a network of resources, services, programs, and activities that revolve around community building; daily living needs; social, cultural, and educational activities; ongoing health and wellness; and member-to-member volunteer support. Ninety Villages are now in operation across the country. Villages average 150 members with annual membership fees ranging from $100-$1,200.

Age-restricted communities, also called senior retirement or active adult communities, provide market rate housing to healthy, active seniors, generally age 55 and older, who wish to live among their peers rather than in mixed-age communities. Supportive services are not provided, and residents may need to move should their health conditions change requiring more care.

Naturally Occurring Retirement Communities (NORCs) is a demographic term used to describe typical communities or neighborhoods where a large number of residents have lived for a long time and have aged in place. AARP estimates that about 5,000 NORCs exist across the country; these concentrations of older adults can facilitate the organization of supportive communities. In some NORC communities, non-profit organizations have partnered with other agencies to create Supportive Services Programs (SSPs) that include social services, healthcare services, and socialization, recreation, and volunteer opportunities for residents. NORC SSPs are designed to be responsive to individual and community needs, and they depend on resident involvement and community partnerships to maximize success.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are a type of housing created or added to a single family home or built separately on a lot. In-law units, “granny flats,” and restored out-buildings are examples of ADUs. Consumers can lease and purchase ADUs (if their local zoning laws permit them) through such companies as MedCottages™, which provide prefabricated 12-by-24-foot bedroom-bathroom-kitchenette units that can be set up as a free-standing structure in a back yard and include state-of-the-art technology features.

Shared Housing is an arrangement in which a homeowner provides space for a tenant and, in return, receives income and/or needed assistance. It also includes individuals jointly sharing the housing expenses. Shared housing allows older adults to stay in their homes while benefitting from companionship, assistance, and mutual support.

Cohousing or Cluster Housing models create intentional neighborhoods by designing residential developments around shared and jointly owned common areas. Cohousing supports independence but promotes interconnectedness, mutual assistance, community interaction, and a degree of community management. Elder Cohousing communities are built by midlife to older adults and focus on the unique needs of this population.

Senior Cooperative Housing is a housing model popular in rural communities that provides apartments and townhomes that residents own and run cooperatively, although some hire a management company to assist in managing the property. Commonly owned amenities include a community room, kitchen, gardens, workshops, laundry facilities, and exercise room. There are usually a number of resident-directed social programs such as book club and gardening clubs, pot lucks, and games and activities in the common room. Like elder cohousing, because of density they make a good location for community partnerships that serve older adults, such as a congregate meal site or health clinics such as a flu vaccine site.

Community-Based Services are an integral part of the network providing critical services to older adults and invaluable support and respite for family caregivers.

PACE (the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly) fully integrates Medicare and Medicaid financing as well as medical and social supports, with services delivered through Adult Day Health Centers and home care. About 20,000 people in 29 states are served by PACE programs.
Hospice is an integrated, end-of-life medical/social model that supports families with a full range of skilled home health care and supportive services when a person is diagnosed with a terminal illness and has a life expectancy of six months or less. Hospice benefits are usually covered under Medicare, Medicaid in most states, insurance plans, as well as private pay, depending on individual circumstances.
Senior Centers provide a wide array of services, including socialization/civic engagement opportunities, information and assistance, meals and nutrition counseling, transportation, options counseling, wellness programs, etc., often at very low cost or even free for qualified seniors. Over 60 percent are delivery sites for Older Americans Act programs and services. Many senior centers are reinventing themselves to appeal to a broader range of community residents. The country’s 11,000 senior centers serve 1 million older adults every day.
Adult Day Centers provide a range of services for older adults. Social centers provide meals, recreation, and some health-related services. Medical/health centers provide social activities as well as more intensive health and therapeutic services. Specialized centers provide services to specific care recipients, such as those with diagnosed dementias or developmental disabilities. Adult Day Centers also serve as sites for Chronic Disease Self-Management Programs. About 4,600 adult day centers across the country serve over 260,000 people.

Innovative Community Models

Mather Lifeways Café Plus model serves up fun and educational, wellness-related programs and activities in pleasant café surroundings. The Café Plus model has been appealing to senior centers looking at new ways to attract older adults.
Episcopal Senior Communities Senior Center Without Walls program is a nondenominational free telephone program connecting California elders through activities, friendship, and community. From the comfort of their homes, participants can access an assortment of classes and support groups, when going to a community senior center is difficult.
The Living At Home Network in Minnesota coordinates local volunteers, health professionals, and a wealth of other resources to help older residents stay in their own homes and connected to their communities.

Innovative Grassroots Support and Caregiving Models represent an innovative wave of services and programs to support seniors living in their homes and their caregivers. These models harness the social capital within the community and utilize the individual assets of people willing to volunteer their assistance to provide care.

Share the Care brings together friends and family in an organized network to provide supports and services for people who are chronically ill, terminally ill, or disabled.
Lotsa Helping Hands provides a free, Web-based service that develops communities for organizing circles of community during times of need.
TimeBanks represents “pay it forward” models that allow members to perform a service for another member, in the process earning a “time dollar” that can be redeemed for an hour of time volunteered by another member.
Tyze Networks provides private online communities centered around one person needing friendship, support, and connection.
The Transition Network’s Caring Collaborative provides member-to-member volunteer support for health-related needs.

¹ See “The Roseto effect: a 50-year comparison of mortality rates” at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1695733/.

¹ Henry Cisneros, Margaret Dyer-Chamberlain, and Jane Hickie, eds., Independent for Life: Homes and Neighborhoods for an Aging America (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2012).

² Independent for Life.

³ Independent for Life.

⁴ Helman, R., et.al., “The 2012 Retirement Confidence Survey,” Employee Benefit Research Institute, March 2012. (accessed August 31, 2012).

⁵ Teresa Ghilarducci, “Our ridiculous approach to retirement,” New York Times, July 21, 2012.(accessed August 31, 2012).

⁶ MetLife Mature Market Institute, “Market survey of long-term care costs” (New York: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, October 2011). (accessed August 31, 2012).

⁷ Wisconsin Coalition for Person Directed Care. www.wisconsinpdc.org.

⁸ Pauline Chen, “When doctor’s advice is ignored at home,” New York Times, March 10, 2011. (accessed August 31, 2012).

⁹ Julianne Holt-Lunstad, Timothy B. Smith, and J. Bradley Layton, “Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review,” PLoS Medicine, July 10, 2010. (accessed August 31, 2012).

¹⁰ Michele Heisler, “Building peer support programs to manage chronic disease: Seven models for success” (California HealthCare Foundation, December, 2006).

¹¹ MetLife Mature Market Institute.

Susan Poor, M.P.H., is the Director of Innovation and Business Development at On Lok in San Francisco. She is a specialist in community approaches to aging, the Village model, long term services and supports (LTSS) for older adults, end-of-life care, family caregiving, health care reform, and managed care. Prior to joining On Lok, Susan worked with the Village-to-Village Network to replicate Villages nationwide. As Owner/Principal of Susan Poor Consulting, she worked with local governments and nonprofit providers on a wide range of aging and health-related projects. Susan is a Founder and Board Member of San Francisco Village, Co-Chair of the San Francisco Long Term Care Coordinating Council, and West Coast Director of Outreach for Share The Care. In her work with On Lok and the Village movement, Susan is a leader in focusing attention on the LTSS needs of middle-income seniors.

Online Surveys Engage Older Adults in Community Planning by Mia Oberlink

Among its many benefits, the Internet is facilitating direct communication across different sectors of society as never before. Anyone with a computer and an Internet connection has the opportunity to express his or her opinions and needs to a variety of audiences. Under the right circumstances, this can create positive change swiftly and effectively.

A recent New York Times article provides a good illustration of how female consumers are influencing cosmetic companies by participating in online conversations. In their efforts to stay fresh and up to date, cosmetic companies are constantly discontinuing old products and introducing new ones. The rub is that many women prefer the old products. Now, through company-run Internet chat lines and social media sites, women are expressing their preferences, and the cosmetic companies are listening. “Until recently, these consumers had little recourse other than to register complaints with manufacturers’ service centers,” writes the author. But now, thanks to the Internet, the companies are receiving timely input from customers and responding by reissuing the discontinued products. “It’s literally reshaping how the market is driven,” said one analyst. “The consequence of a poor decision could take 18 months to two years to filter back to the head office,” said one executive. “With social media you can take an instant read.”

This concept works not only in commerce but also in the public arena, where the Internet is facilitating communication between groups that in the past rarely had direct, instantaneous access to one another. The Internet allows like-minded people to find one another, exchange ideas, and become a collective force capable of influencing decision-making. Voters can easily reach their elected officials and make their opinions known; community residents can easily alert local government departments about pressing community problems and needs.

An Instant Read on Older Adults’ Opinions

Another effective, low-cost way to engage older people in civic matters is the online survey. The AdvantAge Initiative has developed a survey tool and planning process which allows a community to measure — and improve — its “aging friendliness.” Collecting older adults’ perceptions of and experiences in their communities becomes the first step toward involving them in the process of making their communities more livable.

The philosophy driving the AdvantAge Initiative approach is that community planning needs to include roles for the people most affected by decisions and actions that result from the planning process. Once older residents weigh in with their thoughts and opinions, they then become active stakeholders who can help implement whatever plans emerge. While this may seem patently obvious to readers, it’s surprising how often communities fail to take these important, necessary steps!

AdvantAge Online Surveys Reveal Problems

The AdvantAge Initiative team recently conducted an online survey in two urban neighborhoods that illustrates many of the points made so far. Over 1,200 adults age 60 and above responded to the survey. An extensive marketing campaign encouraging people to take the survey was conducted with the assistance of many neighborhood associations, providers of health and social services, elected officials, and others. In promoting the survey, these same groups became stakeholders in the survey process and joined an advisory group that helped interpret the survey findings.

The survey asked older people their opinions about what they thought about their neighborhoods and how they could be made better places for older people in which to live. Demographic characteristics (age, gender, marital status, living arrangements, health status) of the respondents were also collected along with information about their social networks, care needs, activity levels, and knowledge of available services.

The answers to questions that asked residents how they got around the neighborhoods proved particularly useful to the sponsoring organization whose mission was to advocate for improvements in the built environment (e.g., housing, sidewalks, streets) in addition to improving older adults’ knowledge of and access to existing services.

When all the responses were tallied, these key issues emerged: over 71% of respondents cited heavy traffic as a big problem in their neighborhood, 27% thought streets and sidewalks in the neighborhoods needed repair, and 15% felt that traffic lights allowed too little time for pedestrians to cross the streets. A follow-up series of open-ended questions asking what changes they would make to improve conditions for older people in the neighborhood identified the same issues. Here is a small sampling of some of the comments we received:

I live in an area with streets that permit truck traffic. Although there are recent changes that give pedestrians some more protection from autos and trucks, I am loath to cross the streets at night.

I would work to reduce traffic deaths to pedestrians and make this a safer neighborhood for seniors to walk in.

[I would] eliminate hazardous pedestrian crossing areas by having lights with a countdown, and varying them according to the crossing time needed, especially for seniors and people with disabilities.

Similar comments addressed pedestrian safety issues, including references to the dangers that bicyclists who don’t follow traffic rules pose to pedestrians, sidewalk curb cuts that need to be improved for people in wheelchairs and scooters, and uneven pavements that cause pedestrians to trip and fall. The overall instant read was that older people and people with disabilities in these two neighborhoods are very much at risk when they leave their homes and try to navigate the streets.

Because this was a physical safety issue involving traffic flow and pedestrian crossings, the feedback the survey had generated was immediately taken to the city Department of Transportation. Interestingly, we learned that the department already had plans to install pedestrian countdown signals in neighborhoods throughout the city. These signals let pedestrians know how many seconds they have to cross the street before the light changes, and many survey respondents had urged their use. While a decision to install the signals was in the works, the department had not yet prioritized which neighborhoods would get the new signals first. The survey findings and the respondents’ comments made a very compelling argument for beginning the installation process in the two neighborhoods surveyed.

…But It Also Reveals Community Assets

Through our surveys we also learned some important things about how older residents feel about their role in community life. Several of the respondents pointed out the need for seniors to get involved in making their neighborhoods better places to live. One respondent wrote, “More outreach programs [are] needed to make citizens aware of how they can personally get involved in community affairs and problems existing on a particular block in the neighborhood…” Another said, “[We need to] make a real effort to get 90% turnout in every election and make the politicians take our neighborhoods’ concerns seriously.” Still another said, “[We need to] identify the seniors in the community and actively seek their participation in community affairs.”

Survey findings and comments also strongly indicated that older individuals are seeking more personal involvement in meaningful activities. One respondent said, for example: “Programs for seniors should be more interesting and vibrant to keep them involved and growing, with many activities for them other than just games for the old! We need things that will keep us going.”

While we found that most of the survey respondents are active in many different ways, they seem to crave even more engagement in community life. Nearly a quarter of the respondents said they are working either part or full time, and another 11% said they work occasionally. Nearly half of the respondents said that they volunteer — tutoring or mentoring young people, supporting programs that deliver services to older adults, advocating for political causes, and in many other ways. The vast majority of respondents — 60% or more — had gotten together with friends or neighbors or engaged in some other kind of social activity in the past week. Yet while nearly the same percentage (60%) of respondents said that they are happy with their level of work, volunteering, and social activity, nearly 40% said that they would like to be doing more. Again, some respondent comments are good illustrations:

The senior center at [a local church] is wonderful. I hope the community leaders will give that program support and money. I should volunteer there… This survey made me realize that I don’t do enough for others. Thanks for making me realize it.

Another respondent wrote:

In my case, I am in good health and have a good business and financial background. If there was a [way to] put my services to some use for seniors, or for any other residents that might need them, I would consider that very productive for all parties concerned.

The Survey as a Call to Action

The AdvantAge Initiative survey not only gave us the opportunity to learn a great deal about older people and conditions in the two neighborhoods — it was also an invitation to older adults to get involved in making their communities better places to live, not only for themselves but also for residents of all ages. Judging from the number of completed surveys and extensive comments we received, many older people in these two neighborhoods want to have a voice and meaningful roles in community life, and taking the survey seriously and sharing their thoughts was a first step toward potential ongoing involvement in community improvement. Just knowing that others are interested in their opinions prompted one respondent to comment, “I appreciate that there are those who care enough to want to know about us through this survey.”

Older adults’ willingness to get involved seems to be there; the challenge, of course, will be to keep older adults engaged over the long term. This means taking active steps to remain attentive to their voices and periodically take that instant read of their concerns; mobilizing older adults by providing meaningful roles for those who want to actively work on resolving community issues; finding ways for interested older adults to use their knowledge and skills to help others; and last but certainly not least, celebrating their contributions whenever the opportunities arise.

Mia Oberlink, M.A., is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Home Care Policy and Research (CHCPR) of the Visiting Nurse Service of New York. She manages the AdvantAge Initiative, a project that has collaborated with over 50 communities nationwide to measure their elder-friendliness and develop strategies to help older residents age in place. She is the Director of the technical assistance office that provides support to the grantees of the U.S. Administration on Community Living program, Community Innovations for Aging in Place (CIAIP). For more information about the AdvantAge Initiative, please visit their Web site: advantageinitiative.org.

The Ties that Bind by Tobi A. Abramson

The current cohort of older adults is comprised of the generation who were at the forefront of developing and cultivating the growth of suburbia. Suburbia provided numerous, multifaceted opportunities for social connection to one’s neighbors and community. However, as this cohort ages and experiences age-related physical challenges, this suburban reality — once an innocuous choice for a good quality of life — may now be fraught with less than optimal consequences. Buffers to these consequences, paired simultaneously with opportunities for vitality in one’s later years may be found in one’s social networks and in the social capital within one’s community.

What are social networks and social capital ? Since both are both key components to successful aging in community, an explanation of the two concepts is in order. The fundamental difference between the two relates to how and to whom we are connected. Our social networks tend to be composed of those individuals with whom we have social ties and from whom we receive social support on a personal level. They are dynamic, and our affiliations within these networks can — and usually do — change over time. On the other hand, our social capital refers to our deep social connections and resources within our larger communities. Social capital is more of a collective dimension focusing on the social relationships between groups of people, whereas social networks reflect an individual dimension. According to Robert Putnam, noted author of Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, “‘Social capital’ refers to features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.”

Although these two concepts are intertwined, it is possible to have few individual social ties or little personal social support while at the same time having rich social community connections within one’s environment. Communities with high social capital typically respond best to external physical and health threats (e.g., natural disasters), and this is true even for older adults who may be socially isolated.

The Value of Social Networks

Throughout one’s life, individuals are embedded in a variety of different interpersonal relationships that include family, friends, and neighbors. The value of these social networks increases as one ages. How extensively one engages with one’s networks has a lot to do with availability, frequency of contact, and proximity to other people.

Those with the largest social networks tend to be married people with higher levels of education and income. Additionally, those in the early years of later life — the “young-old” (65–74 years of age) — are more likely to be part of larger social networks than their “old–old” counterparts (75+ years of age). For these younger individuals, social networks include more non-family members. Not surprisingly, unmarried older men living alone are typically part of the most circumscribed social networks. In addition, one’s functional status influences one’s social connections: physical impairments lower the amounts of family and friend support.

The type of social network one belongs to — friend focused, neighbor focused, family focused, faith based, or restricted in focus and composition — is also a key indicator of social capital. Different types of networks have different outcomes for older adults. Those who are part of a diverse or friend-focused social network are apt to have the widest range of social connections and, consequently, the best outcomes — regardless of physical health status or other demographic characteristics. Interestingly, having family connections available (independent of the quality of these relationships) either lowers or has no impact on one’s morale. Thus, just having family around is not enough to affect older adults’ sense of well-being (which includes such subjective measures as morale, happiness, and life satisfaction).

Our physical and mental health is also impacted by our connection to others. In times of stress, social networks help to minimize the psychological distress. Those integrated into social networks experience less anxiety. This is significant, because anxiety has been linked to older adults’ suffering from and experience of medical illnesses, cognitive decline, sleep disturbances, and even hospitalization. Being lonely — not being connected to or part of a social network — has also been shown to be a reliable predictor of cognitive decline, mortality, depression, self-harm or suicide, as well as problems with alcohol and drug use. In general, those with few social connections tend to have higher rates of major mental disorders.

The Role of Social Capital

Social capital is a critical component of successful aging. With age, the experience of loss increases at the same time one’s social network is shrinking. As a consequence, older adults may become less dependent on their individual social networks and more dependent on the social capital within their communities. Similar to social networks, social capital positively impacts both physical and mental health, increasing life expectancy and decreasing rates of diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, obesity, and diabetes.

Social involvement has been likened to the happiness of increasing one’s income. Joining a group can reduce — by half — the risk of dying within the next year. Rates of depression and substance abuse problems decrease. Having a sense of purpose, feeling needed and useful — these add meaning to one’s life and combat depression. Being able to depend on one’s neighbors, the availability of neighborhood or community services, and social cohesion (interdependency among neighbors) all serve as buffers to life’s stressors and lessen the adverse effect of the losses and declines older adults, especially those who are poor and single, experience.

As its population ages, social capital within a community naturally declines. It therefore becomes critical for adults of all ages to build their social capital throughout their lives, so that they can reap the benefits of their investment during their later years.

Thriving Where We Live

Where to live one’s later years is not an easy decision for older adults. The decision is often presented as a false dichotomy — the choice to remain in one’s current home (for many, the home they raised their families in) or to relocate (to retirement communities, assisted living facilities, or other long-term-care settings). Though numerous technical advances have made aging in place a more viable option than in the past, many of these same advances can actually create a more asocial environment for many older adults. Aging in one’s own home has to be more than the ability to age in place; it must include the ability to continue to function and, yes, thrive in one’s community.

Communities must be able to provide opportunities for older adults to engage in and leverage the community’s social capital with appropriate social, cultural, educational, and religious opportunities. An efficacious community is one that provides these avenues of support. Examples can range from neighborhood-based volunteer programs or projects (like mentoring), to social clubs, to creative engagement. Libraries are becoming centers of activity, and research increasingly indicates that involvement in the arts has a wide range of mutual benefits for the individual and the community. This need to participate in lifelong learning, civic engagement, and cultural enrichment and religious activities will only continue to grow.

We would be remiss not to anchor this discussion in its important historical context. The generation now entering later life is the boomer generation noted for its high levels of civic participation, community involvement, and social capital. As a generation, they have long been accustomed to entertaining and socializing with friends, family, and neighbors at home. We know that volunteering has increased over the last 10 years, due mainly to the retiree workforce. Consequently, this generation is often referred to as the civic generation. They are used to giving back to and staying involved with their community. The challenge, then, is how to maintain this lifelong civic participation with rich social capital and social networks so that, when faced with the demands of aging and less-than-ideal housing alternatives, they can continue to thrive.

As the range of living arrangements has evolved — moving from institutional options to assisted living, to aging in place, to livable communities — the focus, both of the environments and the professionals serving within those environments, is also evolving. Transportation; safety; ADA compliance; affordable, accessible, and appropriate housing; adjusting the physical environment for accessibility; and creating walkable communities — these were the issues that livable communities initiatives usually focused on. What was often lacking in such initiatives was how to move beyond physical needs and be more inclusive of the social and psychological components of living.

It is only now that we are beginning to detect yet another shift — a further evolution beyond livable communities to a new focus on aging in community. The robustness of this new option depends upon our ability to strengthen and leverage the social capital for older adults. This means encouraging participation in a wide range of civic, cultural, social, and recreational activities. The organizations that exist within communities are a starting point for such an effort. Families, and even long-time friends, may be too spread out to fulfill some of the social network needs; consequently, the social capital within the community becomes critical for older adults wanting to maintain their independence and autonomy within their homes and communities.

Keep in mind that this is not one directional. Not only do older adults benefit from the social capital of their communities, they too give back in myriad ways and are a vital component of the community fabric. Many older adults are looking for ways to make meaningful contributions to their communities. For those that do, the benefits are not only physical, but also psychological.

Conclusion

Increasing longevity and the enormous growth of the aging population require a reappraisal of how we engage older adults to help them thrive in their later years. The need to belong is a fundamental human need which directs thoughts, emotions, and interpersonal interactions. Older adults face many barriers that prevent them from remaining part of their community, and there is a strong need to develop strategies to allow them to not only continue to reside in their communities, but to stay engaged and thrive within these milieus. Joining new groups and being involved in organized groups with some consistency greatly impacts both physical and mental health. Community connectedness can make a tremendous difference in the lives of older adults. Greater access to social capital and connections to one’s community not only will enhance the well-being of older adults, but allow them to successfully age in community.

Tobi Abramson, Ph.D., is Director of the Center for Gerontology and Geriatrics, an Assistant Professor of Mental Health Counseling at New York Institute of Technology, and an Adjunct Assistant Professor of Family Medicine at New York College of Osteopathic Medicine. For over 25 years, Dr. Abramson has served in leadership roles on numerous national boards and professional associations in the fields of gerontology, geriatric medicine, and mental health.

We All Share the Same Sky by Teddi Shattuck

During the Great Depression, I was fortunate to grow up with six sisters on 66 acres in Rockfall, Connecticut. I often wandered all day through the woods and fields, discovering the natural beauty that surrounded me. I learned to immerse myself in the changing seasons, not only the endless patterns and colors of Mother Nature’s palette, but also the natural and man-made sounds which transformed into designs in my mind. I remember, for example, the sound of the electric wires humming in the frigid, early mornings, as I waited for the school bus. Later in the day, I tried to visually interpret these sounds into colors and designs on paper. Color fascinated me with the play of light, and to this day this interplay is a major influence in all of my work.

In spite of the economic challenges of the day and coming from a large family, we were blessed with parents who encouraged each of us in our goals. One of my favorite Christmas gifts of childhood was my first small black box of water colors. It was truly Pandora’s box, introducing me to the magic, mystery, and discovery of color. I kept the paint box long after the colors were gone. Color, design, and patterns became the magical ingredients that have mesmerized me for hours ever since.

After high school I was thrilled to be accepted into Rhode Island School of Design. For the next two years, an entire new world opened to me. Sadly, for financial reasons, I was unable to complete my degree. The exposure and knowledge I gained, however, have stayed with me all my life.

Marriage took me to Atlanta, and “30-too-long-years” later divorce took me to California to join my four children who migrated there. Three of my children enjoy successful careers in the arts: My son Dwayne is an accomplished artist and an award-winning producer for the hit TV series, “Mad Men.” My daughter Shari is a successful actress as well as a critically acclaimed author, and my daughter Stephanie has a rewarding career teaching art. My youngest daughter, Shawna, has a fulfilling career in family counseling.

As a travel agent and an intrepid explorer, I have traveled to over 100 countries, often for extended stays. I have used a pencil or paints to document my journeys and to share them with others. Painting is my passion, but it is also a language I use to communicate my experiences and impressions of people, places, nature, and other cultures.

I believe that one of the most effective methods of diplomacy and problem-solving in the world is through one-on-one human interactions. Blessed with the ability to travel, I strive to be a goodwill ambassador, creating lasting friendships and tangible pieces of art as I go. Additionally, creating art is part of my cathartic process — it is both a way of depicting the spiritual essence of my journey, as well as a visual reminder of my travels through life. I am profoundly influenced by stimulating new environments. I revel in the scents, the dissonant sounds, the myriad faces, and fantastic happenings. In response to such intense sensory input, I feel compelled to put pen or paint to paper to capture these feelings and emotions. In this heightened state of total immersion in the creative mind I lose all sense of time, and it often evokes feelings I did not know I had. Pouring color after color onto canvas or paper, deeply lost in the work, I never know where the work will take me, nor the results; but the work itself guides me forward.

One of my favorite destinations is Egypt. Recently I was invited to return to paint a mural at a school in El Qusair on the Red Sea. This ancient town was once a major port for pilgrims making the dangerous crossing to Mecca. Centuries later it became a mining town, and today it’s a sleepy forgotten seaside village. The mural covers a 20-foot wall, depicting many endangered African animals, such as an elephant, zebra, rhinoceros, lion, and a variety of birds. It was designed to educate children about African animals in need of protection. I enjoyed watching the delight and wonder in their faces as the animals appeared. I do not speak Arabic, nor they English, but pictures transcend language barriers.

I often thought when I was younger that when I retired I would have plenty of time to paint and pursue all the things I wanted to do. At 76, however, I am busier and more creative than ever before! I live in California in Burbank Senior Artists Colony. One of the things I appreciate about living here is having an art studio accessible 24/7, as it allows me to work late at night in a safe place. The camaraderie and the sharing of ideas and critiques are all conducive to a productive work environment. While living here I have discovered my love of writing. In five years, I have written three plays, all of which have been performed in our in-house theater.

I mentor and work at a school for at-risk kids. They are my inspiration. Most have had horrible life experiences, and we try to help them express their feeling and anger through art. Many are very gifted, and just being with them as someone who cares and shares inspires me. Our joint projects have included a film written and filmed with our help, Claymation, and various art projects. I see this raw talent and try to nurture their efforts, giving them guidance; but I receive so much more than I give.

In between creative projects, I still travel. My next trip will be an eco-adventure tour of Dutch Guiana (Surinam). I have been blessed with a life of boundless joy, colored by every hue in the rainbow.

When it is time for me to leave this earth, I will ask God to put a paint brush in my hand so I can paint rainbows across the sky. We all share the same sky.

Teddi Shattuck studied art at Rhode Island School of Design, Georgia State, University of Georgia Studies Abroad in Cortona, Italy, Glendale College Studies Abroad in Prague, Czech Republic, and with private teachers. With an extensive background in art history and as an avid traveler, her journeys to over 100 countries profoundly influence her work. Teddi’s paintings are in many corporate and private collections throughout the world. She lives at Burbank Senior Artist Colony in Burbank, CA.

Life at Beacon Hill Village by Susan McWhinney-Morse

I have belonged to a “village” — that new aging in community concept — in downtown Boston for over 10 years. Beacon Hill Village is a member-driven organization for local residents 50 and older, which provides programs and services so that members can lead active, vibrant, and healthy lives while living in their own homes and neighborhoods as they age. For many, that will be for as long as they live. For others less fortunate, the choice to stay at home may become more complex, sometimes impossible. But the fact remains that most of us want to be autonomous, linked to our own neighborhoods and able to pursue our own lifestyle as we age.

The elements that enable us to thrive — and I believe most village members feel they do — vary greatly from person to person and from month to month. I rarely avail myself of all the opportunities and services that our village has to offer. I am healthy, happily married to an active retired lawyer, and surrounded by wonderful family. Life is good. Yet I depend on our village in a very deep sense. And, I really love our village.

I love our village because it espouses community engagement, healthy lifestyles, and intellectual stimulation; it is run by and for our members; but it mandates nothing, and it has no requirements or restrictions other than paying an annual fee.

I love our village because it is reflective of the neighborhood in which I live. With nearly 400 members, it is a magnetic combination of the vigorous and the frail, the new old and the very old, the rich and the urban poor. (Contrary to myth, Beacon Hill and Back Bay, the neighborhoods our village covers, is not just an enclave for the wealthy. Twenty percent of our population over age 65 live near or at the poverty line.) We are a diverse group representing a variety of backgrounds and interests. We meet in both structured meetings and casual settings, in large groups as well as small, informal gatherings. Some members attend stretch classes, walking groups, and tai chi, while others meet informally for a cocktail or potluck. At any gathering, one finds canes and walkers, running shoes, and high heels. Some members are actively involved in the life of the village; others rarely or never appear at any gathering nor request any support or services. They are just happy to know that the village exists and is there if and when they should need it.

Searching for a Better Way

The prospect of aging, particularly in our culture rampant with ageism, is disconcerting, even frightening to many people. These feelings were the impetus for a small group of us to gather in 1999. Each of us had witnessed firsthand the distress our relatives experienced as they aged: a mother in a retirement community in Florida who felt lonely and abandoned; a parent in a nursing home, marginalized and overdrugged; an uncle with very limited means and no immediate family to help out. We found these prevalent scenarios shocking and unacceptable — and we were determined to find another way.

It did not take us long to discover that the conventional wisdom about aging well was deeply flawed and limited. The first piece of advice we all received was to MOVE: to a warmer climate, to continuing care retirement communities, to senior housing near our children. Why, we asked, should we have to pull up our roots from a community we love just to be “safe”? Why did we need to lose our history, our friends, our identity? Why did we have to compromise our lifestyles before it became absolutely necessary, just to fit into a pre-designed community? In my opinion, senior congregate housing is “warehousing the elderly.” Why would we ask our children whose lives were already hectic with jobs and children to take us on, too? And what about financial considerations? Moving is an option available only to a small group of us who could afford it. Although we conceded that warmer climates and segregated communities were good choices for some people, they were not a viable or attractive option for us.

Sadly, the only other option for most people was to just stay put, to downsize, perhaps cut way back on expenses if necessary, and hope for the best. For those on very limited budgets there are community-based, government-sponsored programs, but that leaves the majority of us on our own. Alone. A pretty grim option for anyone.

Our small group of 11 neighbors spent two years studying all aspects of aging, dreaming of solutions. Though discouraged at moments, in the end we prevailed.

In the winter of 2002 our group came up with a plan for aging well that was so grounded in common sense, so available to all older people, and so responsive to our needs and wants, that we could scarcely believe that it did not already exist. It is a 21st–century update of the way things, in an ideal world, are supposed to be but with an important fail safe component: we form partnerships with healthcare professionals and community organizations that help us advance our mission to remain at home and stay healthy and connected to our community.

In doing so, we totally rejected the hierarchical system of the past, which was designed to take care of us, make choices for us and keep us safe. That system is one that all too often patronizes and infantilizes us. It is also a system that is unaffordable for so many older people. The concept of partnership brought about a paradigm shift in the way we age. It has instant appeal. And most remarkable of all, it is affordable. As of this writing, there are 96 open villages stretched across 38 states, 4 villages internationally and over 100 villages in development. We are now all linked together by a Web-based network called the Village to Village Network — vtvnetwork.org.

I love going to my weekly political discussion group. It is full of informed, articulate people with strong opinions. I love seeing how organs are made, how bronze is cast, how a totally green office building in Cambridge was constructed. I will be forever indebted to the caterer who served dinner to my family the day I came home from the hospital with a new knee. All this courtesy of Beacon Hill Village.

But what is most important to me is I have entered an older age still in control of my life, still a contributing member of my community, still a known member of my neighborhood. There are moments when all of us, as we age, search for new meaning in life. As children we learn; as adults we earn. What is it we do with this gift we have received — the gift of longevity? My friends and I, and all the baby boomers who are following us, must at some point confront this question. I believe that being a member of the village has left me free to explore my tomorrow in a healthy and informed way with little anxiety or worry about my future. I know where to find support and information and friendship when and if I need it. That is what villages are all about. I also know that it is up to me to forge a healthy and happy future. Beacon Hill Village is here to help me to accomplish this goal.

After a career in marketing and fundraising, Susan McWhinney-Morse was haunted when her mother-in law, after being placed in a nursing home, said, “Here, I’m just an old woman. I’ve lost my identity.” In 2002, at age 69, McWhinney-Morse and a group of Boston residents created Beacon Hill Village to give people over 50 the support and services they need to retain their identities by “aging in community,” in their own homes.

Life in Takoma Village Cohousing by Ann Zabaldo

My name is Ann Zabaldo. I’m 62 years old and I live in an intentional community in northwest Washington, DC. Today I’m sad, vexed, and… cranky. I’m sad because my 61-year-old childhood girlfriend called to tell me she has “pre-frontal brain atrophy.” I don’t know what this is, but anything with “atrophy” at the end of it can’t be good. My friend lives in a rural area of North Carolina — Asheville is 60 miles away.

She’s having a difficult time trying to figure out how to get a ride to the doctor’s office on a regular basis. She has friends, of course — one will be taking her to Asheville this week. But her friends have their own lives, as well as being scattered over a large geographic area. She can’t depend on them ad infinitum. And she needs help with other things, too. She’s having trouble making change. She forgets a lot of things. She’s depressed. And she’s scared. Very scared.

I’m vexed because she’s having these difficulties, and because she doesn’t know what to do. Neither do I. This makes me cranky. What makes me crankier is knowing it doesn’t have to be this way.

How different it is for me, living in this intentional community called Takoma Village Cohousing. We are a small-scale condominium, comprised of 43 privately owned homes. We came together because we saw the value of knowing our neighbors and pooling our resources to do more with less. By collaborating, we have all that we want and need without excess — we don’t need 43 lawn mowers. We are NOT a commune. While we share a lot of things, income is not one of them.

Strangers to each other when we began 12 years ago, we have come to know firsthand the power of living in community which helps us live longer, healthier, more robust lives.

I was part of the development team that built Takoma Village. When I started the marketing and outreach campaign for the community, I was still walking 10 years after being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Over the last 12 years, I’ve gone from walking to using a power wheelchair. I suffer from extreme fatigue, especially in the heat. While I could live on my own in a single-family house or in a standard condominium, it would be so much harder. Most of my day would be taken up just maintaining my daily needs.

Instead, one of my neighbors buys my groceries every week of the year. I send her a list on Sunday night and Monday morning she delivers them, even puts them away for me. Another neighbor shops at the Farmers’ Market so I can have fresh produce all year. Yet another neighbor picks up my prescriptions at the local drugstore. Several neighbors drive me to my appointments because I get so easily exhausted from driving these days.

I contribute my time and energy to our community through activities that I can do from home. I’m the point person for elevator maintenance and repair. I organize community events. On community work days, I’m the job-broker helping to match up people with work that needs to be done. I serve on a team that’s overseeing refinishing the interior of our Common House — a community building, only bigger, with a lot more bells and whistles. It includes a living room with a small library/meeting area, a sun room, and at the center a very large dining room and kitchen, designed to host large community meals, parties, movie nights, and other community celebrations and events.

Living in community makes it possible for me to live an interdependent full, dynamic, passionate life in my own home. I am ever grateful to my neighbors.

Unlike my friend in North Carolina, I have 65 adult neighbors whom I can call for assistance if I need it. One of my friends in another cohousing community says you know you live in cohousing when you can call any neighbor at 2:00 a.m. — even the one with whom you have the least relationship — and they will come if you need help. That’s the commitment that comes with the decision to live in cohousing. An example from my own life: One night fairly late, I fell in my living room. Luckily I had my cell phone, and I called a neighbor. In fewer than 30 seconds, three sets of neighbors showed up at my door. All of this makes this kind of community living a safe place for me.

My friend’s situation would be so different if she lived in this kind of intentional community. The conversation wouldn’t be “Who can I get to give me a ride?” but rather “Which one of my neighbors is going to get here first?” Ubiquitous in Europe, intentional community living can be the norm rather than the exception in our country.

You can do cohousing anywhere. While there are architectural design principles — front porches, central courtyards, or green spaces; parking relegated to the exterior of the community; core principles of spontaneous sharing, spontaneous support, commitment to neighborliness, bottom-up governance; shared work maintaining the community — all these can be practiced in any housing or neighborhood situation.

I’ve shared with you my experiences of how living in community has mitigated the effects of my disability. Living in community also mitigates limiting circumstances as we age. For those of us 80 million getting-ready-to-retire-baby-boomers, we would be wise to think in advance about what kind of community we want to be in as we age before someone makes the decision for us. It’s important to make that decision as early as possible so you have nurtured the relationships that will see you through difficult times. Waiting until you’re 85 years old, in poor health and needing lots of assistance, is too late to form the relationships to age in community.

And now, I have to return to the vexing problem of helping my girlfriend find a ride to Asheville.

Ann Zabaldo, M.A., is a national leader in the cohousing movement. She is past-president of The Cohousing Association of the United States and is a founder and current board member of Mid-Atlantic Cohousing, a regional non-profit organization. A specialist in outreach, education, and marketing, Ann is a certified facilitator for McCamant & Durrett’s Senior Cohousing Study Group workshops, and the co-executive producer of “Building Sustainable Communities for Today’s Housing Market,” a DVD and companion handbook created specifically for developers. Ann was also on the development team for both Eastern Village Cohousing in Silver Spring, MD and Takoma Village Cohousing in Washington, DC where she lives.

Pocket Communities by Ross Chapin

Mending the Web of Belonging, Care, and Support Among Neighbors

Just as I was finishing writing my book on pocket neighborhoods, I was invited by a friend to a garden party. Twenty guests were invited to dine at a long table in her orchard overlooking a broad valley. It was a beautiful scene.

We all knew our host, but many of us did not know one another. At one point during the gathering, she asked that we take turns introducing ourselves and saying a few words. When my turn came, I said my name and that I was just finishing writing a book about pocket neighborhoods. Of course, the response was, “What is a pocket neighborhood?” After pausing for a moment, I suddenly noticed a connection. “This table is like a city block within a neighborhood,” I said. “Look where our conversations have been happening before our introductions — one at each end, and one in the middle. These are like three pocket neighborhoods along our block.” I pointed out how conversations happen spontaneously in smaller groups, while a conversation with the larger group requires organization. Then I asked them to imagine themselves as a house — each with a formal façade adorned with a bay window, two-story arched entry, and two garage doors. “If we were a typical neighborhood, our stiff facades would be facing the street, while the life of our homes would be oriented toward our backyard BBQ, kitchen, and family room. The street out front would be empty, except for cars. If we were at a dinner party,” I continued, “there would be no conversation! We each have all the privacy in the world, yet no community. In a pocket neighborhood, active living spaces of houses face toward a common area shared with nearby neighbors, while quieter, more private spaces are farther back. Living in such a neighborhood, like friends around a dinner table, conversation is effortless.”

The home I grew up in was an American classic: a shingled bungalow with a wrap-around porch, within a neighborhood of homes built at the turn of the last century in White Bear Lake, Minnesota. The street out in front seemed to have a constant stream of walkers parading by, and there was never a question that it was off limits for kids.

During warm summer evenings, I remember our porch being the scene of long, meandering conversations, typically begun with a laptop supper. Several adults, including my folks, my great aunt, and a neighbor or two stopping by, would offer up the main stories. Often us kids would add our own animated chatter to the mix. After dinner, we would head back out for another round of play in the neighborhood. When we returned after sunset, the adults would still be talking on the porch.

Reviewing the American Dream

Since those days of my youth, the new houses being built have changed radically.

With the introduction of air conditioners, porches became a nostalgic extra, replaced with two- and three-car garages, with their wide doors and driveways flanking the street. Family life retreated indoors, taken up at first with TV and entrenched over time with ever evolving choices of electronic entertainment. Once a mecca for kids and pedestrians, the street became a kind of no-man’s-land, a danger zone replete with strangers and fast cars. Today, parents chauffeur their kids to “play dates” and after-school activities, and neighbors are more likely to be seen at the grocery store than knocking at the back door.

For empty nesters, it’s a different scene altogether. Without the bustle of kid’s activities and the impromptu drop-by neighbor, daily life can feel lonely and isolating. Friends can be across town, and family members across the country. Who can you call in case of an emergency? Who will walk your dog or go for groceries if you break a leg or are in bed with the flu?

Ask any of the 80 million retiring baby boomers to describe their ideal home, and the answer is not likely “a large, high-maintenance house out of sight from any neighbors and tied to the world by car.”

The challenge is, what other living options are there?

Exploring another approach

About 15 years ago I had an opportunity to explore this question. The town I live in on Whidbey Island, north of Seattle, has only 1,000 people. Yet it is only 7 miles as the crow flies to where Boeing builds their airplanes. You can imagine how the pressures of suburban sprawl seriously threaten the character of our town. In response, our town passed an innovative “cottage housing” zoning ordinance, the first of its kind in the country, to help direct new development toward neighborhood-sensitive, small-scale infill housing.

The ordinance focuses on expanding the choices for households of one and two people, such as empty nesters, singles, and single parents — a population segment today that represents more than 60 percent of American households. The carrot of the code is an incentive that allows twice the number of homes normally allowed in residential zones. The catch is that the house size is limited to 700 square feet on the ground level and no more than 1,000 square feet total, including a second floor. Such an increase in density comes from the recognition that cottage-sized homes have less impact than their plus-sized cousins. In addition to the size limitation, the ordinance stipulates that the cottages must face a usable landscaped common area, have a room-sized porch, and have parking screened from the street.

Around the time when this ordinance was passed, I met Jim Soules, a builder with a planning background and a former Peace Corps volunteer. We are both passionate about small houses and decided to test the new code as a way of demonstrating the market for smaller homes. We pooled our savings, rallied our relatives into joining us, and purchased 4 lots within a 5-minute walk of downtown. We came up with an approvable plan and were able to convince the local bank to lend us the capital to build eight cottages and a commons building.

A Pocket Neighborhood

The cottages we built were tucked off of a relatively busy street, like a pocket safely tucking away its possessions from the world outside. It seemed to me like a “pocket neighborhood,” and the term stuck.

Our hunch that there was a market for small homes in a community setting proved true. The cottages quickly sold to working and retired single women, empty nesters, and a couple with a 3-year-old child. Within a few months, word got out about our pocket neighborhood across the country, with articles in numerous magazines, newspapers, and cable TV. The response we received was electric. Inquiries came in from all age groups, but especially seniors, asking, “Are you building any of these in my area?” It became immediately clear that we had tapped into a deep, unmet longing for smaller, simpler houses where neighbors actually know one another.

Design Patterns for Community

Many people respond enthusiastically to the cottage style of our pocket neighborhoods. The buildings and details are quickly familiar and easy to love. But style is not critical to what we are doing. Beneath the skin of the form are the bones that make these communities work. In the way of the “pattern languages,” a structured method of describing good design practices developed by Christopher Alexander, we have identified a series of essential design patterns below to describe key elements of pocket neighborhoods.

Clusters of Nearby Neighbors — A larger neighborhood might contain several hundred households, but when it comes to pocket neighborhoods, I think the optimum size is around 6 to 12 households. These are your nearby neighbors, the ones you know by name and run into on a daily basis. They are the ones who “have your back” — the first to notice a need, and the first to call for assistance. Think of it as a neighborhood within a neighborhood.

Shared Commons — The shared outdoor space at the center of a cluster of homes is the key element of a pocket neighborhood. This space is neither private (home, yard) nor public (street, park), but rather a defined space between the private and public realms. Residents take part in its care and oversight, and feel a pride of ownership. A stranger walking into the commons will immediately feel they have entered private space and is likely to be greeted with a friendly, “Can I help you?” During the daily flow of life through this commons space, nearby neighbors offer a friendly nod of greeting or stop for a chat on the porch. These casual conversations can grow to caring relationships and a meaningful sense of community — all fostered by the simple fact of shared space.

Eyes on the Commons — The first line of defense for personal and community security is a strong network of neighbors who know and care for one another. When a small cluster of houses looks onto the shared common areas, a stranger is noticed. As well, nearby neighbors can see if daily patterns are askew next door or be called upon in an emergency.

Layers of Personal Space — Community can be wonderful, but too much community can be suffocating. On the other hand, with too much privacy, a person can feel cut off from neighbors. Creating multiple “layers of personal space” will help achieve the right balance between privacy and community. For example, a guest coming to visit might pass through an arbor into the commons. This is the first layer. From here to the front door are five more layers: a border of perennial plantings at the edge of the courtyard, a low fence with a swinging gate, the private front yard, the frame of the porch with a sittable-height railing and flower boxes, and the porch itself. Within the cottages, the layering continues with active spaces toward the commons and private spaces further back and above.

Room-sized Porches — The front porch is a particular “layer of personal space” that needs highlighting. It is essential in fostering neighborly connections. Rather than a small “key-fumbling” porch, it should be large enough for friends and family to gather, and in view of the commons, street, or sidewalk in front.

Nested Houses — Having a next-door house or apartment peering into your own can be uncomfortable and claustrophobic. In pocket neighborhoods, we design homes with an open side and a closed side so that neighboring homes can “nest” together — with no window peering into a neighbor’s living space. High windows and skylights on the closed side can bring in ample light while preserving privacy.

Commons Buildings and Gardens — How many lawn mowers do you need in a close-knit neighborhood? Sharing is a central value of residents living in a pocket neighborhood. So, the answer is, one. Some communities take it a step further with a shared multipurpose room complete with a kitchenette to host community potlucks, meetings, exercise groups, and movie nights. Larger communities may afford a community kitchen and dining hall, guest apartment, and workshop. Pocket neighborhoods of any size will enjoy the benefits of a community vegetable garden. Beyond being amenities for residents, these common facilities cultivate relationships among neighbors and strengthen their sense of community — and they are considered by some as essential ingredients for creating community.

Corralling the Car — In America, nearly everyone has a car. But cars don’t need to dominate our lives. Don’t let garage doors be the first greeting. Shield parking areas and wide banks of garage doors from the street. In warmer climates, we locate parking areas so that residents and guests walk from their car doors to the front door. This arrangement creates an opportunity to enjoy the flowers and nod to a neighbor along the way. Of course, there are more patterns, but these are few of the essential ones to convey the hallmark features of a pocket neighborhood.

Creating Community Where You Live Now

But let’s say you do not want to move from where you live now. How can you create a stronger sense of community? Here are a few actions that most people can do with little or no money at all.

Move your picnic table to the front yard — See what happens when you eat supper out front. It’s likely you’ll strike up a conversation with a neighbor. Invite them to bring a dish to share. It’s likely others will want to join in. Make room.

Plant a front-yard vegetable garden — Don’t stop with the picnic table. Build a raised bed for veggies; plant edible landscaping and fruit trees. If you’re inclined, invite your neighbors to share the garden. Along with carrots and sweet peas will come conversation and friendship — a bountiful harvest.

Build a fence bench — If you live on a street with walkers, build a bench into your front fence to offer a welcome way-stop or a foot-activated water bowl to offer their dog a cool drink on a hot day.

Make a Book Lending Cupboard — Take a book, lend a book. Collect your old reads and share them with passersby in a book-lending cupboard mounted next to the sidewalk out front. Give it a roof, a door with glass panes, and paint it to match the flowers below. Or, change the story — create a poetry cupboard with a signboard announcing, “Read a Poem, Write a Poem.”

Mending the Web of Belonging, Care, and Support

For aging boomers, this seems to be the time when many of us are evaluating our living situations. Where is home? Such a fundamental question can come when our parents (or we ourselves) are facing another season with the burdens of a big house and yard, or in the wake of natural climate events that are disrupting lives within entire regions.

The sad story is that many of us lack networks of personal and social support. Family members can be spread across the country, friends live across town, and neighbors don’t know one another. Too often, a listening ear or helping hand is not available when it’s most needed.

Pocket neighborhoods are one answer to mending a web of belonging, care, and support among those who are physically closest to us — our neighbors. Their small scale makes it easier for neighbors to know and look after one another. The simple act of having a neighbor admire a newly planted garden or share stories about grandkids strengthens the bonds of “neighborship.” This makes all the difference.

I’d like to say that pocket neighborhoods are common. The fact is, there is a lot of work to do. Neighborhood and housing advocates are speaking out. Planning officials are changing zoning and housing policy. Architects and developers around the country are creating new communities. Writers and producers are featuring stories in a range of media. One thing is for certain, though: The baby boomer generation will surely reinvent how they want to live out the rest of their lives, and for many that will be in neighborhoods that foster the same sense of community that many of us knew growing up.

Notes

1 See “The Roseto effect: a 50-year comparison of mortality rates” at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1695733/.

Ross Chapin Ross Chapin, FAIA, is an architect and author based on Whidbey Island, north of Seattle, WA. Over the last 15 years, Ross has designed and partnered in developing six pocket neighborhoods in the Puget Sound region—small groupings of homes around a shared commons—and has designed dozens of communities for other developers across the US, Canada, and the UK. Many of these pioneering developments have received international media coverage, professional peer review and national design awards, including AIA Housing Committee Awards in 2005, 2007, and 2009. Ross’s book, Pocket Neighborhoods: Creating Small Scale Community in a Large Scale World (Taunton Press), has received wide acclaim, including a full-page review in USA Today, listing on Wall Street Journal’s Top Ten House & Home Books and as one of Planetizen’s Top Ten Planning & Design Books of 2012.

Aging Better Together by Anne P. Glass

I recently visited an 82-year-old relative. I had been with her five months earlier when her husband died from pancreatic cancer. She says she is doing “all right.” She continues to live in the same large house that has been her home for 54 years. It is on a busy road with no sidewalks. She has not missed a Sunday at church since her husband died, and she attends a “senior group” there once a month. Her son and his family are nearby, and she goes out for breakfast or lunch with her friends periodically. Despite these supports, there are weeks when she does not see anyone, other than at church. She showed me a book of word search puzzles that she had bought and said she used them to pass the time.

I could not help but reflect upon how different her life might be if she was living in an elder cohousing community. Elder or senior cohousing has flourished in northern Europe for decades but it is new in the United States. The first three elder-only cohousing communities opened during a two-year period between late 2005 and 2007, in Davis, California; Abingdon, Virginia; and Boulder, Colorado. The communities are small, with 12 residents in the smallest to less than 40 in the largest. These self-directed intentional communities represent an innovative type of living alternative in the United States. Older adults proactively choose how and where they want to live, and who they want to live with, in a close-knit community where neighbors look after each other. It is a radical “do-it-yourself” approach that older people themselves envision and implement, with no administrator telling them what they can or cannot do.

I have been fortunate to have had the opportunity to visit each of these communities and interview the residents.(1) At one, I have a longitudinal study continuing in which I have collected data every year since the community opened in 2006. In these communities, I have observed neighbors helping each other and looking out for each other in a way that stands out in stark contrast to the neighborhoods in which many of us live — where we drive home at night, pull into our garages, and never even see our neighbors.

We know very little about the role of older friends and neighbors in helping and supporting each other. Our society has largely focused instead on assuming that old age is a time of dependence when people can only be on the receiving end of assistance. Both long-term-care policy and the vast body of caregiving studies assume that the family will be responsible for providing that care when it is required. There are at least two problems with these assumptions. First, this image of old age does not fit with the reality. Not all older people are dependent; most will have many years in which they are healthy and actively engaged in life. Simultaneously, they may have more unstructured time than they have had at any other point in their lives to spend as they choose. They want to have a sense of meaning and purpose in life. The second issue is that when the day comes that some help is needed, not all older adults can depend on family members to provide care — either because they are not close (whether physically or emotionally, or both), or they just do not have families. This gap will only increase with the aging of the baby boomers, as they are more likely to be single(2) and to have only one or no children,(3) compared to previous generations.

The concept of elders helping take care of each other has been little studied, but it offers a way to provide caregiving outside of institutional or traditional structures. It opens the possibility for provision of mutual support that encourages and allows independence at more advanced ages. Establishing the delicate balance between independence and accepting help when needed is one of the challenges that ultimately often comes with age.

These self-managed communities hold the potential to enrich residents’ lives in many ways. Cohousing communities are physically designed with shared common spaces to facilitate social contact. When you move into a cohousing community, you can know all your neighbors within a matter of days. The design promotes a sense of community and mutual support. The concept and potential of mutual support assume even more significance for older adults, with many finding that giving assistance can be as rewarding as receiving it.

Mutual Support

Living in such a community is not without challenges, but a distinct sense of a close-knit neighborhood evolves over time, and mutual support occurs. The model of mutual support developed by the ElderSpirit Extension Team in Abingdon, Virginia, has three elements. Residents must be willing to (a) ask for help when needed, (b) accept help when needed, and (c) give help to others, to the extent that they are able. Additionally, residents also have the responsibility to take care of themselves. As part of their mutual support model, each resident in this community has named other residents to be their “care coordinators,” who will step up when help is needed and organize the necessary assistance. These types of assistance have included grocery shopping, preparing meals, visiting, accompanying a neighbor on physician visits, dog walking, and even personal care. In addition, there is the invaluable knowledge that there is someone to call on, even in the middle of the night.

Beyond assistance when people are hospitalized or recuperating from illness or injury, there is another even more basic level of mutual support that is occurring: people are watching out for each other in this neighborhood, and this familiarity helps residents feel safe. They value the combination of having their own homes but not feeling alone, having the security of knowing that a neighbor would notice if something happened to them. One female resident stated that when she lived in her prior condominium, there was no sense of community or mutual support and that people just exchanged pleasantries. She then continued graphically:

One of the reasons I wanted to live in community, rather than isolated in my condominium [was]…just ‘cause I thought, you know some morning I’m going to wake up dead and nobody will know for two weeks until they pass my door and say, “It really smells funny in here.” And here, we’re going to do like [others have] done, and check on one another.

Another expressed, “Here we are to some degree interdependent. That’s the way it should be. That’s the difference to me what a community is as opposed to just a bunch of neighbors.”

Benefits of Aging Together

The “solidarity in aging” gained through living in an elder-only community helps individuals to accept their own aging and encourages a willingness among many residents to consider and discuss aging issues. They have purposefully chosen to live in an adult-only community. Most residents would agree with this statement: “It helps being with people who understand because the same things are happening to them.” Some residents also mentioned that they found older neighbors to be excellent role models for aging. For example, a 70-year-old respondent expressed that she learned a lot about aging from observing residents in their 80s. The theme of role models was also expressed in another way: Some residents recognized that what they were pioneering was being viewed as a model by others in the larger community.

As residents age in the community, another significant benefit is support for the caregiver within the community. For example, there have already been cases of couples in which the husbands have been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease. Certainly it would be an enormous comfort to you as a caregiver whose spouse or partner is dealing with a life-threatening illness to know that you are not dealing with it alone, but have only to go out your front door to reach out for social support.

Respondents have exerted positive influences on each other in a variety of ways, such as encouraging exercise. Another theme many residents mentioned was the ability to have a sense of humor and laugh together about their limitations. Finally, living in this community was energizing to many respondents, simply from the sheer excitement of being part of pioneering a new model of how the later stage of life could be lived.

Thus, the mutual support is part of a larger phenomenon that is helping residents have a better experience with aging by going through the experience together. All the residents know each other, which facilitates convenient companionship and a sense of looking out for each other. This familiarity is important, as there is a strong connection between social networks and improved health outcomes,(4) and friends can play a significant role in well-being and mental health.(5)

A self-directed elder cohousing community is the ultimate example of residents being proactive and taking full responsibility for what happens in their retirement community. Pride in what they have accomplished in these elder cohousing communities is evident.

Creating a “Family of Friends”

Many older people are happily ensconced in a network of family and friends and meaningful activities and have all the support that they will need to help them deal with whatever the future holds. For others, however, especially those without close family, the aging process can be frightening if they see themselves walking that path alone. In fact, too many people face their older years solitary, isolated, and in denial about their own aging. We know now that isolation itself can increase health risks for individuals.(6) Some people, particularly the baby boomers, have witnessed with dismay the experiences of their aging parents and are hungry for a new approach. Building on a concept that has emerged from my work documenting the experience of these elder cohousing communities, my future research will explore an innovative approach for older adults and baby boomers to consider: forming a “family of friends” as an intentional way to build a sense of community and solidarity as a path toward resilient aging. People choose where and with whom they wish to share this journey.

The intentional “family of friends” community model is built upon the idea that older adults are capable of taking a proactive role to share the experience of aging together. Mutual support in this model is based on the concept developed at ElderSpirit Community. The fact that some individuals will eventually also need more formal services is recognized, but it provides an essential “social safety net.” The “family of friends” idea would provide a supportive environment in which individuals grow old in solidarity, thereby enhancing their quality of life through this communal aging process.

The potential for older adults to experience this kind of arrangement is only beginning to emerge. Based on my research, if a group of individuals jointly commits to this idea, they will see each other regularly and often, and share a dedication to mutual support of each other. This mutual support could extend to each individual naming a “care coordinator” among the other members. This self-directed “intentional community” can exist in cohousing specifically designed for it, and some groups may follow the examples of the pioneers who have established the first elder cohousing communities in the United States. Indeed, a fourth elder cohousing community opened in 2010 in New Mexico, and others are opening in California and Oklahoma. However, I believe this “community” can also be created in a variety of existing sites, such as people organizing in an apartment building, a condominium association, or even a traditional neighborhood. Another possibility would be to explore the use of the new concept of a “pocket neighborhood,” as described by Chapin in another chapter, within a standard subdivision or even within a retirement community.

Conclusion

Increasing the likelihood of older people helping each other and sharing information to improve their levels of knowledge about health and aging all lead to healthier older adults. Choosing to live with an enhanced sense of community cannot guarantee that an individual will completely avoid the need for nursing home admission, and it does not preclude receiving help from one’s family, if available. With additional help, if necessary, however, the support provided by one’s “family of friends” certainly increases the likelihood that one can remain longer in one’s home. As one respondent in Colorado expressed:

I think it’s less scary if you think you’ve got support, people are going to be dropping in or bringing you some soup or whatever, and it just makes you feel, I can get through anything better because I’m not frightened of being alone or isolated or ignored or something like that. So I think it definitely does help.

Individuals can remain independent in their housing and be part of the larger community, but still have the support and comfort provided by interdependence among a group of their peers, which can facilitate their ability to remain in the community longer. There are too many older adults who, like my relative, are spending too many days lonely and isolated. It is time to give thoughtful attention to innovative and creative ways that elders can build a sense of community in a way that will help them create solidarity and resilience in dealing with the aging process. Sharing the experience with a “family of friends” is a powerful way for elders to take back control of their own aging from the medicalized bureaucracy that sees aging as a disease and older adults as dependent.

Anne P. Glass, Ph.D., is internationally known as a leading researcher in the field of elder self-directed intentional communities. She is especially interested in the potential for older adults to provide mutual support and age better together, and how communities can facilitate this process. She is an Associate Professor and the Associate Director of the Institute of Gerontology in the College of Public Health at the University of Georgia. Visit her website at https://elder-cohousing.squarespace.com/.

Lessons of an Accidental Developer by Dene Peterson

My mother used to tell everybody that I’ve been “an administrator since the age of two.” Chances are, the first time that occurred to her was in a moment of exasperation. From the beginning, I had a pretty good idea of how I wanted things to go. And I would insist in moving in that direction, organizing processes and people around me, no matter what the barriers. As a child, those qualities probably didn’t always endear me to adults. Nor was it always a plus in dealing with job supervisors as an adult. But it was exactly those traits, refined over the years by lessons learned working in collaboration with others, that served me well in my unexpected career as an accidental real estate developer. In fact, if there is one category of advice I have for those hoping to replicate our work in establishing what we believe is America’s first affordable, mixed-use, elder cohousing community, it’s the following.

To turn beautiful ideas into bold action, make sure that your leadership team:

Possesses a high tolerance for risk;
Prepares for steep learning curves;
Keeps laser-like focus on long-range goals (so that they’ll work their way through the inevitable frustrations to get there); and
Understands the need to attract powerful allies and to build, nourish, and leverage networks of influence.

If reinventing communities for successful aging were easy, reinvention wouldn’t be necessary.

From Convent to Community

The vision for what became the ElderSpirit Community in Abingdon, Virginia, had its foundation in 1967, when a group of us women working in Appalachia in areas of community service and development organized the Federation of Communities in Service (FOCIS). We had an advantage when it came to seeing both the big picture of service to others and the finer-grain responsibilities that come along with lofty goals. Core members of that founding committee were former nuns. For years, we had been committed to community development in Appalachian communities. When the Church hierarchy insisted we be more conventional than what we thought our work required, we chose mission over obedience, and we left the convent.

The FOCIS group expanded to include men as well as women. As some members approached retirement age, we thought about what it might take to create a retirement community that addressed our concerns for conscious, meaningful aging. We decided on the following goals:

Create a model that allows older adults to share their wisdom with the larger community in such a way that younger people begin to look differently at old age.
Create a community that builds personal relationships, as we believe that this is where we find much of our spirituality and meaning in life.
Create a model that is affordable for all those people who have not made big salaries, but who have contributed to our society by the lives they have lived.
Create a community where we are encouraged to face the fact we will die, and are supported to do what we need to complete our lives.

Finding the Right Place for the Right Idea

With those goals in mind, the where and the how of the community became crucial. It would have to be a neighborhood within an existing community, so that even though we were planning a close-knit group of aging friends, we’d be surrounded by multigenerational families in the larger community. The way homes fit together, the balancing of private and public space — all of that called for expert design. And, toughest of all, the homes and maintenance responsibilities had to be within reach of incomes of ex-nuns and others who had not amassed huge nest eggs.

In 1995, we formed the FOCIS Futures committee to explore alternatives. We learned about the cohousing movement and chose that as a model. We found ourselves attracted to the later-life spirituality concepts of Drew Leder because of our background and missions orientation.(1) We chose the name ElderSpirit for our community, based on Leder’s writings.

Several people interested in the project lived in or near Abingdon in southwest Virginia, and they invited all who had expressed an interest to come to an “Immersion into Abingdon.” Our friends gave us a tour of the town. They showed us the health, professional, and shopping resources for seniors and told us stories and experiences of living in Abingdon. The town has many features that make it attractive for retirees—a rails-to-trails walking, cycling, and running trail; the Barter Theater; several arts and crafts establishments; a fine health activities center with indoor pool; and an annual arts festival. It looked perfect.

I moved to Abingdon to look for property and found 3.7 acres bordering the Virginia Creeper Trail, a Rails-to-Trails success story and a popular recreational destination for visitors. To purchase the property, we borrowed $45,000 from 23 FOCIS members. The Retirement Research Foundation of Chicago awarded FOCIS a three-year grant for pre-development expenses, which provided salaries for a part-time staff.

In 1999, our group bought the 3.7 acres. Thanks to the grant, I had a job as project manager — and not a clue what was ahead.

Embracing the Challenges

Despite all my years as a born administrator, including fundraising and managing community development projects with budgets in the millions, I had to learn a whole new set of skills. Designing and implementing the kind of nurturing environment for aging the way we envisioned was an act of real estate development. That means overseeing teams of experts, not only in design and construction, but also in engineering, storm water management, landscaping, building and zoning codes, finance, sales, marketing, health regulations, and a long list of other responsibilities that folks who are not in the development professions can’t imagine. It is also a political act, requiring allies in government at the local, state, and national levels.

The surest route to managing all those tasks successfully is to hire an experienced developer who will remove the day-to-day headaches of project oversight. But for us, and for most groups like us committed to affordability, renting the political and real estate development expertise we needed at market rate prices was likely to push costs beyond the means of many of those most open to the idea — and many of those most in need of the aging in community experience. What’s more, even if we could come up with the money, there was no assurance we could find a developer with the right mix of political and real estate development experience AND the ability to apply that expertise to the goals of our project.

The simple fact is that, over the last half-century, the real estate development marketplace has become very good at delivering pretty much the opposite of what we wanted: car-dependent suburbs that tend to isolate people from workplaces, school, healthy exercise, and food — and from one another — at costs beyond the means of most family incomes. Choosing alternatives, including connected neighborhoods nestled within broader communities, often means paying a premium to others to face the political and technical headwinds. Because of those headwinds, even though elder cohousing is gaining traction throughout the U.S., the hassles make it tough for the movement to achieve growth on the scale necessary to make a difference in most seniors’ lives.

What We Learned

Over the course of the decade-long effort that began with our initial meetings, followed by the purchase of the property — and thereafter the financing, design, and construction of our community — before finally moving-in in 2006, I had a series of revelations.

I, of course, renewed my gratitude for the gritty determination that seems wired into my head and heart, and for lifelong friends who have indulged and supported my ideas, even when the ideas seemed a little nuts. But I also grew to appreciate — more than anything, perhaps — the need to forge networks of support beyond our core group. At every stage, we could call upon well-placed experts, many of whom knew us from our previous lives as nuns and community development workers, and had no doubts about our competence and commitment.

There was no way that we could achieve our goals of affordability without help from nonprofit foundations and government agencies. Just when we needed them most, old and new friends from these networks of support stepped forward to help us with grant writing, with contacts with the right officials, and with coaching on design and engineering matters.

We ran into delays and dead ends. Construction was all but halted for 150 days because of rain, while the interest on our loans continued to grow. We negotiated and detoured our ways around unexpected barriers with regard to the site, and with environmental and public health requirements. We had to rethink wish lists when costs threatened to bust our budgets. We hired and fired. We argued (respectfully) among one another. And we continually engaged with the broader community and our future next-door neighbors to prevent rumors of a “cult” moving into Abingdon from gaining traction.

Few, if any, of these tasks were anticipated in our initial, inspiring discussions of how we wanted to live with friends, new and old, for the rest of our lives. And I suspect the same goes for other groups just starting on this journey. This is why I wanted to spend so much time emphasizing the practical and often exasperating responsibilities that go along with making better places.

It’s just as important, though, to stress that the struggle is rewarded. By the time we moved into our ElderSpirit homes, we were already a community, tested by adversity and made more confident by the ways in which we overcame the challenges. Our self-esteem went through the roof. As a result of managing all the practical necessities of building a physical place that enhances community, we’ve grown to be quite good at managing it. All the advantages we dreamed of when we first talked about aging in community have materialized, enriched by the experiences we’ve already shared. It just shouldn’t be so hard to get to this point.

The tasks are made harder because of their against-the-grain ambitions. Many of the habits and rules of business-as-usual real estate development are unreasonable barriers, especially now that so many of us in America and the world are entering the last stages of our lives in places inhospitable to aging in community. So what I often stress in my talks to groups these days is that we all need to invest more energy into making changes in the way we shape neighborhoods.

That’s my first recommendation: Let’s lobby for change.

For those looking for more detailed lessons learned from the ElderSpirit journey, I offer these practical tips:

Hire design and construction professionals with experience with affordable housing. Be honest about your intended price points. And understand how last-minute tweaks and amendments can radically alter costs.
Get the best advice you can on how to make contracts clear and binding when it comes to what’s expected of contractors. Be specific about who’s responsible for absorbing costs for budget overruns and for missed deadlines. The “time is money” adage is never truer than in real estate development.
Understand how real estate valuations and market rates in your locale affect financing and the perceived value of your project. Make homes affordable through compact, well-thought-out design, not through unrealistic discounts from market rates. If subsidies are part of your financial plan, make sure profits realized through later sales are at least partially recouped to continue supporting your project’s affordability.
Be aware of local building and zoning codes. Changing them to accommodate your project’s needs can be a political ordeal. Be prepared for that, or adjust design to accommodate the rules.
Take advantage of Universal Design, which address accessibility concerns in passageways, counter heights, bathrooms, etc. By itself, Universal Design doesn’t assure successful aging in community. But if the place is right, in terms of neighborhood access to what seniors need for physical mobility and social interaction, then Universal Design completes the package.

To learn more about ElderSpirit, visit the community’s Web site: www.elderspirit.org.

Notes

1 Leder, Drew. “Spiritual community in later life: A modest proposal.” Journal of Aging Studies, 10(2):103–116, 1996.

Dene Peterson, a former Glenmary Sister, is the founder and developer of ElderSpirit Community® in Abingdon, Virginia. Her professional background is in fundraising and administration of nonprofit organizations. She has won national recognition for her work with Head Start, community mental health, family planning, and neighborhood organization. Dene serves on the boards of the Aging in Community Network and Second Journey, and she has been honored with a Life-Achievement Award from the National Cohousing Organization.

The Not So Big Community by Sarah Susanka

Ever since moving to the United States as a teenager in 1971, I’ve believed that there is a better way to shape our communities, towns, and cities than what is currently practiced in this country. I grew up in England, a country of small villages and historic towns built over hundreds of years, so when I moved here I found the American methods of construction, as well as the almost exclusive orientation to the convenience of the automobile, very limiting in terms of opportunities for human interaction.

In the world I’d come from, people of all ages lived in the village and interacted on a daily basis. There were also no retirement communities or senior centers. Seniors, or “pensioners” as we called them, were an integral and essential part of village life, like anyone else. Rather than being cordoned off to a separate community for those of their age, they lived amid and amongst the rest of us and could be seen sitting on park benches, walking their dogs, or chatting with one another outside the corner store. Though I’d never thought much about it as a child, these older members of our village played a large part in my upbringing. They were like caretakers in a way, always watching, offering encouraging glances when we were playing, and looking on disparagingly when any kind of fighting or emotional outburst was being displayed. They were passing along signals about what constituted appropriate behavior, and I learned a lot from them over the course of my early childhood.

By contrast, I vividly remember driving through a Los Angeles suburb with my parents in the early seventies, and wondering what would happen as one aged in such a place where everything is so spread out. How did anyone ever get to know each other here, when everyone was safely ensconced within their automobile? What would you do if you couldn’t drive? Where would you go? How would you get around without a car? How would you shop? What would you do all day if all you could see out your windows were your own front yard and the occasional passing car, with no way to regularly interact with the world? It seemed a pretty desolate future.

Back when my parents were in their 40s and 50s that vision was only a distant imagining, but now it’s a growing concern. Like so many of my generation, I look at the options available for seniors like my parents, and for myself a few decades from now, and I know unequivocally that these are not choices that either my parents or I would willingly make. My parents like their independence. They’ve created a home for themselves over the past 40 years that fits them to a tee. The available options, an independent or assisted living facility, or a retirement community, would mean a complete break with the past, with all the places and people they know. It’s the equivalent of extreme surgery just at the time in life when one feels the most vulnerable.

And the requirement that you then spend the rest of your days surrounded by people whose faculties and physical abilities are gradually waning seems a harsh sentence. Wouldn’t it be better to give those who are themselves aging a view into the lives of those who are just beginning their lives, to weave generations together, as was so abundantly present in the village I grew up in?

Why is it that our current development practices require that once we lose our ability to drive, we must also lose hundreds of other freedoms, simply because there’s no way for us to get around by foot since everything is far too spread out and inaccessible, with no public transportation system to help get us where we need to go? Why can’t we create communities where all ages of humans can thrive, no matter their ability to maneuver an automobile?

That’s the question that’s been uppermost in my mind recently as I’ve been contemplating ways to improve the quality of our cities, towns, and neighborhoods here in the US. I’m envisioning a type of community that’s informed by the same Not So Big sensibility as the work I’ve been doing in house and life design over the past few decades.

What Does “Not So Big” Mean?

I coined the term Not So Big to describe a perspective that focuses on the qualities rather than the quantities of space and time.

In terms of house design, this means a home that’s designed for the way we really live, with every square foot of space in use every day — a home that’s an inspiration to live in because it is beautiful as well as functional. A house that’s 5,000 square feet but sorely lacking in character and craft, for example, is nowhere near as satisfying to live in for most people than one that’s half that size but beautifully tailored to accommodate its inhabitants’ needs and aesthetic preferences.

And in terms of life design, this means a life that’s filled with the things we love to do, and with ample opportunity for the kinds of experiences that allow us to grow and flourish. A life that’s devoted to making it to the top of the corporate ladder at the expense of one’s relationships, health, and well-being, for example, may look successful from the outside, but inside can be empty of meaning, filled with stress and frustration. But a life that is spent pursuing the things you love to do, that has time built in for connecting with others and for taking care of oneself, is successful in the true meaning of the word. It feeds our spirits, and not just our bank accounts.

A Not So Big House is not intended first and foremost to knock the socks off the neighbors, and a Not So Big Life is not focused upon accumulation of money, power, and stuff, although it doesn’t preclude those things happening. It’s just that those things are not why you do what you do.

The Ingredients of Not So Big Community

So how can we translate this same sensibility to the places we share and call our collective home…our community? If we look at what we love about the hill towns and villages of Italian Tuscany, for example, or the well-weathered stone cottages of the English Cotswolds, there’s something timeless and at the same time deeply connected to nature that draws us in and makes us want to explore them and spend time in them. Most American towns and cities have precious little of these same qualities. And because of this, whole neighborhoods are regularly torn down, only to be replaced by the next new development trend, the next quick fix to house the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time.

We don’t have to continue this way. We can in fact build towns, neighborhoods, and homes that are every bit as lovely and inspiring as the European models we travel to on our vacations. We just have to recognize what it is that we like about them, and learn to emulate those characteristics in our new developments.

Ingredient #1: Beauty

At the root of the Not So Big sensibility is the notion that beauty matters and is in fact one of the most sustainable attributes a place or object can have. When something — be it a tool, a piece of furniture, a home, or a community — is lovely to look at, to work with, or to live in — in other words, when it’s designed to inspire as well as to function well for its intended purpose — it is not only a delight for those who use it today, but its beauty transcends time and brings that same pleasure to every generation of people who inherit it. The making of a place that’s beautiful, inspiring, and alive is the first step toward the realization of a new, more sustainable, and at the same time Not So Big form of community.

Ingredient #2: The Lessons of New Urbanism

I’ve often characterized the Not So Big House movement as a perfect parallel with what the New Urbanists have promoted in terms of walkable, mixed-use communities and neighborhoods. the New Urbanism sprang up in the early 1980s to counter the trend toward urban sprawl, and is based on the characteristics and proportions of neighborhoods that were developed before the advent of the automobile. Over the past two decades, over 600 New Urban communities have been built around the United States, and the movement promises to continue to grow in decades to come. Now I believe it’s time to weave the tenets of both the Not So Big House movement and The New Urbanism movement together into a new vision for integrated community design.

Ingredient #3: Learning from A Pattern Language

Another important addition to the mix of ingredients for this new type of community are some of the key concepts from A Pattern Language.[1] This weighty tome, first published in 1977, is a marvelous compendium of principles, or patterns, that govern successful building around the globe. The book begins with principles that apply to the city scale, with patterns named such things as “Lace of Country Streets,” “Mosaic of Subcultures,” and “Identifiable Neighborhoods”; and works its way down in relative scales, to neighborhood considerations such as “Degrees of Publicness,” “Main Gateways,” and “Hierarchy of Open Space”; then on down to the scale of the house, with patterns such as “Farmhouse Kitchen,” “Alcoves,” and “Sunny Counter.”

This book was pivotal in the development of my own architectural work and has much to lend to the discussion of sustainable community design. At the time of its release it presented a paradigm shift in the approach it recommended to design and construction, and it continues to provide a compass for those who want to revitalize our approach to the built environment.

Ingredient #4: Aging In Place and Multigenerational Communities

As the baby boom generation moves ever closer to retirement, they’re looking for ways to age in place rather than to move to a community of people all their own age. Studies show that over 80 percent of adults want to stay in their own homes until the end of their days. To address this desire there are a number of new initiatives being spearheaded by AARP. One in particular is called CAPS, or the Certified Aging in Place Specialist program. With increasing numbers of designers now trained to help people stay in their homes as they age, there’s also an increased awareness about how we can make all homes and communities accessible, not only for those with age-related disabilities but for those with other types of disabilities as well.

Taking these understandings and applying them to the designs of new communities will allow people to stay in their homes for the full duration of their lives. By designing for accessibility without making those features look or feel institutional, we’ll be creating truly multigenerational communities that are sustainable for all age groups and physical abilities… a truly inclusive environment.

As well as the obvious features required for ease of movement and general functionality, there are the critical ingredients of walkability and visibility. We feel most alive when we can see others fully engaged in their own activities. Being able to take a stroll on fairly level surfaces, placing benches and sitting areas throughout the community, and having views out from every home to pedestrian walkways, green spaces, and everyday activities like farming, shopping, and playing, can transform one’s later years from isolated to alive and vibrant.

Although none of this is complicated to accomplish, there’s an immediate need to integrate these design characteristics into the communities being designed today to allow for aging in place in the future. It’s not rocket science, but if we put it off, we’ll be depriving generations to come of the type of aging experience that almost everyone today longs for.

Ingredient #5: Not So Big Living

This last ingredient, the principle tenets of Not So Big living that I describe in The Not So Big Life, is perhaps the most critical but least quantifiable aspect of community design. A big part of what makes neighborhoods that already have the magical quality of real community so special is the connection between human beings. There’s an authenticity and a genuine caring for one another that comes about as a result of a quality of interaction that’s almost impossible to define in words. It truly is a quality and not a quantity, with the central characteristic being one of real interest and attention, as opposed to social obligation.

A community can be so much more than we normally appreciate when the inhabitants share a common bond around the way they engage their lives, understanding that every activity and interaction is a kind of nutrient for one’s sense of well-being and personal growth. On the surface, everything looks very much the same as in any other community, but inside each individual who lives there there’s a depth of experience that is rare in today’s world. Although it is possible to live in a “Not So Big” way by oneself, it becomes a great deal easier when a number of people share the same aspiration and vision. They can support each other as they go about living their everyday lives, and in so doing become a community of true friends.

This process of Not So Big living is not connected with any particular spiritual tradition; yet it does acknowledge that we are spiritual creatures that crave a type of engagement with each other and with ourselves that is less superficial than we presently recognize and generally allow in conventional society. It’s a challenging vision to bring into being because it is so little understood or appreciated, but one I believe we are ready to entertain and live into over the coming decades.

Mixing It All Together

This vision for community design will, I believe, provide a new model for the kind of place that supports its inhabitants in living fully all the phases of their lives, from infant to elder. And it will do so in much the same way that The Not So Big House has provided a new model for house design over the past dozen years. It will be a community designed with true sustainability at its core, where people can live in harmony with their environs, with each other, and with themselves.

So how do we begin to make such places? Not So Big Community begins with the first imaginings about its form, and it is colored and shaped by the involvement of everyone who touches it, from the planners, designers, builders, and developers, to the long-term residents, participants, and caretakers. Community is not only a place, but also — more importantly — a process; and the more people who are fully and passionately engaged in its making, the more alive, regenerative, and sustainable that community is likely to be.

Notes

1 Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa, and Murray Silverstein, A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction (Berkeley, CA: Center for Environmental Structure, 1977).

Sarah Susanka, F.A.I.A., is an inspirational cultural visionary, acclaimed author of nine books, and an architect who describes herself first and foremost as a student of life. She became a household name in the world of home design with her Not So Big House series, but the true magic behind her life story is revealed in her landmark book The Not So Big Life, where she unveils the process by which she lives her own life — a process she is adept at sharing with everyone interested in more fully inhabiting their own life and realizing their full potential. Visit her Web site at susanka.com/.

Isn’t This Where We Started? Irony and Remembering in Late Life by Philip Stafford

A couple of years ago, after a long absence, we made a sentimental journey to the old neighborhood and realized the truth of the saying “You can never go back.” Gone was the casual and tolerant informality in lifestyles, along with the former graciousness displayed in area neighborhoods. Victorian houses had been razed and replaced by imposing new mansions, creating an atmosphere of wealth and even arrogance. New stores had ushered out the old familiar ones. New York merchants, with high-priced offerings, had moved into a huge, elaborate shopping mall a few miles distant. The lovely little village we cherished had vanished — like Brigadoon — and been replaced by ostentatious wealth and class distinction attesting to moneyed success.[1]

Not too long ago, I made a similar “trip to bountiful” — back home to explore my old neighborhood in Hobart, Indiana. My parents moved to Hobart in 1948, seeking a small town alternative to life in the city. They purchased an 1850’s farmhouse on the edge of town, initiating a 20-year remodeling project that engaged all five members of the family. We moved the kitchen so many times we came to call it the “whichen.”[2]

The acreage behind the house was mostly undeveloped woods and field, leading down to “Duck Crick,” where we spent hours and hours, in every season, wading, swinging, exploring, building forts, sledding and, occasionally smoking. Across the creek laydanger, as the area bordered the “hoody” part of town and kids from that neighborhood would shoot their BB guns at us as we played. It was a classic idyllic childhood, I have to say.

I left that neighborhood for college in 1967, my parents moved soon after and, in subsequent years, it rapidly developed into a suburban zone with ranch houses, cul-de-sacs, and neatly trimmed lawns. No wonder I was totally disoriented on my return to that neighborhood about 40 years later. It was difficult to imagine myself in the woods while looking around at asphalt and grass. As I was sitting at a street corner in my car, trying to orient myself to the area of the creek, I looked up at the street sign. It read “Memory Lane.”

That is irony. The (street) sign, in semiotics, would be called a zero-sign, where a presence derives its significance, for me, from an absence. How ironic that the sign is meant to evoke the value of memory (or, rather, nostalgia) when, in fact, the memory of the place has been radically erased.

As we reach advanced old age, much of our reality is defined by absences rather than presences. The scales begin to tip in favor of things gone, over things remaining. Positively and meaningfully engaging with absences becomes another of those existential challenges facing us in old age, akin to Erikson’s notion of integrity versus despair. Irony is perhaps the singular dramatic trope that defines our condition at this stage of life,[3] as we are surrounded by signs that signify absence — a landscape of trees and buildings razed, a house full of photographs of people no longer alive, a newspaper replete with wars that have been fought before.

To return to a landscape we inhabited in the past is to experience the dialectic tension between who we are and who we think we were. Irony occurs when there is a dissonance between the two identities and, as Vesperi has noted, citing Kenneth Burke, the irony can be tragic or comic. Erikson appears to have dwelt on the tragic, without considering the healthy function that the comic can play in sustaining our sense of psychological health (ego integrity). I can laugh at the Memory Lane sign. I can hold the cherished landscape in my heart even though it no longer exists.

Ralph Remembering

Some time ago I became interested in the process of individual remembering while listening to and working with an audio-recorded life history of an old friend, now deceased, whom I came to know initially through a counseling relationship during my days as a geriatric mental health worker. (I will call him Ralph to protect his anonymity.)

I recall with fondness how much of my so-called therapy with my older client (and others) centered around a process of reminiscence. I wouldn’t be so presumptuous as to call this “reminiscence therapy,” however, for that lends an overly professional label to something that felt much more like good company. What was remarkable about my old friend was his depth of attention to his past and his serious obsession with life review. Perhaps most notable about the six hours of audiotape is that they were produced by a man completely alone in his room, door closed, speaking into a microphone, like Samuel Beckett’s figure, Krapp,[4] and unprovoked by the interviewer, so ubiquitous in most life history studies as an external condition of remembering.

To borrow these tapes, I phoned Ralph’s widow, with whom I had intermittent contact since his funeral several years ago, and inquired as to the availability of his tapes for my research. Graciously, she invited me to visit and took me to his room, which I found completely unchanged since his death — not a thing moved from the closet nor bureau, though clean and tidy as a pin, as is always the case with her entire house. Atop the bureau, among numerous family pictures, sat his wooden, slotted case, holding perhaps 100 or more audio cassettes, carefully labeled with dates and themes. Most of the tapes were “mixes” he created from country music stations on the radio. But, sure enough, there were five tapes labeled Golden Memories, and I suspected these contained his personal memories. With her permission, I borrowed the tapes to duplicate, including a couple of music mixes on the theme he called “Old Age Ain’t So Bad.”

Listening to the tapes has been an emotional experience for me. Hearing his gentle and articulate voice lent a renewed presence to our friendship. Discovering them five years after his death was like finding a secret gift, left by a friend too unassuming to demand instant recognition and gratitude.

It would be my wish to identify my friend and provide the recognition he never received during his life. But my friend is dead. He cannot provide his informed consent. My interpretation of his life cannot be confirmed nor co-authored. There is textual evidence, however, that he presumed an audience. Frequently, throughout the tapes, he makes comments such as: “Listen to this,” or “On this tape, we’ll talk about…” Moreover, he explicitly deletes major areas of his life story that he doesn’t want to talk about because they are too painful. While I am personally familiar with those events, I cannot make reference to them, out of respect for his wishes.

“Let me do what I can, be it ever so small each day, and if the dark days of despair and depression overtake me, let me not fail to recall the strength that comforted me in the desolation of other dark days…”

There are, in other words, things that are to be forgotten, but, as I reflect on the meaning of the story, the things forgotten lend meaning to the things remembered. The vividness and animation of his childhood memories stand in stark contrast to the brief and reportorial character of his summary of later life. Whole decades of his adult life are essentially elided. Yet, in his last tape, he brings his life full circle and, while sparing the details, makes reference to the role that failure has played in his life. He authors his own obituary and waxes philosophical as he reflects on his life as he has lived it, standing outside of the remembering itself.

In constructing a retrospective of his life, my friend relied on several tools. The primary tool was his own introspection, and I use the term consciously as a “looking in.” Frequently, he employs visual imagination, “his mind’s eye,” to revisit and describe the landscape of his childhood, experienced on foot. He employs self-drawn maps to recreate the expanding automobile-supported geography of his adolescent and adult years. He uses old photos to recollect his schools, teachers, and fellow students. Old-time songs taped from the radio support his sense of what things “were like” during the Depression. Occasionally, he makes reference to conversations with his brother and phone calls with school mates that helped to confirm memories.

For the most part, he did not, however, use the physical return to origins — the proverbial Trip to Bountiful — as a technique to jog his memory. The closer he came to the end of his life, the more painful did his visits back home become, as the landscape changed and the buildings disappeared. Increasingly, his comfort was derived from dwelling among things absent, not things present. It might be said that his childhood identity was no longer supported by the physical environment. Yet, alternatively, insofar as emotional pain was part of his adult identity, it was supported by the physical environment — an environment of zero signs, where the meaning (as a world lost) is derived from absences and not presences.

I don’t think it is paradoxical to suggest that my friend’s identity as a child and his identity as an adult were maintained concomitantly. In the privacy of his room, he was a time traveler, moving back and forth from the comfort zone of his past as reconstructed through remembering to the painful zone of his present, characterized, ironically, by absences — things he might have done. Some have argued that the work of autobiography in old age seeks continuity of self.[5]

My friend, like Krapp, experienced discontinuity, moving to his childhood through the embodied tool of visualization, but continuingly re-encountering his adult self upon re-entrance into and reflection upon the present. I think he felt trapped by this paradox. Though I occasionally saw Ralph exhibit the comic, for him the irony was, sadly, too often tragic.

And finally, this could well be my obituary, if they would use it, heh, I don’t know if they would or not… born June the 21st, 1920, in a house long ago torn down, to John and Eunice Deckard, in Monroe County, at the foot of what is known as the Handy Hill. Of five children of John and Eunice, two lived beyond the first few months, John Jr., born on the 16th of August, 1917, and myself. I spent my childhood days on Handy Ridge from 1924, when they moved into the house there. I attended the first through eighth grade at the Red Hill School and four years at Unionville High School, graduating April the 21st, 19 and 39. [Dates and names are fictionalized.] The only accomplishment worth mentioning in my life is that I surpassed the allotted time that the Bible allows man, three score years and ten. And time will not permit to tell of all the blunders and mistakes in those years but I can always look back and think of what might have been.

“Though many of my former friends may seem to have forgotten me, let me not forget myself in despair. Though all the world may seem unfriendly, please do not let me become unfriendly with myself…”

In Wendell Berry’s short novel Remembering,[6] Andy Catlett, a figure quite reminiscent of my friend, struggles with the pain of self-hatred, focused on the literal loss of a member — his hand — to a corn-picking machine and the figurative loss of his attachment to his own past. In his role as a farm agent, Andy is attending an agri-business conference in San Francisco and lapses into a deep depression as he ruminates obsessively about days gone by. When experienced as something which is absent, his past brings pain, as he thinks about the good old farmer and mentor Elton Penn:

To Andy, Elton’s absence became a commanding presence. He was haunted by things he might have said to Elton that would not be sayable again in this world. That absence is with him now, but only as a weary fact, known but no longer felt, as if by some displacement of mind or heart he is growing absent from it. It is the absence of everything he knows, and is known by, that surrounds him now. He is absent himself, perfectly absent. Only he knows where he is, and he is no place that he knows. His flesh feels its removal from other flesh that would recognize it or respond to its touch; it is numb with exile. He is present in his body, but his body is absent.

For Andy, recovery and redemption require remembering — re-membering[7] the long chain of personal relationships over time and centered around a place, Port William, Kentucky. In a reverie near the end of the novel, Andy revisits Port William and discovers it occupied by the shades of his ancestors, not absent but present; and it is the world of the dead that leads him to the world of the living. The paradox is resolved, and his depression lifts as absence and presence are revealed as a unity.

While my friend’s obituary might suggest that he could not find the redemption that Andy Catlett found, perhaps at times he did. On his last tape he spoke something that he had composed and written down on the previous New Year’s Day, 1991. He wrote:

Let me do what I can, be it ever so small each day, and if the dark days of despair and depression overtake me, let me not fail to recall the strength that comforted me in the desolation of other dark days. Let me remember the bright days and hours that found me in the days gone by as I wandered in the woods behind my home on Handy Ridge and as I fished in Griffy Creek with my Dad. Let me recall the comfort that would quiet my puzzled mind as I sat beside a little stream and listened to the crows in the trees overhead. Let my memory relive the enjoyment I shared with others at Unionville High School and the fellowship of the church…

Though many of my former friends may seem to have forgotten me, let me not forget myself in despair. Though all the world may seem unfriendly, please do not let me become unfriendly with myself. Lift my downcast eyes upward as I jog my memory of the worth of friends, loved ones, and the sunshine and the moonbeams that flow in my bedroom window as I sit here and write here today…

Let not my disappointments of the past overcome my appreciation of all the good things that have befallen me in those seventy years plus. Give me a few friends who still love me just for what I am, and let me not condemn others lest in so doing I condemn myself. No, don’t let me get lost in the clamor of this world and all its effects, but let me just walk calmly down the path that is chosen for me in my latter days.

Though my sicknesses and my inabilities of these past few years tend to overtake me and I realize I have fallen so very short of the goals that I once had for myself and for my family, in days gone by, then Lord, teach me to be thankful for life and for time’s golden memories that are so good and sweet and will continue to the grave. Then, may I, as dust begins to settle on my life, be thankful for living, and for the privilege of family and friends, and the companionship of those who may, if they didn’t understand me… but, who kinda liked old Ralph, anyway, and were my friends.

Remembering and forgetting constitute a dialectic of presences and absences, each of which cannot exist without the other. What is said always leaves something else unsaid. Voice cannot exist without silence. As for my friend’s personal memory and autobiography, it is not my place to describe things he wants forgotten to an audience he didn’t create. Indeed, I suspect that, for most of us, our obituaries will recount things we did and not things “we didn’t.” Yet, as anthropologists who engage in cultural critique, an important role is to reveal and even resist the forces at work in the forgetting. Chief among those forces are the bulldozers of modern development, scraping the soil of its memory, creating new environments that bear no relationship to a past. When the bulldozers can’t be stopped, it becomes ever so important to employ story to sustain that connection to our past. Old people, as the rememberers, represent a treasure we must protect. They re-member our communities.

Notes

¹ Francis Sanden, in E. Peterson-Veatch, ed., Experiencing Place (Bloomington, IN: Bloomington Hospital Evergreen Project, 1995).

² This article is adapted from a paper read at the 2005 meetings of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, DC, entitled “Talking about Memory: Zero Signs, Irony and the Cultural Construction of Truth.”

³ Maria Vesperi, “A use of irony in contemporary ethnographic narrative,” in Philip B. Stafford, ed., Gray Areas: Ethnographic Encounters with Nursing Home Culture (Santa Fe: SAR Press, 2003).

⁴ Samuel Beckett, Krapp’s Last Tape and Other Dramatic Pieces (New York: Grove, 1960).

⁵ Sharon R. Kaufman, The Ageless Self: Sources of Meaning in Late Life (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1986). Also in Medical Anthropology Quarterly 2(2):189-90, June 1988.

⁶ Wendell Berry, “Remembering,” in Three Short Novels (New York: Counterpoint, 1992).

⁷ Barbara Myerhoff uses the hyphenated term re-membering in an essay entitled “Life history among the elderly: Performance, visibilility, and re-membering.” Kaminsky notes in his Introduction to that volume that Myerhoff claimed that the term originated with Victor Turner. See Barbara Myerhoff, Remembered Lives: The Work of Ritual, Storytelling, and Growing Older (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1992).

Phillip B. Stafford, Ph.D., is a cultural anthropologist and Director of the Center on Aging and Community, Indiana Institute on Disability and Community at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is a founding board member of the Memory Bridge Foundation and the author of numerous articles on culture and dementia, participatory research and planning, and the meaning of home for older people. His recent book, Elderburbia: Aging with a Sense of Place in America, was published by Praeger Press.

Back to the Garden: Woodstock Nation Values Re-emerge by Janet Stambolian and Janice Blanchard

By the time we got to Woodstock, we were half a million strong.
and everywhere there was song and celebration…
We are stardust, we are golden
and we’ve got to get ourselves back to the garden.

— Joni Mitchell, “Woodstock,” 1969

Were You There?

In the interest of full disclosure, Janet wishes to preface this article with the following true confession: “I didn’t actually go to Woodstock. In August of 1969, I was working in the inner city in New Jersey at Upward Bound. My sister attempted to defy our mother and go, but when our mother threatened to kill herself, my sister changed her mind.”

Janice, likewise, did not go to Woodstock. Although technically a boomer, she was only 9-years-old. Although her oldest brother wanted to go, their mother wouldn’t hear of it either!

Whether or not you were there, if you were a certain age or older at the time — and had a pulse — you knew that something really big had happened on Yasgur’s Farm. All these years later, the event still has power as a cultural watershed moment for many baby boomers.

Perhaps We Were Just Looking for a Bit of Good News

Boomers endured serious, wrenching political turmoil and trauma during our youth, and in those days no grief counselors or school psychologists were on hand to help out. Kids essentially dealt with it on their own and within their families, already grappling with grief of their own: four assassinations (including Malcolm X), a war that tore the country apart, the infamous chaos at the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago, and the election of Richard Nixon. Boomers were lurching to the end of the decade crushed, anxious, and yearning for evidence that goodness could still be realized somehow, somewhere.

What happened at Woodstock presented that evidence.

The Woodstock Music and Art Festival occurred during the height of the counterculture movement of the 1960s. From August 15–17, 1969, the place to “be-in” was Max Yasgur’s farm, in Bethel, NY. Nearly half a million young free spirits gathered for “three days of peace and love” to hear stellar music and, in the process, became a spontaneous community that would come to be known as Woodstock Nation.

Despite the rain, mud, shortage of water and food, and an over-abundance of mind-altering drugs, there were no riots, fights, nor acts of violence. Instead, the hallmark experience for many who attended was the sense of community fostered through people sharing what they had, helping one another cope with adversity while grooving to the music and each other. For the generation that had become best known for what we stood against, Woodstock showed the world what we stood for — freedom to be our truest selves, acceptance of one another, and living together in peaceful harmony, even in adversity.

Inspired by the possibility of a different way of living, millions of young people joined others in communes, ashrams, and kibbutzim, or banded together in old houses, farms, and school buses to intentionally create community and live out the values that many felt epitomized Woodstock Nation — communitarianism, egalitarianism, environmentalism, social activism, and a general rejection of traditional values and conventional institutions such as marriage, gender roles, and mainstream religion. In sharing the rhythms of daily life, we created bonds between us in ways unheard of by our parents — sharing personally, intimately, deeply with unrelated people outside of our families. While most eventually rejoined mainstream society, many of us recall this period of living in community with other like-minded individuals as one of the most remarkable, growth-oriented, and satisfying times of our lives.

At the Crossroads Again

Boomers once again stand at a crossroads as we leave middle-aged adulthood and begin the journey into elderhood. As was true when we left adolescence and entered adulthood, the customary path that our parents and grandparents traveled is not one that many are willing and/or able to take into the “sunset years of retirement.” For better or worse, the mid-twentieth-century paradigm of life past age 65 as a time to withdraw from work, collect a pension, and enjoy a life of leisure — in a Sunbelt retirement community or in one’s home — has become a mirage.

While many boomers, especially leading-edge boomers born between 1946 and 1955, tend to be healthier, wealthier, and better educated than their parents, this is a broad generalization for an enormous and diverse generation. For example, unlike our parents and grandparents, a significant number of boomers have never married or are divorced; nearly 20 percent do not have children, and the majority live a great distance from relatives. Furthermore, a significant number of our generation do not have adequate savings or retirement income, especially since the economic downturn of 2008. Chuck Durrett, of McCamant & Durrett, a pioneering architectural firm that specializes in ecologically sensitive cohousing projects for seniors and others, says: “Cooperation is the watershed in grappling with this economic downturn. It doesn’t make any sense — economically, emotionally, and environmentally — for retired people to be living in these isolated homes, making thousands of individual trips to the grocery store and pharmacy.”

For many boomers, this life-stage transition evokes that earlier period in our lives when we rejected the well-worn path ahead and sought out like-minded others to forge a new trail. The values inspired at Woodstock and kept alive in our hearts and minds all these years might once again provide a road map into the future. As the country has changed and become in many ways a strange and foreign land, economic, social, and environmental trends suggest a scenario where it is not only appealing, but increasingly necessary, to “get back to the garden.”

Woodstock and Aging in Community

Tending the Same Garden

In the spring of 2006, I sang along with Joni Mitchell, replaying the song “Woodstock” over and over again, as I made the long drive to Dr. Bill Thomas’s farm in central New York. An emerging nonprofit organization, Second Journey, had convened a group of thought leaders to re-think the meaning and purpose of growing older including where we grow older. Driving, I felt that same elation and anticipation I had felt 37 summers earlier when that “other” event was happening at another New York farm. I was two years shy of 60. “Sixty is the new forty,” my peers were fond of saying. Though I recognized the implicit ageism in that adage, I also recognized that mine was not going to be my mother’s 60! Indeed, boomers have redefined every other life stage; undoubtedly we will change old age as well.

At the end of a powerful weekend, we crafted a phrase to reflect our values and our approach to elderhood: aging in community. Below you will find two tables which suggest some striking similarities between the values that epitomize Woodstock Nation (Table 1) and the principles of Aging in Community (Table 2).

While these parallels are not intentional, they do not surprise me. The majority who gathered at Thomas’s farm were boomers; most had experienced living in community and (likely) felt strong affinities to the values of “Woodstock Nation.” More broadly, many who currently live or who are considering living in housing arrangements that support “aging in community” are boomers. Like our core group, most tasted the experience of community earlier in their lives and are also likely to strive to live the values and principles outlined in the two tables below. This is not to say that all people who embrace the values of Woodstock are necessarily interested in an aging-in-community living arrangement — but they are likely to agree with the core principles. Alternatively, if the values of Woodstock Nation do not resonate for a person, it’s unlikely that the aging-in-community model would be an appealing lifestyle choice.

“As a generation, boomers have a unique relationship to the idea of community,” notes Tony Sirna of The Fellowship of Intentional Communities. “Partly because of the Counterculture, many retirees are choosing to create non-corporate senior cohousing, as opposed to traditional senior communities in which they feel institutionalized.”

Economics, demographics, and politics may once again rally boomers to rebel against the current prescribed social norms for old age. Already, we are seeing signs across the cultural landscape that many boomers — particularly in their choice of living arrangements — are coming full circle back to their Woodstock-era values. Whether they live in a group house with services brought in as needed, a shared apartment, a full-on hippie-style commune, or an aging-in-community neighborhood, they will likely live longer and more fulfilling later lives if they choose to grow old together. “The results here are truly amazing,” declares Kirby Dunn, of Homeshare in Burlington, VT. Referencing a number of studies that gauge the effects of shared housing, Dunn concludes, “Across all programs and age-brackets, people say they feel safer, are less lonely, happier, and sleep better.”

Table 1: Woodstock Nation Values

Communitarianism is belief that “we are all in this together,” that people are interdependent, need one another, and mutually benefit from loving one another. This philosophy led to the flowering of communes, ashrams, intentional communities, and other collaborative economic and social arrangements that centered on living more interdependently. The back-to-the-land movement embraced sustainability, self-sufficiency, living simply, raising children consciously, and caring for the land and all living beings.
Egalitarianism is a commitment to treating everyone equally regardless of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, or age. This value was the basis of the social movements in the 1960s and 1970s (Civil Rights, Women’s Movement and Gay/Lesbian Rights).
Environmentalism is a belief that the earth is a fragile and interdependent ecosystem that has finite resources, and humans have a moral obligation to be good stewards of these resources. This value resulted in activism that led to the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Earth Day, the Greenpeace movement, and numerous non-profit organizations dedicated to protecting animals, plants, air, ocean, and land.
Integration of Mind, Body, and Spirit is belief that the body, mind, and spirit are interconnected. Boomers began exploring other religions, philosophies, and spiritual practices as well as adopting a more holistic view of health, which led to interest in organic foods; alternative medicine, such as acupuncture, homeopathy, and natural childbirth; and physical and mental fitness practices such as tai chi, yoga, and meditation.
Social Activism is belief that the status quo or “Establishment” of the time was unfair, corrupt, based on greed and authoritarianism, and headed in the wrong direction for the health of the people and the planet. Further, this value implied direct action such as protests, marches, boycotts, and sit-ins to promote social, economic, political, and environmental change.

Table 2: Aging in Community Principles

Inclusive — People of all ages, race/ethnicities, and abilities, especially elders, are welcome.
Sustainable — Residents are committed to a lifestyle that is sustainable environmentally, economically, and socially. Size matters. People need to know each other, and scale determines the nature of human interaction. Small is better.
Healthy — The community encourages and supports wellness of the mind, body, and spirit and, to the same degree, plans and prepares programs and systems that support those dealing with disease, disability, and death.
Accessible — The setting provides easy access to the home and community. For example, all homes, businesses, and public spaces are wheelchair-friendly and incorporate universal design features. Multiple modes of transportation are encouraged.
Interdependent — The community fosters reciprocity and mutual support among family, friends, and neighbors and across generations.
Engaged — The community promotes opportunities for community participation, social engagement, education, and creative expression.

In comparing these two tables, it is easy to see how the values of Woodstock Nation and the principles of aging in community harmonize in a number of ways when building community. Combining them together, they can be implemented in the design, structure, and interaction of a community in the following ways:

Embrace Interdependence

No person is an island — by our human nature, we need one another. Like other primates, we do best in small groups such as villages or neighborhoods, even when located in urban settings. By acknowledging this human condition, we can better design and build homes and neighborhoods to maximize human interaction and interdependence, particularly in later life. By sharing common space, pooling and sharing resources, and fostering reciprocity and mutual support, we give up some privacy and the illusion of “independence” in exchange for deeper human connections and potentially a more meaningful quality of life.

Plan for Everyone

Diversity is the spice of life, and inclusiveness builds the most cohesive and welcoming community. Planning and building for all ages, abilities, income levels, and backgrounds includes incorporating accessible design features (such as universal design principles), housing for all income levels, and community spaces that can be used by all age groups and ability levels.

Incorporate Sustainability

At every level we should strive to reduce an individual’s or the community’s use of natural resources. For example, at the planning and building levels, we can draw on the criteria established for L.E.E.D. (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification; build smaller living units/dwellings and more densely designed neighborhoods; aim for net zero or very low carbon footprint buildings; and plan site orientation to maximize daylight, views, and solar gain. Within the day-to-day operations, we should maximize ease for residents to recycle, compost, reuse, reclaim, or redirect resources; use alternative or public transportation; support the local economy; and incorporate other measures that increase sustainability.

Encourage Wellness of Mind, Body, and Spirit

Whether in the home or in the community, there should be thought given to creating spaces for spiritual and physical practices that encourage wellness. A meditation garden, labyrinth, community garden, or an area in which to practice yoga, tai chi, or meditation are just a few examples of places where individuals or small groups can practice wellness. In larger communities, paths that can accommodate walking, skating, or biking; sports areas; or an exercise facility not only encourage personal fitness and health — they also provide opportunities to form social connections and friendships that build community.

Promote Social Activism

Ideally, aging in community not only promotes activism within the community through self-governance, volunteerism, and other social contributions — it also reaches out to the larger community in similar ways. Creating a good place to live requires consciousness and action on issues inside and outside the neighborhood, whether it is creating a community “time bank,” lobbying for access to public transportation, or protesting a new development on environmental grounds.

Aging in Community

A 21st-Century Approach to Community Development

The aforementioned strategies are more than theoretical ideas of how to build great communities. Comprehensive design — master site planning, architecture, landscape — plays a critical role in furthering the social values and principles that inspire the aging-in-community model. That model anticipates from the beginning the integration of what might be thought of as dual axis: (1) the built environment and (2) the social software.

The built environment refers to tangible aspects of community development — site plan, layout and relationships of formal to informal interaction, unit design, building orientation, green/universal design — in sum, any aspect of design that helps residents experience a sense of place. Examples of the built environment could include new neighborhoods or master-planned communities, retrofitted apartment or condominium buildings, cohousing neighborhoods, housing cooperatives, shared housing, affinity housing, or other housing and neighborhood configurations including ones for those in need of more intensive medical or supportive environments.

Social software refers to those aspects of a community that feed social, spiritual, physical, emotional, educational, creative, and civic life that help establish a sense of community connectedness among all neighbors/residents. They include programs and activities that enhance the quality of life for residents and which, ultimately, maximize the ability of residents to remain in their own homes or residences of choice and remain connected to their communities. Examples of social software include community-based health services such as Eden at Home; the Nurse Block Program and Share the Care; cultural enrichment programs like the Circle of Care Project and Elders Share the Arts; civic engagement programs such as the Experience Corp and Environmental Alliance of Senior Involvement; and community-building programs such as community gardens and farmers’ markets.

The degree to which both the built environment and the social software are brought into alignment from conception exponentially increases the probability of creating the hoped-for outcome — a supportive neighborhood that enhances an individual’s well-being and quality of life at home and as an integral part of the community across the age continuum.

The aging-in-community model draws on the expertise of developers and builders to expedite the design and construction of new projects; however, it also invites future residents to become involved and consulted in decisions affecting their eventual community.

Conclusion

Aging in Community represents a proactive model that intentionally creates supportive neighborhoods to enhance the well-being and quality of life for residents of all ages and abilities, particularly elders. The model promotes a deliberate consciousness about being a good neighbor and a good steward of our fragile planet.

It encourages a sense of social trust and interdependence which is strengthened through positive interactions and collaboration in shared interests and pursuits. The model recognizes elders’ wisdom and experience and creates opportunities to share these qualities with others in the community and in the community-at-large.

For the past 40 years, through life’s changes and against formidable odds, many idealistic boomers have retained their commitment to the values that inspired them during the amazing period of transformation and expansion in their youth. The time is now for planners, architects, developers, and builders to work diligently and help those who want to “get back to the garden” do so with a strong sense of community, meaning, and full engagement.

Notes

1 See “The Roseto effect: a 50-year comparison of mortality rates” at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1695733/.

Janet Stambolian, M.Ed., is Director of Business Development for Mackenzie Architects. She has devoted her 35-year career in construction, project management, marketing, and business development to creating environments that enhance the quality of life, promote meaningful intergenerational connection, and tread lightly on the environment. A lifelong community builder, Janet connects and engages people in a common goal through a team-centered, holistic approach. She works to expedite the design, development, and construction of new models of communities nationally.

Janice Blanchard, M.S.P.H., is a gerontologist and nationally recognized writer, speaker, and consultant on aging issues. For 20 years she has worked on the cutting edge of public policy and programs promoting a new vision of elders as valuable members of our communities and of elderhood as a distinct phase of the human life cycle.

Creating Community in Later Life by Bolton Anthony

There is an ad in a trade publication marketing East Coast retirement properties to baby boomers. The text reads something like,

Last Chance Mountain, a village that lives up to the mountain. Relax here, play here, indulge here. Nestled at ease among the near-limitless expanses of one of the East’s last surviving wilderness areas, Last Chance Mountain is synonymous with luxurious adventure. The rustic elegance of its mountaintop Village welcomes your mind, body and spirit to reconnect with nature and rediscover yourself. This is where your family comes to play. This is where you come to relax. This is where you revel in luxury. This is your mountain. This is your home.

You long to “rediscover yourself” and live moreauthentically. Midlife forces us to confront “the lost and counterfeit places within us.” It challenges us to release “our deeper, innermost self — our true self.” It challenges us “to come home to ourselves [and] become who we really are.”[2] An age-old question resurfaces. Though we thought we resolved it in our youth, it returns with new urgency born of our sense that time is running out: Who am I? In the tumult of raising a family and making a career we had somehow lost track of ourselves. Who am I now — now that the nest is empty and the career winding down? Once the frenetic activity of midlife starts to wane and things quiet a bit, we can hear the “still, small voice”[3] calling us to “come home” to ourselves.
You long to live more simply. We feel an urge to slim down and disencumber ourselves: lose those extra pounds, clear out the attic and our storage unit (assuming we’ve kept ourselves to one!), and rid ourselves of useless regrets and poisonous resentments. The Hindus call this time of life our Forest Dwelling period, when it is appropriate to leave behind our previous things, roles, and duties — a letting go we in the West often find very threatening. But as Drew Leder writes in Spiritual Passages: “To the Hindu, aging is more than a series of meaningless losses. There are modes of liberation contributing to spiritual growth. If age strips away pride, pleasures, and profit, all the better… If our responsibilities are diminished, the time available to explore the sacred expands.”[4]
You long to “reconnect with nature.” We have vague memories of a natural world rife with magic and mystery. As adults, weren’t we supposed to put aside such “childish” views? And yet, our intimation — shared with Native Americans — that “the Earth is alive,” is a stubborn one. We dwell among “other beings, other forms of awareness, our voices interweave among others more-than-human,”[5] Anthony Weston assures us. Step outside at dawn and catch the mere snippet of a bird’s song, and you are instantly transported back into this primal oneness with the world. It is only a matter of letting “the soft animal of your body love what it loves.”[6]
And finally, we long for community. We long for companions who will share our excitement for this “second journey” in life — companions who will help sustain our own efforts to live more simply and authentically. For the paradoxical truth is, “We never get to the bottom of our selves on our own.” Indeed, we only “discover who we are face to face and side by side with others in work, love and learning.” Remember those three words: work, love and learning.[7]

Community is what the developers of Last Chance Mountain are hawking — community served up with a heavy dollop of nostalgia. “The rustic elegance of its mountaintop Village” evokes images of a simpler time. “This is where your family comes to play” — as if all families were still like the Waltons. “This is your mountain”: not our mountain — strange community, that. (Never mind the presumption that one could actually own a mountain — that all this bounteous world, including this body I walk around in, was ever anything other than on temporary loan.) “Relax HERE. Play HERE. Indulge HERE,” the ad whispers. But who are the guests at this feast? The short answer is, those who share our “lifestyle.”

That leads us to a useful label for Last Chance Mountain, coined by the authors of Habits of the Heart: a “life-style enclave.” Unlike genuine community, which celebrates diversity and “the different callings of all,” life-style enclaves celebrate “the narcissism of similarity.”[8] Those similarities usually include age: Sun City developments, for example, enforce a 55+-age restriction. And they always include income level: only those who, like us, can afford to ““revel in luxury” are welcome; and, in case of doubt, the guard at the gatehouse can pull your credit report. More importantly, community at Last Chance Mountain embraces only private life, and its rituals revolve around leisure and consumption.

“We never get to the bottom of ourselves on our own. We discover who we are face to face and side by side with others in work, love and learning.”

— Habits of the Heart

Poking fun at Last Chance Mountain is a bit like hunting game with a Kalashnikov (though, trust me, it is a real place, and my only change to the advertisement copy was to rechristen the mountain). But it is important to locate developments like Last Chance Mountain within their sociohistorical context: they are outgrowths of a view of retirement as “a time to take it easy, enjoy leisure activities and a much-deserved rest from work.” This view, according to Marc Freedman, author of Prime Time, is largely the invention of one man, Del Webb, the Arizona developer/promoter whose Sun City launched the retirement community industry. It is a view that Freedman believes has lost its hold on the American imagination. When asked to choose, Americans between the ages of 50–75, by a margin of three-to-one, preferred to think of retirement as “a time to begin a new chapter in life by being active and involved, starting new activities, and setting new goals.” The numbers were even more dramatic among the boomer and pre-boomer cohorts.[9]

The subtitle of Freedman’s book contends that “Baby Boomers Will Revolutionize Retirement and Transform America.” The obvious next question is, “How?” And, specifically, how in relation to this issue of community. First — though it’s a bit late in the game — let’s make an important clarification. “Community” has two aspects. When we speak of “new model communities,” we mean the physical container — the hardware, if you will. When we speak of “new models of community,” we mean thespiritual (for want of a better word) container — the software. So let me conclude with a potpourri of unsystematic ideas about where our dual search might be leading.

First, it takes only a cursory investigation to discover a vanguard of new communities, whose hallmarks are sustainability and Traditional Neighborhood Design. The more compact design of these communities encourages bicycling and walking for short trips by providing destinations close to home and work. The “sense of place” they create invites community and connects people to each other and the natural world in mutual respect. Simultaneously, interest in cohousing and other intentional community models is intense, though it is still a ways from becoming mainstream. And the ranks of architects committed to sustainable design in harmony with the environment are swelling.

This said, you may rightly point out, “Our suburbs are filled with houses that are bigger than ever.” The square footage of new homes continues to soar in inverse relation to the dwindling size of the American family. Those are not cabins they’re building on Last Chance Mountain. Where’s the evidence of a desire to live more simply? Architect Sarah Susanka, author of The Not So Big House (the brisk sales of which are at least anecdotal evidence that change may be in the wind), laments: “So many houses, so big with so little soul.” Then she asks, “Are the dreams that build them bigger? Or is it simply that there seems to be no alternative?”[10] I agree with Susanka that it is the latter. Developers are conservative by necessity; the stakes are high, and deviating from a tried and true formula is fraught with risk. Change will come as successful innovations become more visible and the aging boomers come to understand with greater clarity their hearts’ desires.

The places we live are the physical containers which — by virtue of their wise or careless design — encourage or discourage our interaction with others and with the more-than-human world. But our deepest sense of community is rooted in the intangible, in that network of relationships which supports and sustains our personal growth and spiritual deepening and expands our opportunities for service and engagement in the world. In the past, these networks grew in the soil of small-town life, extended family, and church affiliation. Such primary communities for many — for most? — have lost their relevance. The task we have set ourselves, then, is the monumental one of creating surrogates for the extended family and church community and the various roles they have played through the many seasons of our lives.

Reflecting on the deep friendships we form in our teens and twenties may give us clues about how to go about creating community in later life. Those early friendships grew in the soil of shared, usually intense experiences. Later life is less about experience and more about meaning. Later life calls us to reflect on and understand our cumulative experiences — a radically “unshareable” activity. If we are to create new friendships in later life, we must consciously create new shareable experiences. If they are to be deep friendships, they must be around experiences that engage our deepest, emergent self. That’s probably not golf — or, more generally, leisure and consumption, the stock and trade of life-style enclaves. It may be those things which have to do with “work, love and learning” (remember those): it may be social action, or the “Great Work”[11] of caring for Earth, or a deep engagement in teaching and learning. At the same time — though it would seem to be an example of exactly what I am arguing for — I have misgivings about the intense negotiations that, at least from the outside looking in, seem characteristic of most cohousing developments. A certain indirection seems called for. Couples who spend a lot of time “working on their relationship” rarely succeed as well as couples who simply “do things together.”

“Human conversation is the most ancient and easiest way to cultivate the conditions for change — personal change, community and organizational change, planetary change.”

— Margaret Wheatley

Finally, I have been for a very long time interested in what I called Communities for Imagining the Future, a network of centers around which sustainable residential developments might emerge. Each center — and these might include colleges, retreat centers, organic farms, earth literacy centers, holistic healing centers — would be a kind of magnet that serves as the “strong attractor” not only for the residential community, but also for a certain kind of conversation within the culture. I firmly believe, with Margaret Wheatley, that significant change — “personal change, community and organizational change, planetary change” — begins with conversations about things that matter.[12]

How can I live more simply and authentically? When do I feel most alive and creative? What is the work I am called to? What is the Earth asking of me? What is my gift to the family of Earth? These questions speak to all of us in every season of our lives, but they have special urgency for elders whose personal work is focused on the legacy they will leave and whose societal role is to speak for the unborn generations and for the Earth. My vision for Communities for Imagining the Future is not one I’ve succeeded in moving forward.

Several years ago, in connection with a class I was teaching, I re-read Watership Down, Richard Adams’ novel about an intrepid band of rabbits on an epic journey in search of “home.”[13] One could learn all one needs to know about community from this “children’s” classic: that community is born in our shared experiences, that it is the stories we tell which hold our sense of community, that our very survival depends on our trust in the rich diversity of gifts each brings to the group. And finally, that what we want most from life is the sense of participating in an adventure. Not Last Chance Mountain’s “luxurious adventure” (which is a contradiction in terms), but an adventure where the outcome is in doubt and courage and hope are called for. The outcome will be in doubt if the challenge we have set ourselves to is bold enough. The hope we will need is not an excessive confidence that we will win through to the end, but the simple willingness to take the next step. As Tennyson’s Ulysses says to his aging companions, “Come, my friends. ‘Tis not too late to seek a newer world.” Adventure, yes, that’s what we want — even in later life.

Notes

¹ Maria Polletta, “Rate at which Baby Boomers will turn 65.” May 27, 2011.

² Sue Monk Kidd, When the Heart Waits: Spiritual Direction for Life’s Sacred Questions (New York: Harper, Collins, 1990), p. 4.

³ Harry R. Moody and David Carroll, The Five Stages of the Soul, Charting the Spiritual Passages That Shape Our Lives (New York: Anchor Books, 1997), pp. 3–5.

⁴ Drew S. Leder, Spiritual Passages: Embracing Life’s Sacred Journey (New York: Tarcher/Putnam, 1997), p. 21.

⁵ Anthony Weston, Back to Earth: Tomorrow’s Environmentalism (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1994), p. 79.

⁶ Mary Oliver, “Wild Geese” in New and Selected Poems (Boston: Beacon Press, 1992), p. 110.

⁷ Robert N. Bellah, et. al., Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life (New York: Harper and Row, 1985), p. 84. Few books have provided such a penetrating analysis of the historic tension in American culture between individualism and communitarianism. As this tension again plays itself out in the strident rhetoric of the current election campaign, it is fitting to include the full quote: “There are truths we do not see when we adopt the language of radical individualism. We find ourselves not independently of other people and institutions but through them. We never get to the bottom of ourselves on our own. We discover who we are face to face and side by side with others in work, love and learning. All of our activity goes on in relationships, groups, associations, and communities ordered by institutional structures and interpreted by cultural patterns of meaning. Our individualism is itself one such pattern. And the positive side of our individualism, our sense of the dignity, worth, and moral autonomy of the individual, is dependent in a thousand ways on a social, cultural, and institutional context that keeps us afloat even when we cannot very well describe it. There is much in our life that we do not control, that we are not even ‘responsible’ for, that we receive either as grace or face as tragedy; things Americans habitually prefer not to think about. Finally, we are not simply ends in ourselves, either as individuals or as a society. We are parts of a larger whole that we can neither forget nor imagine in our own image without paying a high price. If we are not to have a self that hangs in a void, slowly twisting in the wind, these are issues we cannot ignore.”

⁸ Habits of the Heart, p. 72.

⁹ Marc Freedman, Prime Time: How Baby Boomers Will Revolutionize Retirement and Transform America(Public Affairs, 1999), p. 224. Freedman’s history of how modern retirement was “invented” is a spellbinding one.

¹⁰ Sarah Susanka, The Not So Big House: A Blueprint for the Way We Really Live (Newtown, CT: Taunton Press, 2001), p. 7. Susanka’s book bears the appropriate dedication: “For our grandchildren.”

¹¹ Thomas Berry, The Great Work: Our Way into the Future (New York: Bell Tower, 1999).

¹² Margaret J. Wheatley. Turning to One Another: Simple Conversations to Restore Hope to the Future. (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 2002), p. 3.

¹³ Richard Adams, Watership Down (New York: Avon Books, 1972).

Friendships in Later Life by John G. Sullivan

Old friends, old friends
sat on their park bench like bookends
A newspaper blown through the grass
falls on the round toes
of the high shoes of the old friends

Old friends, winter companions, the old men
Lost in their overcoats, waiting for the sun

Can you imagine us years from today,
sharing a park bench quietly
How terribly strange to be seventy

Old friends,
memory brushes the same years,
silently sharing the same fears.

Time it was and what a time it was, it was . . .
a time of innocence,
a time of confidences
Long ago, it must be,
I have a photograph.
Preserve your memories,
they’re all that left you.(1)

The poignant song of Paul Simon speaks of friends who are 70 — in their autumn and winter years. Simon was in his late twenties when he wrote the song, and he saw the old friends in sad decline.(2) Memories are all that is left them, says the last line.

But suppose that is not the only way to see and be seventy, to see or be in the last seasons of a life? Suppose that old friends, like those we call “old souls,” have more to offer than the song suggest.

In my recent writing, I look at the lifetime in four stages: Spring Student and Summer Householder on the upward and outward arc; Autumn Forest Dweller and Winter Sage on the downward and inward arc.(3)

I see each season as bringing its own gifts and suggest what I call “integral living.” By that, I mean the capacity to not identify with any one stage but instead to have access to all stages at any moment. In such fashion, we begin to live in a timeless way.

What gifts do the Autumn Forest Dweller and the Winter Sage bring to friendships — especially to old friendships — those that have endured over time? Think first of the various kinds of friendships: the friendship of two spouses, the friendship of fathers and mothers with their daughters and sons. Consider the longtime friendships of grandparents and their grandchildren. Consider the relationships of brothers and sisters and others in the family circle. Imagine further long-term friendships whose roots are in common work or common causes — from classmates to workmates to volunteers. Think even of new friendships made by elders with contemporaries — with children, youth, householders; with other forest dweller and others exploring the depth dimension.

What gifts do the Autumn Forest Dweller and the Winter Sage bring to such friendships?

First of all the Forest Dweller-in-us and the Sage-in-us partake of what I call waterfall energy as they enter the downward and inward half of the circle.

Forest Dweller is learning to release and return to what has always been at core. The skills are letting go and letting be. Letting go does not mean giving up relationships; it means letting them be. Releasing the tendency to control others, re-owning the projections we place on others. Allowing others — especially those we have known longest, to be exactly as they are — on their own path, following their own journey, navigating their own joys and sorrows. Detaching from the desire to control does not mean ceasing to care. Rather, we hold the tension — caring deeply and even having views on what we find healthier ways of achieving goals. Yet, we give up controlling people; we give up controlling events. We rest in one of the great insights of India’s wisdom ways, namely to act while renouncing the fruits of action. We act as wisely and compassionately as we can. We leave the results in the hand of powers beyond ourselves.

What are the fruits of this hard-won releasing?

Love without possessiveness.
Compassion without condescension.
Joy arising from the practice of gratitude, a sympathetic joy in the good of the other without envy or jealousy.
Peace without breaking the bonds of oneness, peace in our goals, peace in our means, peace in every step.

We approach these “releasings” in the spirit of Michelangelo who, when asked how to make a beautiful statue, advised the inquirer to find a piece of marble where the statue already existed and to chip away what was impeding its manifestation. This is the waterfall way. The gifts and the qualities are already in us. We need not strive to achieve them. We need only let go of what we are doing to obscure their manifestation.

Friendship and Time

Imagine again the old men sitting on the park bench like bookends. Imagine they were 70 in 1968, the year the song was released. This means that they would have been born in 1898. And the round toes of their high shoes evoke that earlier age. Surely they had lived through much as had their age cohorts. Their memories stretch back to another time, another way of being. It is winter and they are waiting for the sun. They have much to share. They can speak easily, leaving much unsaid yet understood. They are comfortable with the silence from which arises what can be said and what lies deeper than words.

When old friends have shared a lifetime, much can be said with only a small reference: a song, a proverb, a place, a family ritual, an event. The familiar allusion, the thing half-said, suggested only. Winter in some cultures calls to mind the waters of unknowing. I think of these old friends as dwelling in things known and things unknown. I see the present moment expanding to include vague intimations of past, present, and all that is yet to be. The mystery of it all deepens, revealing and concealing, disclosing and closing again.

Winter wisdom is less certain. We know and do not know our friends. We know and do not know ourselves. As if the universe and even our planetary home is vaster than we know. As if each individual partakes of that vastness. As if in the realm of soul and spirit, what is most ultimate is most elusive, and we are content with glimpses only. A vastness in and beyond all things.

We are changing like a garden changes, seasonally and also in other ways. I think of Robert Irwin who designed the garden at the J. Paul Getty Museum outside of Los Angeles. Of that garden, he says, it is:

Ever changing never less than whole.
Ever present never twice the same.

So it is with those we count as longtime friends. Those we have known over many ages and stages. Over many seasons unfolding. Through joys and grieving and many hurts to the heart. And in it all, landscapes of shared histories, shared memories, shared fears, and shared hopes.

Honoring Our Ancestors

In the native American way, elders are called “grandfather” or “grandmother.” So too are mountains and other elements of nature that are old and wise. While not everyone is a biological grandparent, all who reach a certain age and manifest a wisdom precious to the tribe gain this honorific title.

We can learn much about the skills needed for friendships in later life by focusing on grandparents, in this expanded sense. At their best, I see them fulfilling three tasks:

to keep the big things big and the little things little
to encourage creativity (in themselves and others), and
to bless the young.(4)

Let’s look at each of these “elder tasks” in turn:

1.) Keeping the big things big and the little things little.

Grandparents at their best see us in a much longer view, knowing the wisdom of “This too shall pass.” We in our roles of youth or adult often stay stuck in the limited drama of the moment. (Think of first love, first loss, first event that reveals life as unfair and unjust, the first betrayal, etc.)

2.) Encouraging creativity

Grandparents can remain supple by encouraging creativity in themselves. And grandparents at their best can be allies of the young by encouraging them to be daring, take risks, follow their dreams. We — in our roles as youth or adults — often are locked into what those in the “real world” will say.

3.) Blessing the young

Grandparents at their best see us in our unique core beauty; they see us as deeper than our actions and hence in their presence we often become our better selves. We — in our roles of youth or adult — often do not see each other’s core beauty; we often freeze one another in stories from the past.

So how do we bring these three grandparent gifts to each of our relationships? In one sense, the answer is in the adverbs: Do it ever-more lovingly, compassionately, joyfully, and peacefully.

In another sense, it is through ceasing to approach life as if it were ours to control.

Old Friends to Soul Friends

A Celtic tale: A group of ancient Irish warriors rested while on a hunt. They were led by their chieftain, the great Fionn MacCumhail (pronounced Fin ma Kool.) While they rested for some moments, a debate began. The question was “What was the finest music in the world?” And Each warrior in turn ventured an answer:

A cuckoo calling
The ring of spear on shield
The belling of a stag across the water
The baying of a tuneful pack
The song of a lark
The laugher of a gleeful girl
The whisper of a moved one

“Good sounds all,” said Fionn.

“Tell us, chief, what do you think?”

“The music of what happens,” said the great Fionn, “that is the finest music in the world.”(5)

The Irish poet Patrick Kavanagh agrees in his oft-quoted lines:

So be reposed and praise, praise, praise
The way it happened and the way it is.(6)

Such music is not easy to appreciate. To hear it, we must relinquish control. Letting go of control, we enter into a more spacious loving. For winter wisdom has its own warmth as the old ones waiting for the sun knew. And love is there. As poet Kathleen Raine puts it: “Unless you see a thing in the light of love, you do not see it at all.” (7)

In Celtic Ireland, having a soul friend (Anam Ċara) was highly praised.(8) Such a friend — almost a confessor or spiritual advisor — allowed the fullest sharing of intimate thoughts and feelings, longings and belongings, aspirations and uncertainties. I see the soul friend as sharing in one’s spiritual journey as well as one’s outward life passage. Hence soul-friendship has overtones of what Brother David Steindl-Rast calls “The More and Ever More.” Yet it retains a blend of earthiness, candor, humor, and large-mindedness often rare. A hospitality to the full range of human experience: bodily and emotional, insightful and reflective, mysterious and unimaginatively vast and — at the same time — present in the smallest event. Here the distinction between secular and sacred dissolves. Earth and sky dance together. Things divided are recognized again as whole. Attention is given to matters visible and invisible; things ancient become new. Time merges with the timeless. Such is the province of the soul friend. At best, soul friends leave behind narrow dualism. They keep widening the circle of inclusion so as to embrace the Great Family of elements, plants, animals, and humankind as well.

Soul friends touch the worlds of Source, Self, and the Circle of Nature. As they do, all is increasingly suffused with mystery.

P. A. Mendoza in conversation with Nobel prize-winning author Gabriel García Márquez asked the author about his thirty-year relationship with his wife Mercedes. Márquez replied: “I know her so well now that I have not the slightest idea who she really is.”(9) This loving openness is the fruit of letting go and letting be. It fosters a life where each friend is capable of surprising us, capable of appearing newly, again and again.

I leave the last word with love. Love unfinished. As the lover remembers a lasting love not yet returned. They are not in a city. Not on park benches. Rather the woman is nodding by a hearth fire. And the man is seeing her in his mind’s eye as she is and was and will be for him.

Here is William Butler Yeats’ poem “When you are old”:

When you are old and gray and full of sleep,
And nodding by the fire, take down this book,
And slowly read, and dream of the soft look
Your eyes had once, and of their shadows deep;

How many loved your moments of glad grace,
And loved your beauty with love false or true;
But one man loved the pilgrim soul in you,
And loved the sorrows of your changing face.

And bending down beside the glowing bars,
Murmur, a little sadly, how Love fled
And paced upon the mountains overhead
And hid his face amid a crowd of stars.(10)

Notes

1 From the “Bookends” album – the fourth studio album of Simon and Garfunkel. This album was released April 3, 1968 by Columbia Records. It was produced by Paul Simon, Art Halee and Art Garfunkel. The song “Old Friends” also appears on the Columbia Records 1999 CD compilation, “The Best of Simon and Garfunkel”.

² In April 1968, when the Bookends album was released, Paul Simon (born October 13, 1941) was in his 27th year. Oct. 13th, 2012 will be his 71st birthday.

³ See my book, The Spiral of the Seasons: Welcoming the Gifts of Later Life (Chapel Hill, NC: Second Journey Publications, 2009). In this book, I overlay the four seasons on the classical four stages of life from ancient India, getting Spring Student, Summer Householder, Autumn Forest Dweller, and Winter Sage.

⁴ I learned these three functions from poet Robert Bly in one of his public talks. He spoke of them as three functions of the sovereign. I see them as functions of grandparents at their best.

⁵ See James Stephens, Irish Fairy Tales (New York: Macmillan Company, 1920). Also see John J. Ó Ríordáin, The Music of What Happens: Celtic Spirituality: A View from the Inside (Dublin: The Columba Press, 1996), p.7. I have altered slightly the telling.

⁶ See Patrick Kavanagh, Come Dance with Kitty Stobling, and Other Poems (London: Longman, 1960) Also see Patrick Kavanagh, Dancing with Kitty Stobling: The Patrick Kavanagh Poetry Award Winners, 1971-2003, edited by Antoinette Quinn (Dublin: Lilliput Press in association with The Patrick Kavanagh Society, 2004).

⁷ Quoted in John O’Donohue, Anam Ċara: A Book of Celtic Wisdom (New York: HarperCollins Publishers,1997), p. 65.

⁸ See John O’Donohue, Anam Ċara.

⁹ Quoted in John O’Donohue, Anam Ċara, p. 91. For the original, see Plinio Apuleyo Mendoza, The Fragrance of Guava: Conversations with Gabriel García Márquez (London: Faber and Faber, 1988, c. 1982).

¹⁰ See The Collected Poems of W. B. Yeats (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. 1956), pp. 40–41.

Books of Interest: Life Gets Better! review by Barbara Kammerlohr

Life Gets Better: The Unexpected Pleasures of Growing Older
by Wendy Lustbader
Tarcher Books, 2011

Wendy Lustbader has long been a soldier in the war against western culture’s bias against aging. With Life Gets Better, she argues that our fear and dread of growing older is unjustified, and she targets assumptions that youth is the best time of life. In the book’s introduction, she touts the book as “a counterbalance to the negative, stultifying stereotypes about aging. I show the worship of youth to be a colossal error.”

The book is a series of chapters on topics such as self-knowledge, gratitude, spirituality, resilience, and other psychological traits that research has shown to lead to a satisfying life. Lustbader incorporates her own life experiences, stories of her clients and her family, and her knowledge about the late-life developmental stage. In a book full of information and real-life stories about how the aging process actually works, she proclaims that everything about life but the physical gets better with time, and she succinctly points out the reasons.

Here are some of the reasons that buttress her optimism:

As self-knowledge deepens with years, we get better at handling relationships and decisions with less frenzy. There is an inner freedom in being less constrained by other peoples’ judgments and expectations.
Gratitude for what goes right in life deepens and, as we focus on what is right, our appreciation leads to a growing inner contentment. After the experiences of loss that are inevitable, we no longer take for granted the things that remain. We begin to appreciate and cherish them.
Decision-making can be done without frenzy and worry; we can call on deep knowledge from lessons of a lifetime. Memories of mistakes from which we have recovered, misadventures and problems we have solved, are all there to use when similar situations arise.
We are less fearful of adversity. After all, we have faced many challenges and noted that most issues eventually work out for the best.
As spirituality deepens, petty concerns recede to their rightful place in the background. We begin to learn that the most important activity in life is inside each of us.
We have learned the pleasures of generosity and, as we become more interested in others, that interest begins to occupy a central place in how we regard the value of what we do.

However, as interesting as the information on the late-life developmental stage may be, it is the copious number of stories of her friends, family members, and clients that bring spice and enjoyment to reading the book. For every principle she explains, there is at least one, and frequently more, poignant story — like the one below — of someone wrestling with that specific issue.

One example is a story about gratitude:

Physical limitation contains its opposite — freedom — because it jars us into prizing that which we can still do. Our capacities, like standing at a stove for hours, go largely unrecognized until threatened.

A friend in her early sixties has severe arthritis in her hands. She takes care of frail women in their eighties who have lost their way through dementia. Her hands sometimes make it hard for her to accomplish simple tasks, but the women are in no hurry. They are delighted by her humor and kindness, and they love the meals she places before them that are prepared with unfailing thoughtfulness. Alone in her house, my friend sometimes has to force away tears about her own future; but with the ladies, she feels the flush of every competence she continues to enjoy.

In considering the audience for this book, I could think of no age group that would not benefit from its information and wisdom. To those well into this last developmental stage, it explains why life is infinitely more satisfying than we were led to believe by our youth-focused culture. My hope, however, is that it will be more widely read by the entire population, especially by younger people who can then exercise a positive approach to their own aging process. A more universal understanding of this most important developmental stage can also lead to less bias and fear about aging. Readers of Itineraries may want to consider gifting this to members of a younger generation.

Wendy Lustbader is the author of several books and essays that have earned her a national reputation in the field of aging. A medical social worker, she holds the rank of Affiliate Associate Professor in the School of Social Work at the University of Washington. She is a skilled psychotherapist and experienced medical social worker. Her other books include: Taking Care of Family Members, 1993; Counting on Kindness, 1993; What’s Worth Knowing, 2004; and Hidden in Plain Sight, 2008.

From the Editor, Gaya Erlandson…

The elders say we must let go of the shore —
push off into the middle of the river,
keep our eyes open, and our heads above
the water.
See who is in there with you and celebrate.

The time of the lone wolf is over.
Gather yourselves;
Banish the word “struggle” from your attitude and your vocabulary.
All that we do now must be done in a sacred manner and in celebration.
We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!

— The Hopi Nation

This is the fun stuff, the Fall harvest. Culminating from the other seasons’ visioning, building, and living, Section 4 starts with the article “Citywide Community: A Living Legacy” that gives a vision of what is possible in creating community for ourselves and for future generations. It then focuses on community celebrations, joy, spiritual practices and ceremonies, aging with grace, letting go, higher purpose, transformation, beauty, balance with Nature, and leaving a legacy.

May you learn something that is personally meaningful, be inspired, and enjoy

Citywide Community: A Living Legacy by Gaya Erlandson

We are never too young or too old to consider our own legacy, especially during these times of tremendous change. Those in our future likely would treasure our thoughts on things like the civil rights and women’s movements, and the continuing political–economic upheaval. We have ample means at hand to interview our elders, fill out questionnaires about our own lives, gather and digitalize family photos, and even to put it all on video.¹

While we may be proud of our personal accomplishments or those of family members, how proud are we of what we collectively may be leaving behind? Environmental, political, and economic concerns today are global in scope and demand attention. Can we address our own needs in the second half of life in such a way as to benefit future generations?

It Takes a Village for Everyone

While most agree it takes a village to raise a child, few have strong relationships with their extended family or neighbors. In addition, 70 percent of American children live in households where all the adults are employed outside the home, at least part time. This means most of our children lack not only a village, but also day-to-day caring relations with anyone other than peers.

In effect, we largely expect our children to grow up on their own. Their teachers, coaches, counselors and advisors have working relationships with our kids that revolve around performance on the standardized course material they are expected to consume and regurgitate. What these young people think; who they are; what their dreams, interests, and talents are — these go largely ignored — in the same way these same qualities within their parents are ignored in the workplace.

We have bought individualism and the myth that the nuclear family should be self-sufficient lock, stock, and barrel; and no matter how unreasonable, parents expect that they must provide everything for their kids. Ninety percent of mothers and 95 percent of fathers in America report work–family conflict due to the number of work hours and the inflexibility of their work schedule. It doesn’t occur to them to report a lack of extended family and community support. It’s no wonder that mothers commonly report depression and personal inadequacy in attempting to do it all.

Estimates are that 30-50 percent of adults experience recurring or chronic depression and that at least 15 million children live in households with parents with major or severe depression. For mothers, the prevalence of lifetime major depression is almost double that of their male spouses; these rates are even more dramatic for mothers who are divorced, widowed, or separated. Depression in parents takes its toll on their children’s health and physical, psychological, behavioral, and social development.²Being raised in single-parent households also takes a toll.

Studies have shown that in cities with a population over 100,000, a strong correlation exists between the number of single-parent families and the crime rate, regardless of the socioeconomics or racial composition. The youth in these families are twice as likely to become juvenile delinquents or teenage mothers. Seventy percent of long-term prison inmates, 60 percent of rapists, and 75 percent of juvenile murderers grew up without fathers. Children without fathers are more likely to drop out of school and 40 times more likely to become victims of child abuse (see divorcereform.org/crime.html).

While one segment of the population — mid-life families raising children — finds itself so over-stressed, another (fast becoming numerically larger) segment stands willing to offer their wisdom, hands-on help, and mentorship. These elders — and elders-in-waiting — would benefit from the contact, energy, and creativity of younger people. There are enormous possibilities for meaningful relationships that span the generations and rekindle community. Rather than isolation, standardization, and individualism, a community approach nurtures connection, self-expression, and individuation at all stages of life.

It’s time we get out of the box of the single-family home.

Never doubt that a small group of committed citizens can
change the world. In fact it is the only thing that ever has.
— Margaret Mead

Citywide Permaculture Paradise: A Vision

Most would agree with these two premises: first, that living in proximity with all generations is desirable and, second, that building or purchasing a new home in an intentional, retirement, or other specialized community is an economic option for only a few. This leaves the majority of people — young and old alike — in need of an alternative. That alternative is, I believe, to transform our existing neighborhoods into caring, collaborative communities.

In this vision, then, the city center becomes a cultural hub surrounded by a network of caring, collaborative communities — the locus of theaters, restaurants, pavilions, galleries and museums — all small to medium-sized or human-scaled with abundant outdoor public space that invites visitors and interaction. All would be connected by easily accessed streets and quiet, rapid transit rails.

Knitting the neighborhood communities together would be public greenways that provide benches, bikeways and walkways, picnic and exercise areas, and public restrooms (with composting toilets, of course!). Besides orchards and woodlands, the greenways would also include community gardens and landscaping (largely edible and food producing), both designed according to low-maintenance, permaculture principles. Walls and rooftops (such as for outdoor pavilions or seating enclosures) would be made of living plants that shade and cool in the summer.

Underground rainwater catchments would provide reservoirs for the gardens and orchards and feed small ponds that have fish and provide water for the local habitat. Other ponds would purify water from buildings and would be piped to various drinking fountains and public restroom facilities. Outdoor kitchens encourage community gatherings that might include holiday celebrations, concerts, and fall canning parties. Residents of all ages would enjoy the outdoors and tend their beloved green spaces that provide much of what is eaten.

Affordable Private Space

In this vision the predominance of the single-family home would give way to higher density housing with shared walls and common facilities that dramatically reduce energy use and cost. Even where people live in smaller residential buildings or single-family homes, shared energy devices such as geothermal heating and air conditioning, solar-heated water, and on-demand, tankless water heaters would be plentiful.

Many of the large “apartment hotels” would have inner courtyards or covered atriums with lush vegetation (including fruit and nut trees that a “greenhouse” environment makes possible in even prohibitive climates), walkways, sitting nooks, and beautiful gray-water treatment ponds. Some buildings would have rooftop gardens and grow vertical gardens along south-facing walls. Each building would have private units with back patios facing outside and front doors that open into the green communal area.

Each unit would be designed to be elder and/or child friendly and to minimize domestic work. The basic kitchens in many households would be augmented by shared community kitchens that encourage collaboration and conviviality. Food co-ops, bulk buying, and community gardens make food more affordable as does preparing meals for several families at once. Meals would be shared either in common areas or taken to private living quarters.

In some buildings, professionals would be hired to do meal preparation combining low cost, restaurant-like convenience with the nutritious value of meals that residents request. Residents could order meals and have them delivered, if desired. In most facilities, however, the community kitchen would be set up for residents to use any time of day, typically on a lower floor. In multistory buildings, kitchens would be located on additional floors for convenience.

Providing for approximately 15-20 people, each community kitchen would have several refrigerators and stoves, two to three double sinks, and plenty of countertop and storage space. Each home unit would have its own designated refrigerator and cupboard space in the community kitchen, and there would be areas for shared food and commercial meal preparation. Residents could prepare their own meals or collaborate with others on kitchen duty, enjoying shared meals several times a week, as desired.

Designed well to accommodate the flow of several people participating in meal preparation, kitchens and their nearby dining areas would be places of great activity and conversation most of the day. Dishes, pots and pans, crock-pots, blenders, and spices would be shared. Tidy recycling and composting stations would make conservation easy, and residents of all ages could sign up for various chores. Paid workers, typically community members, also would do chores.

While some facilities would be age-restricted, housing only adults over age 50 or only families with children, most would have specified areas for people with identified needs. In a large apartment hotel, for example, two or three consecutive floors could be devoted to adults only, to elders only, or to families with children. Even with smaller living units, residents could afford on-site amenities, such as an exercise room or movie/media facility. The floors that have children might have daycare centers and game rooms; those for adults or seniors might include a library, a cozy dining room, or living quarters for home health care staff.

Most single-family homes would become shared homes for extended family based on kinship or choice. Many would be designed or retrofitted to accommodate ten or more people and could be converted easily to support assisted living by adopting the Green House model created by Dr. Bill Thomas or the Living Well Care Home model in Vermont. With fencing removed from backyards, neighbors could share outdoor meals, clothes drying lines, gardens, chicken raising, tools, and play areas for children. Many of the homes and residential units would be owned as housing cooperatives.

Self Governance

Indispensable to this vision is an effective governance structure where all residents have the opportunity and responsibility to participate. With the double linking of the structure known as Dynamic Governance (see my article, “Dynamic Governance and Sharing Lives”), residents can influence their own community, neighboring communities, their city, neighboring cities, and beyond through procedures that assure collective agreement as well as efficiency. It is the implementation of these structures that give me the greatest hope for humanity.

People respond to the rules of the game. When we shift our focus from the isolated individual or the nuclear family to winning through collaboration and monitoring our success, all benefit. While collaborative approaches such as Dynamic Governance are common in the business world, introducing them into our communities to facilitate how we care for everyone’s basic needs, educate our youth, and co-create innovative solutions to future housing are just now emerging.3 Governance structures that champion effective collaboration allow for all manner of possibility.

Don’t ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive
and go out and do it. Because what the world needs is
people who have come alive.
— Howard Thurman

Community-Based Education

Within each neighborhood community, older adults would have a special role, particularly in mentoring and educating younger generations. Students with similar interests would work in small groups of 3-4 on creative projects they would choose and design with one or more adults. In community-based education, the “classrooms” would be real-life businesses and work areas. Students would design their projects in such a way that, when completed, a contribution is made.

In each community all manner of win-win arrangements would exist for students of all ages. The strong focus on living locally means many local enterprises would exist in and around the housing facilities, including specialized learning centers, cafes, small theaters, a neighborhood tavern, grocery and retail stores, and small industries. Many would be cooperatively owned. People would be “employed” at every level of the community and/or city, often exchanging time and talent rather than money and always pursuing interests they genuinely enjoy.

A team of three students (aged 12-14), for example, might be interested in building a small grey-water treatment system that is attached to a community laundry facility. Mentored by adults with similar interests, they design a project of appropriate complexity and determine its production stages and completion date. The team then researches it and writes up their methodology, findings, and recommendations. They also present their proposal to the relevant governing circle(s) at appropriate times until the project is passed. In the final stage, they build it. This next step, of course, involves other community members — in this example, probably a backhoe operator and the landscaping maintenance and plumbing crews. Key to the learning experience is that student recommendations are followed, with community approval, and the students know this upfront!

In these self-directed projects, self-motivated students learn creative thinking and research skills, math, English grammar, spelling and writing skills, communication skills (including how to frame questions and listening), teamwork, and leadership skills. They also participate in the governance process in sharing their proposal and learning about relevant community concerns. And they experience profound connection and belonging. This all is in addition to learning real-life skills and the project at hand.

Imagine the excited faces of children (and their parents!) knowing that what they are doing is relevant and will make a difference! Cocreating win-win projects with teams of youth starting at an early age is foundational for building healthy self-esteem, personal and interpersonal competency, as well as for generating the level of ingenuity and teamwork skills needed for our future. Initiating and pursuing personal interests while benefiting the greater whole is part of the adventure and goal of lifelong learning for all.

There is almost a sensual longing for communion with others
who have a large vision. The immense fulfillment of the friendship
between those engaged in furthering the evolution of consciousness
has a quality impossible to describe.
— Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

The Living Legacy

Our youth have tremendous capability; they carry our future. Supported by others, young people thrive in being able to work in teams and pursue personal interests, and in being significant to their parents and elders. Families and elders also thrive. Supported, happy parents have more positive influence on their kids and more quality time with all their loved ones. Within caring collaborative communities, the creativity and vitality of all age groups can be harnessed for the happiness, health, and betterment of all.

In addition to helping to create competent, multigenerational communities to live in, I would urge readers to give money to those organizations across our country that already are immersed in this work.

One relevant example is a small group in Vermont that created a nonprofit organization to help people establish community-based health care centers as alternatives to the federal Healthcare Bill mandating we all buy privatized health insurance starting in 2014. Integrative law attorney, Cheryl Conner, took it upon herself to read the 2000+-page document specifically to find a loophole and found it, based on the separation of church and state. While there is more complexity than can be discussed here, the possibility is for people to cocreate health ministries and healthcare centers within their churches and communities that exactly meet the needs and desires of members. Another integrative law attorney, Janelle Orsi, is promoting a new area of law called “sharing law” which provides the legal means for people to share their cars, home ownership, tools, co-op businesses, etc. With support, her nonprofit SELC (Sustainable Economies Legal Clinic) could benefit many more people.

There also are a few consultants that teach groups how to govern themselves effectively. Diana Leafe Christian has been a leader in the intentional community movement for years and now teaches a variation of Dynamic Governance in a way that helps existing communities transition from consensus decision model (see dianaleafechristian.org). John Buck, the first international consultant for Sociocracy, teaches this to businesses, nonprofit organizations, and communities (see governancealive.com).

The research efforts of John McKnight and the Asset-Based Community Development Institute on social service delivery systems, health policy, community organizations, and neighborhood policy spans decades; their efforts in neighborhood and community development deserve support (see abcdinstitute.org). The Living Well Care Home in Vermont is doing amazing things in the area of assisted care and community. Some interesting educational approaches are being offered such as that created by Meg Henshaw in North Carolina.

And there are numerous small businesses and institutes that teach or implement permaculture practices or offer various other sustainable building products and methods. In my area, Asheville, NC, we have the Ashevillage Institute that has been doing these things for years — locally, around the country, and in third world countries as well. Anthony Brenner of Push Design has brought the product Hemcrete (made of hemp and minerals) to the US from the UK. A change in the laws in the US that allows the growing of industrial hemp will boost domestic employment (numerous products can be made from this renewable resource) and would allow us to create a US-made hemcrete-like product.

I believe that in leaving a legacy of caring, collaborative communities with all generations interacting and collaborating effectively together, we actually solve one of the biggest crises of our times, that of living to our potential. Creating a legacy of caring, collaborative communities promises no less than to evolve our culture and our civilization, from the inside out.

Notes

¹ See http://www.legacyproject.org/guides/lifeintquestions.html.

² England, Mary Jane and Leslie J. Sim, Editors. 2009. Depression in Parents, Parenting and Children: Opportunities to Improve Identification, Treatment and Prevention. National Research Council. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

³ Dyer, Jeffrey H. 2000. Collaborative Advantage: Winning through Extended Enterprise Supplier Networks. New York: Oxford University Press, USA.

Gaya Erlandson is a psychologist, writer, teacher, social architect, and community consultant. Certified in Imago Relationship Therapy, she loves to coach couples, facilitate groups, and offer trainings related to conscious relationships and living the new paradigm. Gaya lives in Lotus Lodge — a shared-home near Asheville, NC, which is situated on 2.5 acres of land with a pond, stream, and organic gardens. Lotus Lodge and its community was the subject of a recent news segment on CBS Early Morning — an experience which in part has inspired the project she is now working on, a how-to book on creating and maintaining shared households.

Celebrating Community — Deeper Connections by Gaya Erlandson

When asked, “How can I pray better?” Mother Teresa is reported to have said, “Just pray more.” The same could be said about celebration, especially in community — however you define it. Community is about relationships; and whatever we do to enhance our sense of connection with one another, we could do it more.

In other words, the more we can acknowledge and enjoy our relationships, the more likely they will be healthy and lasting, and a great way to do this is to celebrate — a LOT.

From Consumption to Engagement

Bringing more celebration into our lives can be done easily by simply adding depth to what we already do. Saying blessings of gratitude about our loved ones at the table prior to eating (in addition to blessing the food) and toasting to the health, happiness, and accomplishments of each other on a daily basis goes a long way to feeding the soul of a family or community group.

During a dinner conversation, for example, we can tell our loved ones that we really value our time together. This presumes that the conversation is meaningful, rather than complaints about the news or the weather. Sharing what we found meaningful about the film can follow an evening of watching a movie together.

Too often we have mindlessly consumed together — meals, movies, “taking in” sites and trips, etc. — rather than engaging ourselves and each other in thoughtful reflection. Conscious celebration helps us to shift our focus from individuals doing passive consumption side by side to joyful relating and passionate living.

Celebration can be as simple as taking pictures frequently and posting them for all to see and remember meaningful times together. Sharing the “stories of us” repeatedly, both funny and poignant, maintains the bonds and continuity of a community. Like everything else, maintenance is required of our relationships, and regular celebration is a wonderful way to do this.

Courage and Conscious Living

We also can make every gathering more meaningful with conscious expression to each other of what’s important to us, particularly our goals and visions for the future.

During a birthday party, for example, the birthday person can share what the last year was for them — highlight what was important and tell what they see or want for the coming year. Regular sharing like this at birthday celebrations has everyone thinking more about each other’s path, as well as our own. Everyone’s journey is important.

What makes a celebration “more” is to give voice to what is important to us. If we spend days cooking and traveling to have a big Thanksgiving meal with loved ones and end up having the same conversation we had last year, the whole experience could feel like a waste. What might you share this holiday season that moves you and your life forward? It may take courage.

How Celebration Relates to Community

Celebration typically is done after some accomplishment — after a person completes another year of life (with a birthday party), for example. When the accomplishment is significant, a more formal ceremony can be created and followed by celebration. Two aspects of formal ceremonies I’d like to point out here.

One is that specific people have stepped forward to announce some achievement and change in who they will be in the community in the future. In a marriage ceremony, for example, the couple announces they now are ready to be a family unit, and they make vows accordingly.

The other aspect of a formal ceremony is that the people at the forefront are asking for recognition and support from the community for their new role. Before the marriage ceremony is over, for example, the presiding officiate asks whether anyone objects to the union. If no one does, the community acknowledges the couple’s readiness and worthiness to assume the new role and in effect vows to support them.

In other words, formal ceremonies inherently are social, community events. Often these more formal ceremonies are considered rites of passage.

Rites of Passage

Many argue, and I agree, we need more “rites of passage” events in our western lives. The passage from childhood or adolescence to adulthood is so important that many believe we, as a community, need to mentor our youth accordingly. Otherwise, too often, our teens join gangs out of a misdirected hunger for affirmation. Within gangs, various challenges must be met for the initiates to demonstrate their readiness for full membership.

Marriage is perhaps the most well-established, complete rite of passage we have. Others that we could develop ceremonies for include divorce, parenting (complete with the requirement for parenting classes first), and grandparenting (complete with training on what is expected and how to welcome grandparents into their children’s lives). All involve a role change within a community and deserve our acknowledgement and support.

Another area where we have well-established ceremonies relates to memorial and funeral services. What I would add to how we typically do these ceremonies is to emphasize how the loss makes the community different. If the surviving spouse has young children, for example, what vow of support does the community offer? Or if the deceased played an important role in the community, how will it be handled now that the person is gone?

Women Creating Community

In recent years there has been an upsurge, particularly among women, of more formal ceremonies for those becoming “crones” or elders, usually around the age of 60-65. Similar to any rite of passage, much preparation is done before acknowledging the accomplishment via ceremony and then celebrating it. (The wonderful story in this issue by Berta Parrish, who wrote the book Wise Woman’s Way, is a fine example.)

Creating the Extraordinary

Other than being social, tribal, communal beings, I believe we are creative at our core. And when we stand up and offer our creativity, we are being far more intimate, generous, and open with others than when we are dumping petty complaints or old stories of past ordeals on them.

A really excellent way for a community to celebrate is to have members display and perform art. People can play musical instruments, do sing-a-longs, exchange jokes and poetry, display art or crafts, do some stand-up comedy, or all of the above at an in-house Talent Exchange. Rather than being about (judging) the offerings, the idea is to encourage authentic self-expression. Imagine the creativity and fun that can emerge!

I live in a small community of about 8 people, and the times we have done talent shows and musical sing-a-longs are some of the most heartwarming and memorable. We also make sure to take pictures to share later. Those creative, out-of-the box shared experiences still make me smile and feel close to people who have long since moved away.

Other events might be to do a community “potlatch” where everyone brings items to give away — and to do it with creative flare. Anytime is a good time to unload unneeded items in exchange for desired ones, or simply to lighten our load. All of the gifts of generosity, creativity, and community caring we give are gifts to ourselves.

Notes

1 See “The Roseto effect: a 50-year comparison of mortality rates” at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1695733/.

2 The SOTEL is based on a distinctive form of Dutch housing, called hofjes, which dates back to the fifteenth century. Hof means “garden” and hofjes are buildings and housing units clustered around a courtyard or garden.

Gaya Erlandson is a psychologist, writer, teacher, social architect, and community consultant. Certified in Imago Relationship Therapy, she loves to coach couples, facilitate groups, and offer trainings related to conscious relationships and living the new paradigm. Gaya lives in Lotus Lodge — a shared-home near Asheville, NC, which is situated on 2.5 acres of land with a pond, stream, and organic gardens. Lotus Lodge and its community was the subject of a recent news segment on CBS Early Morning — an experience which in part has inspired the project she is now working on, a how-to book on creating and maintaining shared households.

Celebration of Age: A Wise Woman Ceremony by Berta Parrish

We met in the Osher Lifelong Learning Institute “Discover the Goddess in You” class. It was so inspirational, informative, and enjoyable that we didn’t want it to end. We were hungry for a more vibrant vision of growing older than our culture provides. So we formed a Wisdom Circle and decided to meet twice a month to go through the initiatory experiences in my book, Wise Woman’s Way: A Guide to Growing Older with Purpose and Passion.¹

The Preparation of Hearts and Minds

This is how seven women aged 61 to 72 came together to plan and to conduct the following Wise Woman Ceremony, a ritual to announce our commitments to conscious aging. As a rite of passage, Wise Woman ceremonies, also called cronings or grandmother ceremonies, conclude the initiation to elderhood — stating intentions to advance a broader perspective with different values, roles, and rewards.

For the last six months we analyzed our cultural conditioning; studied folktales and myths; reclaimed some shadow issues through writing, art projects, and dreamwork; met our Wise Woman Within; and determined how to best share our talents and passions. We laughed, cried, challenged, and encouraged each other as we reinterpreted the past to visualize a fulfilling future.

Now is the time to celebrate, to honor this important transition, and to deepen our pledge to think, feel, and relate more and more as initiated female elders. Although this ceremony is highly personalized with symbols and prayers that are meaningful for us, it includes the necessary features of any sacred ceremony: intention, preparation of sacred space, purification of participants, crossing a symbolic threshold, invocation, active participation, and a departure ritual.

Planning the ceremony is just as important as conducting it. So, we studied the most dominant imagery and symbols traditionally associated with eldership, wisdom, sages, and cronehood.² All the research, deliberation, and selections discern and define what we consider significant and sacred. The altar objects, prayers, songs, gifts, and activities bring physical form to our memories, our intentions, and our spirituality.

The Wise Woman Ceremony

We transform the lovely, private, shaded backyard garden into a sanctuary by placing one of our art projects, the “paradox masks,” on the fence. This decoration reminds us of the illusion of duality while also setting physical boundaries for the ceremony. We listen to “The Rose,” “My Life,” and “Bridge over Troubled Water” while we prepare the altar with purple shawls, roses, candles, and statuary of the Triple Goddess Hecate, Kali Ma, and Sophia. Before crossing through the doorway, we place the wrapped gifts on a side table and wash our hands in a basin of salted water.

The eldest woman lights the large candleholder in the middle of the altar while an invocation is given, evoking the presence and blessing of Wise Woman consciousness, the power and perspective of all the Wise Ones before us. Then we sing an adapted hymn that summarizes the initiation process just completed:

Spirit of the Living God, fall afresh on us.
Spirit of the Living Goddess, fall afresh on us.
Melt us. Mold us. Fill us. Use us.
Spirit of All That is Sacred, fall afresh on us.

One after another, we place a symbol of Wise Woman archetypal qualities on the altar and explain why we choose this particular object. Without prearrangement, the basic elements are invoked by a butterfly (air), a mermaid (water), semi-precious stones in a mirror (earth), and a candle (fire). Pictures and jewelry of deceased friends and relatives bring their poignant memory and wisdom into our circle.

Then we read the litany “The Directions”³ expressing our gratitude for the specific gifts from the East, the South, the West, the North, the Sky above, and the Earth below. Afterwards, everyone shares her favorite poem, prayer, or quote. For instance, Mary Oliver’s “The Summer Day” is read, Rumi is quoted, and The Byrds’ rendition of “Turn, Turn, Turn” is played.

We joyfully sing “Life as a Tree”⁴ (to the familiar tune of “On Top of Old Smokey”) celebrating the beautiful, fruitful, and rooted life of a woman — just like a grand old oak tree, “filled with joy, love, and sorrow and a spirit well fed.”

Storytelling is next. Everyone shares what she has gained from our Wisdom Circle. Stories of forgiving a perceived past injury, claiming personal power, fearing death less, listening to intuition, interacting with underdeveloped aspects of personality, and relating to the Wise Woman Within. All the stories reveal major transformations taken during the shared initiatory journey towards wholeness.

The beginning stanzas of the Song of the Crone⁵ remind us of this journey:

Maiden, mother, mother, crone, a time of change is now at hand.
You’ve crossed a thousand stepping stones to where we stand.
This loving circle gathers round as you begin your life anew.
Upon your head we place a crown and we honor you.
As we hold this sacred space shed the woman that you were
Now the crone will take her place and we welcome her.

Going around the circle, we each light a votive candle and read our commitments. Some are quite general, like my commitments below:

To validate myself instead of seeking approval for others.
To honestly deal with decline and loss.
To be more aware of projection onto others.
To stay vitally connected to Spirit.
To counsel and inspire others.
To be enthusiastically engaged without attachment to outcome.

Other commitments are very specific, like the following:

To make a conscious effort to avoid judging another person.
To pursue lavender business opportunities.
To continue poetry study in more depth.
To prioritize a “bucket list” of do-able activities.
To increase volunteer time/efforts in community and church.

We join hands and listen to a prayer of thanksgiving that concludes the ceremony. Eyes are moist, smiles are wide, and hearts are open. On the way back to the house, we select the gift that calls to us. We drink champagne or sparkling water, eat delicious snacks, open the surprise present, and bask in the relaxed beauty reflected in each face around the table.

The next day, I feel energized and blessed to have the support and insights of other women who are dedicated to lives of purpose and passion, regardless of age, resources, or situation. The Wise Woman Ceremony provides a wonderful memory filled with anticipation, gratitude, fellowship, and holiness as well as guidance, archetypal energy, and direction. A fitting way to begin the next stage of my life — the best stage of my life!

Notes

¹ Parrish, Berta. 2007. Wise Woman’s Way: A Guide to Growing Older with Purpose and Passion.Morro Bay, CA: Morro Press. See www.wisewomansquest.com.

² Wise Woman’s Way, pp. 244–262.

³ Council for American Indian Ministry. 1991. Worship Resources. Minneapolis, MN: United Church of Christ.

⁴ Crones Counsel. 2008. Songbook.

⁵ James Nihan, “Song of the Crone, from Murals [CD] (Heron’s Feather Records, 2008).

Berta Parrish, Ed.D, is an educator with over 35 years’ experience helping people create and maintain their dreams. Berta has written articles on spiritual journaling, women’s issues, and Wise Woman ceremonies for local and national magazines. In her book, Wise Woman’s Way, she uses her background in Jungian psychology and transformative learning to explore the uncharted territory of life after 60. Berta Parish lives near San Luis Obispo, CA.

Celebrate Our Connections with Others by Sue Ronnenkamp

Our predilection for fierce independence, rather than
our true interdependence, is not helpful.

— Jane Basey

There was a lot of hard work involved with providing “hands on” help to folks making a later life move — but there were also the rewards.

I remember one evening when I was finishing up a move at a retirement community where many of the residents were former clients of mine. I was down in the main lobby several times that day and had the opportunity to witness something that absolutely thrilled me.

Scattered all over the main floor and lobby were clusters of older adults — having engaging conversations, playing pool, laughing together. I knew many of these residents, and was happy to see them looking so good and so involved in the company of others.

One of my former clients was playing pool. I was almost shocked to see him because he had Alzheimer’s disease, and the last time I had seen him he was not doing well. Yet here he was playing pool with another gentleman and looking great.

A Little History

I started my senior move management business back in 1998, and persevered with this tough work for over 10 years — because of my firm belief in the value of moving on to a place and setting that is more fitting for the later stages of life. One of the great benefits that often accompany this transition is the opportunity to live and be involved in community. Yes, I know that moving is hard — but I learned that living alone in isolation is worse.

This is what I typically saw with many of my clients. Some had recently lost a spouse, others were experiencing failing health, many had no family living close by, and more than you would think had no family. Most of them were living in family-sized homes that were way too big for their current needs, many of their friends had moved or passed away, and some couldn’t drive anymore. This can all be very depressing.

So the norm was to see clients looking better and more energized after the move than they did before. Why? Because they were no longer alone and isolated. They had new friends, they were part of a new community, and they had a reason to get out and get involved again.

The Truth of Interdependence

As far as I’m concerned, we put way too much value on independence. It has its place, but it is only one part of our life cycle. Interdependence and dependence also play a large role, though we too often forget this.

In Tuesdays with Morrie, Morrie Schwartz taught his former student and all of us a lot about living through his dying. Morrie knew the value of interdependence and the place that dependence holds in our lives. Listen to what he had to say about this: “In the beginning of life, when we are infants, we need others to survive, right? And at the end of life, when you get like me, you need others to survive, right? But here’s the secret: in between, we need others as well.” How true this is!

My hope for our society is that we reclaim the value of interdependence and the benefits of community. In order to do this, we’ll have to release some of our need for independence that often isolates and separates us from others.

Embracing Our Humanity

We may even need to let go of our long-time homes and move on. But living in community and being involved in the lives of others can offer tremendous value as we grow older.

One of the special opportunities of the later stages of life is learning the importance of interdependence and acknowledging that having support and companionship and interaction with others is a good thing.

You don’t have to be old to shift your thinking in this direction. But it’s also never too late to let go of some of that fierce independence and become open to the benefits of community and being in the company of others.

Sue Ronnenkamp is a nationally recognized expert in the area of retirement living and later-life transitions. After spending more than a decade refining the “how to” of right-sizing/downsizing, Sue shifted her focus to why continuing to move forward in all areas of our lives is key to vital and successful aging. Her current educational programs and writing focus is on living the second half of life to the fullest by changing the way we view and respond to aging. Sue has a Master’s Degree in Hospital and Health Care Administration, and has worked in health care and aging services for over 30 years.

Kindling the Flames of Joy by Joan Englander

Fifty years ago I risked my health to travel alone on a 10-month pilgrimage to India, Israel, and Egypt. I had to find out how to heal the losses of my friends, health, and career. My search led me to Mother Teresa’s home for children in India.

I tried to feed rice to an emaciated boy who stared vacantly into space, unable to respond. Spontaneously I started to sing. Smiles lit up his face. I would never suspect that a few years later, I would be in a nursing home by the bed of an old man who could not speak, only groan. Amidst his groans, I fed him soup and was compelled to sing a conversation. He became palpably present.

A Calling of Joy

For the next 30 years, I facilitated spiritual dialogues, creative classes, and humorous adventures in assisted living, nursing, and retirement homes. I found tools to inspire inner reflections through poetry in elders who supposedly couldn’t concentrate or think. We explored the world’s wisdom teachings. Life stories were created into songs. With my joyful encouragement, elders participated in Qigong exercises and danced in their chairs and in their beds.

Often my life became an expression of joy, dancing at home or with others. People came to see me dance at the annual Greek Festivals, a white-haired lady with a 16-year-old exuberance. It was this vitality I shared with my elders. Beyond hours of solitaire, bingo, or watching TV, we could include the arts and spirituality and create soul care. We could see each person holistically as alive with riches to give, even if they could not talk.

My God is a God of Possibility

That is what I have brought throughout 30 years of visiting elders in elder care institutions. Possibility for people of all faiths or no faith at all. The key is: Can we exercise our wills to see the good in life when life seems bad?

When I companion with elders I ask: Can we activate the possibility that there is something more to us than a body? That we don’t have to give in to negative thoughts threatening to make misery of our days? It can be much harder for an elder to call upon personal will to find meaning, wisdom, or inspiration when in physical or emotional pain.

That is why as I started writing my book, Joy in the Evening of Our Lives in 2001, I began creating Healing Companions^® — to journey together with elders in releasing unnecessary suffering. I wanted to offer a guidebook with tools and stories for anyone caring for an elder, to create a new paradigm and new vision of aging. I wanted to help elders learn how to shift their attention from ailments and instead to experience love, inspiration, healing moments of joy.

In 2010, a few years after Joy was published I was shocked to realize that my book was not just for caregivers, families, and health care professionals; it was for me, a younger elder, now facing the rigorous journey of aging.

Joy and celebration were the last things I felt that day in my living room. Oak tree branches swayed over the deck of my cottage, bushy-tailed squirrels ran along the 12- foot railing, expansive woods could be seen outside the sliding glass door, and skylights sent beams of sunlight across my desk. Yet none of this magic was going to awaken a chorus of joy in my heart.

I couldn’t walk. I was rendered helpless; my toes were in excruciating pain. Diagnosis shifted from metatarsalgia to Morton’s neuroma to capsulitis. Whatever the doctors named it, I lost the best part of my life: dancing.

That morning as I stood by the window, I heard my thoughts. Dark clouds paraded across my mind. “This is the end. I’m old (73) and my life is just about over. I’m helpless and a cripple.”

One Woman’s Talk

The liturgy went on and on. Would I become a victim of my thoughts and circumstances? Suddenly from the depths of my being I heard a melody, and with it, words. I sang out:

It’s not my fault/that I can’t walk so well!
It’s not my fault/ that I can’t see so well!
It’s not my fault/ that I can’t think so well!
I’m creating a new world now!

I was shocked into laughter. A squirrel scampered up the oak tree, seeming to laugh with me. The song went on creating itself:

My cataracts dance/along the freeway changing lanes
A truck goes by/the man is giving me the finger
I don’t know why/I haven’t done anything!
I’m creating a new world now.

Laughter and tears of delight became a defining moment. I could continue to react to my disability with despair, give in and take antidepressants, or respond to life’s challenges with creative joy. I chose the latter. Yet, humility is a lesson here.

Can I make joy and humor happen? No. For I have come to learn that there is an energy, a source, a vitality greater than myself. I call it God or Love. It is up to me to be open to the source of Love that heals discouragement, fear, and sorrow.

As I continued to experience that my body’s functioning was unreliable, I had to revisit my book. I needed to be reminded about serving others, to detach myself from spending endless hours thinking about my sufferings. I had to walk into a nursing home and express care for someone else.

At the Nursing Home

A group of elders sat around a table in the recreation room, TV blaring with its endless programs. The facility’s loudspeaker announced one thing after another. Nurses’ aides chatted loudly. I felt exhausted. I thought I had nothing to give and slumped into a chair.

Suddenly I heard the words from one of Jalalud’din Rumi’s poems, “We have the Spark that Starts the Fire”:

Do not worry if our harp breaks
thousands more will appear.
We have fallen in the arms of love
where all is music.

I began to sing, “We have fallen in the arms of love.” I got up from my chair, went to the piano, found the notes, and came back to my elders singing. We were all singing, including Donald. A brilliant man with severe dementia, he could not remember what was being said from one minute to the next. Yet, he could express spiritual thoughts with great clarity. He had a natural, contemplative nature. And now as he sang, he glowed.

“Come on, Donald, we need to dance!” His body was trembling intensely. I was scared he might fall. But I knew he could dance and that the nursing staff often encouraged him. So I held up my palms to his. Weak and shaking from head to toe, Donald smiled in ecstasy as we slowly circled around each other singing: “We have fallen in the arms of love/where all is music/where all is music.”

Afterward I realized that falling in the arms of love, we can endure anything. For in the arms of love, music soothes our souls and all is well in the present moment. The present moment is all we have. Donald’s ecstatic moment expressed the totality of life — the passion, the expression, the melting into the healing words of Rumi.

Longing for Belonging

I am 75 now. As an active elder still functioning in the world, I am engaged in seeking housing, financial understanding, health care options, advocates for medical issues, insurance policies, burials, and structuring my will. An overwhelming task for an elder whose family is uninvolved, I need the spiritual practices in my book to sustain me.

As I seek housing, I find it isn’t about the typical search for rentals or independent living. It is about longing to belong. To be part of a community whose values include spiritual and psychological growth. To be a contributing elder who, with all kinds of physical and mental disabilities, can still inspire others and bring joy, even if some day confined to a wheelchair.

The spirit of hope, the possibility of reframing negative experiences, and the encouraging messages in my book, are what I want to leave as my legacy. I open the pages of Joy and listen to its teachings:

When I open myself to receive the rising light of dawn, every cell in my body shines, sparkles, and trembles with light. I am rising on this new day with the vast breath of the universe breathing into me health and wholeness. A sea of splendor opens to the sunrise within me. Out of this glorious expansion, I know my birthright — joy and peace.

Joan Englander is a holistic eldercare coach and founder of Healing Companions® services, a holistic approach to eldercare, and author of the highly acclaimed book, Joy in the Evening of Our Lives: Nurturing the Elderly Soul. For 30 years she has served as a consultant and inservice trainer for geriatric care facilities in California.

Ms. Englander sings by the bedside and offers poetry, storytelling, movement, inner reflection, forgiveness work, Qigong, and chair dance in private sessions for elders, elder groups, and for eldercare providers interested in becoming Healing Companions®. Her work is deeply informed by Jungian psychology and by her own spiritual experiences.

Ms. Englander also gives musical presentations at healing, retirement, and retreat centers; Hospice, nursing, geriatric, home health care and ministerial associations; churches and synagogues. Ms. Englander is a recipient of Today’s Caregiver Magazine 2008 Caregiver Friendly Award and a Living Treasure nominee in the community of Ojai. She is an oblate at the New Camaldoli Hermitage in Big Sur and resides in Ojai, California.

Itineraries 2012

Home Alone

Why, What, Who?

Getting Creative

Contact Us

Quick Links

Site Links