I’m a voracious consumer of long-term care (LTC) and long-term care insurance (LTCI) studies.
For me, the more studies, the better. I can use them to create news articles, features, blogs, infographics and tweets. Once the studies are really old, I can mine them for interesting predictions from the distant past that turned out to be correct, or arrogant, annoying predictions that turned out to be wrong. Totally wrong.
For most people, it’s probably a lot more fun, relaxing and lucrative to create an LTC or LTC funding study than to provide care. A study doesn’t ask the same question over and over or have trouble getting out of a chair.
But, on the other hand: A study can’t provide any long-term care, or money that people can use to pay for long-term care.
Along the same lines: Care coordination is great, and someone needs to set up a website to steer people to the available resources. But, hey: Someone does set up websites and other services that steer people to valuable resources for people who need care and their families. Someone is called AARP. Families that don’t like AARP can call the services funded by the care providers, or try a little Web service called Google.