Does Your Parental Longevity Effect Your Retirement Plans? (emotionally, moving, long distance)

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by marino760

There was a post here not too long ago that I can't currently find that helped prove the idea that people are not necessarily living longer today than they did 200 years ago. The founding fathers overall, lived well into their 70s, 80s, and some into their 90s. Their average age of death was the same as at least the last 7-8 Presidents.
Many people have always lived to ripe old ages even in Roman times. What happens now, when the average life expectancy of someone 200 years ago or 1000 years ago is calculated, they don't take into consideration that many children died during the first few years of their lives and at birth. Also, there was a significant percentage of women that died at young ages in childbirth bringing the average life expectancy down.
The obstacle 200 years ago was to get past your childhood and you had a good chance of living to be old. Remember too, people back then were probably overall healthier than we are now. Most people had physical jobs, worked on farms and stayed fit, this included women. Being overweight was probably considered a luxury and limited to people that were well off financially. Also diseases like cancer were not nearly as common as they are today.
That's my take on the age thing and people living longer now than they ever did. I think it's made up for the most part for various reasons.

That is just not correct. Even if childhood deaths and accidental deaths are factored out, people are still living long now than at any time in recorded history. The actuarial tables do not lie (and your friendly neighborhood insurance company, not to mention the government, "live" and "die" - figuratively speaking - based on such tables).

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by eok

George Washington died at age 67 of incompetent medical care. He had pneumonia and bronchitis, and needed a humidifier. Antibiotics would probably have helped, if they were available, but they probably weren't really needed. The medical care he got consisted of things like draining some of his blood to reduce his blood pressure.

People often live longer now just by having better medical care than back then. But not always. Incompetence is eternal.

Better medical care, plus:
- Running water
- Real sewer systems
- Food safety regs
- Pollution controls and enviro regs
- Better awareness of how bacteria and viruses are transmitted, and the subsequent improvements in personal sanitary techniques
- Etc

[huckster]

Interestingly----I remember that; when Aldai Stevenson died, I believe he died of a heart attack in Downtown London on a street corner.

Long lived relatives is a way of determining our own longevity or scarceness of it.
"Dad was going to live to 100 so said the gerontologist". He replied, I don't want to live to be 100."
Diseases like stroke etc, are hereditary. Did I plan around longevity ? No, but I will be fine.

Originally Posted by tijlover

I've always felt that I've got lots of time left, now 66, being my grandmother made it to 102, my Dad to 96, grandfather to 89, mother to 86.

My partner's grandfather died in his early 50's and his Dad died in his 40's, from heart attacks, and he died at 39, but from AIDS.

In a recent bio of Adlai Stevenson, who ran for President in 1952 and 1956:

"Governor, it cannot go on like this," Dr. Lax told him sternly, "You have to stop this way of living, even if it means to resign as Ambassador. You are on a suicidal course."

After looking at him for a moment, Adlai smiled and replied: "How do you know I want to live long? My father died at the age of 60, my mother at 65. I'm now 65; that will be enough for me."

And he died of a heart attack within the next year!

Question: Does this ring a bell with anyone? Your viewpoints of retirement longevity/planning effected by the death of your parents and/or ancestors?

[josie13]

I have planned and saved the best I can, but in the back of my mind I am aware that my father's and mother's family were relatively short-lived, on both sides. My grandparents were all dead before or shortly after 60, so I never really knew them. Three of them were alive for a short time after I was born, but soon died before I got a chance to form any memories of them.

My parents did a little better. My father made it to his 70's, but not by much, and he was not in good health for years before the end came. My mother was in really great shape until her later 70s. She was careful about taking lots of exercise and eating a very healthy diet. She also kept reading and learning new things. She was hiking and swimming daily right up until the point she got hit with Alzheimer's, which rapidly destroyed first her mind, then her body.

I'd rather die earlier, in my 60s or 70s, than end up helpless and frightened like her. In any case, I hope my savings last as long as I do. On the other hand, if I check out early, at least there will be something left for my children to inherit. So there's a silver lining.

[silibran]

Our parents' longevity has not factored into our plans. But we are healthier than our parents were, and we have also lived easier lives, at least in the case of my DH's parents.

My mom is the outlier in the family; she lived to be 95. Her Grandmas lived to be pretty old but I don't know how old they were when they died. At least one lived to be in her 80s, which was considered quite old for the time. Her mother died young probably from TB. My paternal grandma died of a heart attack, and I imagine she was in her seventies.

I think that if I don't get cancer or some other disease, I might live into my 80s. I doubt I will live longer, but I don't know why I feel that way.

[marino760]

Originally Posted by BayAreaHillbilly

That is just not correct. Even if childhood deaths and accidental deaths are factored out, people are still living long now than at any time in recorded history. The actuarial tables do not lie (and your friendly neighborhood insurance company, not to mention the government, "live" and "die" - figuratively speaking - based on such tables).

I wasn't factoring in accidental deaths, but childhood mortality rates up until the 20th century played a large roll in factoring in the "average lifespan". Go to any old graveyard and see how many people died as children while other graves have mostly people that are considered elderly even today.
How do you suppose most of the Founding Fathers lived to be old men when the average life expectancy at that time was 40? It certainly wasn't through advanced medical care.
If today, the average person lives an average of 2-3 years longer than they did 200 years ago, not including children who died before the age of 18, so what? If you have any figures that actually show that people today live significantly longer let's see it. I don't mean average age including children who died of childhood diseases and young women who died in childbirth. I mean people from age of 25 and older compared to people 25 and older 200 years ago. I really don't think you'll see much difference but if you prove me wrong, then I'm good with that.

[Lee W.]

I'm already through working, but I consider the age of death of my mother and my older sister to be significant in how long I might live, but I also know it's possible I could live longer than that. Both of them died at similar ages and both died of forms of cancer in which there is usually a very short time to live once it was diagnosed. My father lived a bit longer than them, but didn't die of natural causes. I'll just assume that I could die tomorrow or live into my 80's. Nobody ever really knows. BTW, I know how long my grandparents and great-grandparents lived because I was into genealogy for a while. I also know the causes of death for some of those.

[SunGrins]

Not longevity as much as health and mobility. Parents shared a room at the nursing home for several years....not what they planned.

[Nor'Eastah]

When I look at photos of my grandparents and great-grandparents, I am shocked that they lived as long as they did. These people were very large, although it did not look like the 'sloppy fat' that so many of today's obese people seem to have.

There's no question that longevity runs in my family. But for me, that is just potential. The ones who died "young" -- mid to late 60s -- had an obvious problem, such as smoking, alcoholism, excessive weight, too many medications, etc. I'm trying to avoid those issues. I am much more active than they were.

But I really want to live. I think that makes a difference. I want to see thst my daughters and grandchildren are pretty much set for life. I know I am. In that sense, no, my family had nothing to do with my retirement plans.

I have seen enough to know that the will to live, and the lack of it, can have a profound influence on how much longer a person can expect to live.

[Pocopsonite]

My great-grandfather and grandfather died in their 50s of a heart attack. My dad made it to 66 before a heart attack killed him. My mom lived to 92 and her parents weren't much younger when they died. So the two sides are very different. And I'm more my father's child than my mom's.

I had a heart attack at 54. So yeah, from then on we based financial planning guesstimates on the likelihood that I'd die sooner rather than later. E.g., I started drawing Social Security at 62, the earliest possible date. My husband has great longevity genes on both sides, and is generally in better health, so we've also planned based on my dying first, even though that's much less likely for the general population of our age.

I celebrated my 70th birthday last Sunday, and I'm actually pretty surprised to have made it this far. Meds make a huge difference, compared to what was available to my forebears. But I do believe genes will ultimately out.