Slashdot Mirror
The Dutch Village Where Everyone Has Dementia
HughPickens.com writes Josh Planos writes at The Atlantic that the isolated village of Hogewey on the outskirts of Amsterdam has been dubbed "Dementia Village" because it is home to residents who are only admitted if they're categorized as having severe cases of dementia or Alzheimer's disease. "There are no wards, long hallways, or corridors at the facility," writes Planos. "Residents live in groups of six or seven to a house, with one or two caretakers. Perhaps the most unique element of the facility—apart from the stealthy "gardener" caretakers—is its approach toward housing. Hogeway features 23 uniquely stylized homes, furnished around the time period when residents' short-term memories stopped properly functioning. There are homes resembling the 1950s, 1970s, and 2000s, accurate down to the tablecloths, because it helps residents feel as if they're home."
In Holland, everyone pays into the state health care system during their working years, with the money then disbursed to pay for later-in-life expenses — and that means living in Hogewey does not cost any more than a traditional nursing home. The inspiration came about in 1992, when Yvonne van Amerongen and another member of staff at a traditional nursing home both had their own mothers die, being glad that their elderly parents had died quickly and had not had to endure hospital-like care. A series of research and brainstorming sessions in 1993 found that humans choose to surround and interact with other like-minded people of similar backgrounds and experiences; the arrangement at Hogewey provides this by ensuring that residents with similar backgrounds continue to live closely together. On a physical level, residents at Hogewey require fewer medications; they eat better and they live longer. On a mental level, they also seem to have more joy. "The people here keep their independence, as much as they can have of it, and they stay active," says Theo Visser. "Here they still have a life. It's not the sort of slow, quiet death you get in other places. Here everyone feels at home."
In Holland, everyone pays into the state health care system during their working years, with the money then disbursed to pay for later-in-life expenses — and that means living in Hogewey does not cost any more than a traditional nursing home. The inspiration came about in 1992, when Yvonne van Amerongen and another member of staff at a traditional nursing home both had their own mothers die, being glad that their elderly parents had died quickly and had not had to endure hospital-like care. A series of research and brainstorming sessions in 1993 found that humans choose to surround and interact with other like-minded people of similar backgrounds and experiences; the arrangement at Hogewey provides this by ensuring that residents with similar backgrounds continue to live closely together. On a physical level, residents at Hogewey require fewer medications; they eat better and they live longer. On a mental level, they also seem to have more joy. "The people here keep their independence, as much as they can have of it, and they stay active," says Theo Visser. "Here they still have a life. It's not the sort of slow, quiet death you get in other places. Here everyone feels at home."
We call it "Washington".
No, at least in the case of pharmaceuticals single payer is less expensive. You have more negotiating leverage. In the Dutch system you also do not have CEOs of medical companies having to pay for trophy mistresses, reducing costs even further.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
"as the ready availability of other people's cash saps the desire to cut costs."
Nope, that's just American propaganda talking. It may take living in the Netherlands, or a Northern European country, but when you realize not everything is about money, you realize people can have motivations outside of profit maximization.
where I work!
Incorrect. Washington is not for dementia patients, it's for people with incurable narcissistic sociopathy. Oddly enough, the afflicted are not the people who suffer as a result of the disease, it's everyone else who suffers.
Anybody with half a brain generally doesn't acquire money for its own sake
The point was that some people would choose non-monetary benefits over monetary benefits. As they say: money can't buy you love or friendship.
most of the interesting jobs you can get in Europe are publicly financed one way or another (research, art, etc.)
False. Unless you wish to invoke a No True Scotsman-fallacy.
1. 'Europe' does not have a centralized policy for funding of 'most of the interesting jobs'. The member states of the EU differ wildly in the extent to which they 'finance' certain jobs.
2. In general: art and research are subsidized, not 'financed'. There is nothing stopping anyone from attracting private investments for their activities. In fact, there are European anti-state aid laws to prevent anti-competitive subsidization by the governements of the member states: http://ec.europa.eu/competitio...
Many universities in Europe cooperate tightly with institutes that are oriented towards commercial(ly viable) research and the associated private investments.
which means you don't get to do what you think is right, you bloody well have to do what society tells you to do
News flash: unless it's your company, you're not deciding what you get to do. You bloody well have to do what was in the bloody job description when you decided to take the job. If you believe that a private institution gives more of a crap about 'what you think is right' than a public one, you're deeply misguided.
generally all citizens paying into something makes it cost more, not less, as the ready availability of other people's cash saps the desire to cut costs.
This is an oft touted claim of conservatives, but it just isn't true. Socialized health care gives far more bang for the buck than privatized. Take a look at how much Americans pay in healthcare costs pro capita (pre-Obamacare if you like, so you won't have that to blame), and compare that with factors like lifespan and health. Columbia pays far more and gets far less precisely because it's so privatized.
The problem is that with a capitalized system, what matters is maximizing profit, and prices will converge at the highest cost the buyers are is willing to pay. When what you pay for is your life and health, the sky is the limit.
Why do Americans go to Canada to buy prescription drugs? Because the free market does not mean lower costs. Rather the opposite.
There are two types of freedom: negative and positive.
Negative freedom is freedom from interference and control, the freedom to do what you like. The US has traditionally been quite strong on negative freedom, with its constitution limiting how the government can impose rules and restrictions on people.
Positive freedom is the freedom to do the things you want to do, to live an enjoyable life. Europe has much more positive freedom than the US, because socialist policies help people achieve the things they want to achieve, or at least live some kind of reasonable existence where they don't suffer too much. Social mobility and redistribution of wealth increase positive freedom.
It's not quite a dichotomy, but it's certainly true that an extreme of one will result in a lack of the other. I prefer the EU model or trying to balance the two, but I know many posters on /. seem to be violently opposed to anything other than near total negative freedom.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC