[eavesdropper]

[quote=Casca]There was a beautiful vintage (1935) stone cabin in Pine Valley, that went for a song about a year and a half ago. I lusted mightily for it.[/quote]

Casca, I can relate. I’m definitely a sucker for early 20th century cabins/lodges. I have a neighbor down by our weekend (hopefully retirement) place in central Virginia who own a rustic lodge. I walked into this place, and totally felt like I was in a very well cared-for Maine fishing/hunting camp, circa 1915. Two-story main room with 25-foot native stone fireplace, canoes and other artifacts resting on the rafters and hanging from the walls. Four bedrooms, and a couple baths. A second-floor gallery surrounding the main room, bordering four more bedrooms with baths. Interesting note: original structure had no kitchen.

I was shocked to learn that the building had actually deteriorated to the point that it was being used as a farm outbuilding where hay was stored, and in which local children played and explored over the years. Fortunately, in the late 90’s, an ambitious out-of-towner bought the place and spared no expense in restoring it. What he could save, he re-used; what he could not, he replaced with architectural salvage or high-quality reproductions. The building was constructed, inside and out, of American chestnut from trees on the property. Prior to the mid-century chestnut blight, the region had one of the most lavish supplies of American chestnut trees in the country, and there are many large houses, barns and outbuildings in our area that were constructed from this great wood.

The property has a 1600 sf Craftsman cottage approx. 30 yards from the lodge, so it’s possible that a caretaker/ housekeeper lived there, preparing food for the lodge guests, which could explain the omission. In any case, the gentleman who rehabbed the place did not feel the need to add one (could have been he felt it would negatively impact the architectural integrity and character), and it came back to bite him when he put the property up for sale. The real estate market in the area was incredibly hot after 9/11 (people wanted a “safe” area within 3 hours of DC), but it took almost a year to sell. The buyers were able to use that to negotiate a much more reasonable price, and installed a compact kitchen in the lodge’s finished basement.

It really is a stunning place, but I don’t envy them the maintenance on the property and on the structure. And there are major energy efficiency issues. But I can’t help but be pleased that such a gorgeous structure was saved from demolition. A lot of that goes on there, and while there are people who recycle the chestnut and other woods, much of it is discarded or burned. Very sad.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Casca]There was a beautiful vintage (1935) stone cabin in Pine Valley, that went for a song about a year and a half ago. I lusted mightily for it.[/quote]

Casca, I can relate. I’m definitely a sucker for early 20th century cabins/lodges. I have a neighbor down by our weekend (hopefully retirement) place in central Virginia who own a rustic lodge. I walked into this place, and totally felt like I was in a very well cared-for Maine fishing/hunting camp, circa 1915. Two-story main room with 25-foot native stone fireplace, canoes and other artifacts resting on the rafters and hanging from the walls. Four bedrooms, and a couple baths. A second-floor gallery surrounding the main room, bordering four more bedrooms with baths. Interesting note: original structure had no kitchen.

I was shocked to learn that the building had actually deteriorated to the point that it was being used as a farm outbuilding where hay was stored, and in which local children played and explored over the years. Fortunately, in the late 90’s, an ambitious out-of-towner bought the place and spared no expense in restoring it. What he could save, he re-used; what he could not, he replaced with architectural salvage or high-quality reproductions. The building was constructed, inside and out, of American chestnut from trees on the property. Prior to the mid-century chestnut blight, the region had one of the most lavish supplies of American chestnut trees in the country, and there are many large houses, barns and outbuildings in our area that were constructed from this great wood.

The property has a 1600 sf Craftsman cottage approx. 30 yards from the lodge, so it’s possible that a caretaker/ housekeeper lived there, preparing food for the lodge guests, which could explain the omission. In any case, the gentleman who rehabbed the place did not feel the need to add one (could have been he felt it would negatively impact the architectural integrity and character), and it came back to bite him when he put the property up for sale. The real estate market in the area was incredibly hot after 9/11 (people wanted a “safe” area within 3 hours of DC), but it took almost a year to sell. The buyers were able to use that to negotiate a much more reasonable price, and installed a compact kitchen in the lodge’s finished basement.

It really is a stunning place, but I don’t envy them the maintenance on the property and on the structure. And there are major energy efficiency issues. But I can’t help but be pleased that such a gorgeous structure was saved from demolition. A lot of that goes on there, and while there are people who recycle the chestnut and other woods, much of it is discarded or burned. Very sad.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] It’s too bad our society has such a negative way of dealing with death. I understand the anguish when people are young; but when they are old, and have lived good long, lives, the end of their lives should be celebrated, and death should be somewhat accepted as closure to a fulfilling life.[/quote]

It seems to me that our society seems to have moved in the direction of assuming that there is a proscribed way of dealing with each and every situation, and there isn’t room for more than one type of emotion. If one doesn’t follow the “script”, it makes him/her a “bad” person.

Everyone has different ways of dealing with the process of dying, and it’s not unusual to experience conflicting emotions. The way in which a person dies can very definitely affect the way in which their loved ones mourn. Very often, relatives of people who die after a protracted illness experience guilt because they feel feel relief after the patient dies, or they don’t have a profound sense of grief. What they don’t realize is that they have been mourning the loss of that person for some time; the person they knew and loved and with whom they shared wonderful times has been gone for some time now. They *have* grieved – it’s just that their grieving period was longer than usual, and much of it took place prior to their loved one’s physical passing.

When a person dies unexpectedly, even when they are older, it’s always a shock, and so the emotions are more “compacted” and intense. Very often, the grief is compounded by feelings that we shortchanged the deceased in some way, and that there is no way to make reparations now.

Then there are those times when the deceased is a not-so-nice individual who made the lives of all those around him/her a living hell. I knew someone like this years ago, and – call me a heartless bitch – the nicest thing he ever did for anyone was die. He physically and emotionally abused his wife and children: he continued to beat his daughters well into adulthood, and emotionally tortured his entire family until he no longer was physically able to. The funeral was an interesting experience: you would have thought this guy was competition for Bill Cosby the way his daughters talked. And they kept wailing, over and over, “What is Mom going to do now without Dad.” My first and only thought was, “She’s going to be able to breathe for the first time in forty years.” The widow was the only one who appeared to be dealing in reality: she was “old school” and would never have thought to criticize her deceased husband or air his dirty laundry, but she could not shed tears or publicly express sorrow she didn’t feel. She was quietly respectful at the wake and at the funeral, however, I remember her kids criticizing her because she wasn’t wearing widow’s weeds and openly sobbing over the loss of her husband.

I know that many people believe that my generation (Boomers) are a self-involved lot. That may well be true, and, with any luck, Boomers will engage in a study of the last stage of their lives – dying. Perhaps it will result in people losing some of their fears and their denial, and perhaps engage in some proactive planning for that time in their lives.

Unfortunately, I also believe that my generation has been very selfish in not planning properly for its aging. There have been major societal shifts at the various life stages due to the immense size of the Boomer population, and the aging of Boomers will be no different. Unfortunately, it will be a shift that will place an enormous economic hardship on the nation, and coming on the heels of this financial debacle, I’m not holding out much hope that the younger generations will be kindly disposed toward our needs during this time. There is still some time to address the healthcare aspect, but between the vicious infighting among ambitious lawmakers and the aspirations of the major political parties, it will take a miracle to accomplish that.

I’m signing up for swimming marathon training, and laying in a supply of life jackets while waiting for this tsunami.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] It’s too bad our society has such a negative way of dealing with death. I understand the anguish when people are young; but when they are old, and have lived good long, lives, the end of their lives should be celebrated, and death should be somewhat accepted as closure to a fulfilling life.[/quote]

It seems to me that our society seems to have moved in the direction of assuming that there is a proscribed way of dealing with each and every situation, and there isn’t room for more than one type of emotion. If one doesn’t follow the “script”, it makes him/her a “bad” person.

Everyone has different ways of dealing with the process of dying, and it’s not unusual to experience conflicting emotions. The way in which a person dies can very definitely affect the way in which their loved ones mourn. Very often, relatives of people who die after a protracted illness experience guilt because they feel feel relief after the patient dies, or they don’t have a profound sense of grief. What they don’t realize is that they have been mourning the loss of that person for some time; the person they knew and loved and with whom they shared wonderful times has been gone for some time now. They *have* grieved – it’s just that their grieving period was longer than usual, and much of it took place prior to their loved one’s physical passing.

When a person dies unexpectedly, even when they are older, it’s always a shock, and so the emotions are more “compacted” and intense. Very often, the grief is compounded by feelings that we shortchanged the deceased in some way, and that there is no way to make reparations now.

Then there are those times when the deceased is a not-so-nice individual who made the lives of all those around him/her a living hell. I knew someone like this years ago, and – call me a heartless bitch – the nicest thing he ever did for anyone was die. He physically and emotionally abused his wife and children: he continued to beat his daughters well into adulthood, and emotionally tortured his entire family until he no longer was physically able to. The funeral was an interesting experience: you would have thought this guy was competition for Bill Cosby the way his daughters talked. And they kept wailing, over and over, “What is Mom going to do now without Dad.” My first and only thought was, “She’s going to be able to breathe for the first time in forty years.” The widow was the only one who appeared to be dealing in reality: she was “old school” and would never have thought to criticize her deceased husband or air his dirty laundry, but she could not shed tears or publicly express sorrow she didn’t feel. She was quietly respectful at the wake and at the funeral, however, I remember her kids criticizing her because she wasn’t wearing widow’s weeds and openly sobbing over the loss of her husband.

I know that many people believe that my generation (Boomers) are a self-involved lot. That may well be true, and, with any luck, Boomers will engage in a study of the last stage of their lives – dying. Perhaps it will result in people losing some of their fears and their denial, and perhaps engage in some proactive planning for that time in their lives.

Unfortunately, I also believe that my generation has been very selfish in not planning properly for its aging. There have been major societal shifts at the various life stages due to the immense size of the Boomer population, and the aging of Boomers will be no different. Unfortunately, it will be a shift that will place an enormous economic hardship on the nation, and coming on the heels of this financial debacle, I’m not holding out much hope that the younger generations will be kindly disposed toward our needs during this time. There is still some time to address the healthcare aspect, but between the vicious infighting among ambitious lawmakers and the aspirations of the major political parties, it will take a miracle to accomplish that.

I’m signing up for swimming marathon training, and laying in a supply of life jackets while waiting for this tsunami.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] It’s too bad our society has such a negative way of dealing with death. I understand the anguish when people are young; but when they are old, and have lived good long, lives, the end of their lives should be celebrated, and death should be somewhat accepted as closure to a fulfilling life.[/quote]

It seems to me that our society seems to have moved in the direction of assuming that there is a proscribed way of dealing with each and every situation, and there isn’t room for more than one type of emotion. If one doesn’t follow the “script”, it makes him/her a “bad” person.

Everyone has different ways of dealing with the process of dying, and it’s not unusual to experience conflicting emotions. The way in which a person dies can very definitely affect the way in which their loved ones mourn. Very often, relatives of people who die after a protracted illness experience guilt because they feel feel relief after the patient dies, or they don’t have a profound sense of grief. What they don’t realize is that they have been mourning the loss of that person for some time; the person they knew and loved and with whom they shared wonderful times has been gone for some time now. They *have* grieved – it’s just that their grieving period was longer than usual, and much of it took place prior to their loved one’s physical passing.

When a person dies unexpectedly, even when they are older, it’s always a shock, and so the emotions are more “compacted” and intense. Very often, the grief is compounded by feelings that we shortchanged the deceased in some way, and that there is no way to make reparations now.

Then there are those times when the deceased is a not-so-nice individual who made the lives of all those around him/her a living hell. I knew someone like this years ago, and – call me a heartless bitch – the nicest thing he ever did for anyone was die. He physically and emotionally abused his wife and children: he continued to beat his daughters well into adulthood, and emotionally tortured his entire family until he no longer was physically able to. The funeral was an interesting experience: you would have thought this guy was competition for Bill Cosby the way his daughters talked. And they kept wailing, over and over, “What is Mom going to do now without Dad.” My first and only thought was, “She’s going to be able to breathe for the first time in forty years.” The widow was the only one who appeared to be dealing in reality: she was “old school” and would never have thought to criticize her deceased husband or air his dirty laundry, but she could not shed tears or publicly express sorrow she didn’t feel. She was quietly respectful at the wake and at the funeral, however, I remember her kids criticizing her because she wasn’t wearing widow’s weeds and openly sobbing over the loss of her husband.

I know that many people believe that my generation (Boomers) are a self-involved lot. That may well be true, and, with any luck, Boomers will engage in a study of the last stage of their lives – dying. Perhaps it will result in people losing some of their fears and their denial, and perhaps engage in some proactive planning for that time in their lives.

Unfortunately, I also believe that my generation has been very selfish in not planning properly for its aging. There have been major societal shifts at the various life stages due to the immense size of the Boomer population, and the aging of Boomers will be no different. Unfortunately, it will be a shift that will place an enormous economic hardship on the nation, and coming on the heels of this financial debacle, I’m not holding out much hope that the younger generations will be kindly disposed toward our needs during this time. There is still some time to address the healthcare aspect, but between the vicious infighting among ambitious lawmakers and the aspirations of the major political parties, it will take a miracle to accomplish that.

I’m signing up for swimming marathon training, and laying in a supply of life jackets while waiting for this tsunami.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] It’s too bad our society has such a negative way of dealing with death. I understand the anguish when people are young; but when they are old, and have lived good long, lives, the end of their lives should be celebrated, and death should be somewhat accepted as closure to a fulfilling life.[/quote]

It seems to me that our society seems to have moved in the direction of assuming that there is a proscribed way of dealing with each and every situation, and there isn’t room for more than one type of emotion. If one doesn’t follow the “script”, it makes him/her a “bad” person.

Everyone has different ways of dealing with the process of dying, and it’s not unusual to experience conflicting emotions. The way in which a person dies can very definitely affect the way in which their loved ones mourn. Very often, relatives of people who die after a protracted illness experience guilt because they feel feel relief after the patient dies, or they don’t have a profound sense of grief. What they don’t realize is that they have been mourning the loss of that person for some time; the person they knew and loved and with whom they shared wonderful times has been gone for some time now. They *have* grieved – it’s just that their grieving period was longer than usual, and much of it took place prior to their loved one’s physical passing.

When a person dies unexpectedly, even when they are older, it’s always a shock, and so the emotions are more “compacted” and intense. Very often, the grief is compounded by feelings that we shortchanged the deceased in some way, and that there is no way to make reparations now.

Then there are those times when the deceased is a not-so-nice individual who made the lives of all those around him/her a living hell. I knew someone like this years ago, and – call me a heartless bitch – the nicest thing he ever did for anyone was die. He physically and emotionally abused his wife and children: he continued to beat his daughters well into adulthood, and emotionally tortured his entire family until he no longer was physically able to. The funeral was an interesting experience: you would have thought this guy was competition for Bill Cosby the way his daughters talked. And they kept wailing, over and over, “What is Mom going to do now without Dad.” My first and only thought was, “She’s going to be able to breathe for the first time in forty years.” The widow was the only one who appeared to be dealing in reality: she was “old school” and would never have thought to criticize her deceased husband or air his dirty laundry, but she could not shed tears or publicly express sorrow she didn’t feel. She was quietly respectful at the wake and at the funeral, however, I remember her kids criticizing her because she wasn’t wearing widow’s weeds and openly sobbing over the loss of her husband.

I know that many people believe that my generation (Boomers) are a self-involved lot. That may well be true, and, with any luck, Boomers will engage in a study of the last stage of their lives – dying. Perhaps it will result in people losing some of their fears and their denial, and perhaps engage in some proactive planning for that time in their lives.

Unfortunately, I also believe that my generation has been very selfish in not planning properly for its aging. There have been major societal shifts at the various life stages due to the immense size of the Boomer population, and the aging of Boomers will be no different. Unfortunately, it will be a shift that will place an enormous economic hardship on the nation, and coming on the heels of this financial debacle, I’m not holding out much hope that the younger generations will be kindly disposed toward our needs during this time. There is still some time to address the healthcare aspect, but between the vicious infighting among ambitious lawmakers and the aspirations of the major political parties, it will take a miracle to accomplish that.

I’m signing up for swimming marathon training, and laying in a supply of life jackets while waiting for this tsunami.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] It’s too bad our society has such a negative way of dealing with death. I understand the anguish when people are young; but when they are old, and have lived good long, lives, the end of their lives should be celebrated, and death should be somewhat accepted as closure to a fulfilling life.[/quote]

It seems to me that our society seems to have moved in the direction of assuming that there is a proscribed way of dealing with each and every situation, and there isn’t room for more than one type of emotion. If one doesn’t follow the “script”, it makes him/her a “bad” person.

Everyone has different ways of dealing with the process of dying, and it’s not unusual to experience conflicting emotions. The way in which a person dies can very definitely affect the way in which their loved ones mourn. Very often, relatives of people who die after a protracted illness experience guilt because they feel feel relief after the patient dies, or they don’t have a profound sense of grief. What they don’t realize is that they have been mourning the loss of that person for some time; the person they knew and loved and with whom they shared wonderful times has been gone for some time now. They *have* grieved – it’s just that their grieving period was longer than usual, and much of it took place prior to their loved one’s physical passing.

When a person dies unexpectedly, even when they are older, it’s always a shock, and so the emotions are more “compacted” and intense. Very often, the grief is compounded by feelings that we shortchanged the deceased in some way, and that there is no way to make reparations now.

Then there are those times when the deceased is a not-so-nice individual who made the lives of all those around him/her a living hell. I knew someone like this years ago, and – call me a heartless bitch – the nicest thing he ever did for anyone was die. He physically and emotionally abused his wife and children: he continued to beat his daughters well into adulthood, and emotionally tortured his entire family until he no longer was physically able to. The funeral was an interesting experience: you would have thought this guy was competition for Bill Cosby the way his daughters talked. And they kept wailing, over and over, “What is Mom going to do now without Dad.” My first and only thought was, “She’s going to be able to breathe for the first time in forty years.” The widow was the only one who appeared to be dealing in reality: she was “old school” and would never have thought to criticize her deceased husband or air his dirty laundry, but she could not shed tears or publicly express sorrow she didn’t feel. She was quietly respectful at the wake and at the funeral, however, I remember her kids criticizing her because she wasn’t wearing widow’s weeds and openly sobbing over the loss of her husband.

I know that many people believe that my generation (Boomers) are a self-involved lot. That may well be true, and, with any luck, Boomers will engage in a study of the last stage of their lives – dying. Perhaps it will result in people losing some of their fears and their denial, and perhaps engage in some proactive planning for that time in their lives.

Unfortunately, I also believe that my generation has been very selfish in not planning properly for its aging. There have been major societal shifts at the various life stages due to the immense size of the Boomer population, and the aging of Boomers will be no different. Unfortunately, it will be a shift that will place an enormous economic hardship on the nation, and coming on the heels of this financial debacle, I’m not holding out much hope that the younger generations will be kindly disposed toward our needs during this time. There is still some time to address the healthcare aspect, but between the vicious infighting among ambitious lawmakers and the aspirations of the major political parties, it will take a miracle to accomplish that.

I’m signing up for swimming marathon training, and laying in a supply of life jackets while waiting for this tsunami.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=UCGal]My mom’s cousin is a nurse who switched from being an ER nurse to being a home-care hospice pediatric nurse. It was a HUGE mindshift for her. And many medical personel can’t make the switch.

Hospital care, traditional medicine, is about doing whatever it takes, applying whatever technology can make an improvement, with less regard to the quality of life of the patient and family’s morale.

Doctors are totally in control in the traditional medicine mindset. Patients are not in the power position.

In hospice – the patient and their family is in control. They can make choices that may have a negative impact on time-till-death but a positive impact on happiness and emotional well being. My cousin had to advocate for a young boy with cancer to be able to join the cubscouts and go camping. (He really wanted to have some “normal boy” experiences – not live in a bubble.) The doctor felt it was too risky because of his weakened immune system. My cousin, the parents, and the boy were able to override the doctor because the boy was in a hospice program. Hospice is about pain management and quality of life, not life extension.

After her 20 years as an ER nurse, she LOVED being a hospice nurse. Even though the outcome was pre-determined (patients were terminal) it was about empowering the patient to live their remaining time as they wanted.

When my brother was nearing the end he was on the cusp of going into hospice. The transition was in place when he was told he could get an appt to a specialist he’d been trying to get in with. He was not allowed to do hospice if he saw the specialist because they were in conflict. As a family member, I wish he’d chosen hospice – he ended up spending his remaining weeks going through extreme surgeries and in the ICU and never made it back home. But it was his choice to make.[/quote]

I cannot say enough good things about hospice. As I mentioned in a post the other day, people (esp. Americans) are very much into “control” over their circumstances, and there’s never a time that you feel less in control than when you are very sick or dying.

You really need to learn “how to be sick”. I know that sounds stupid, but illness isn’t a natural state for most people, and not adjusting to the state of illness can be seriously detrimental to both the patient and his/her loved ones. Hospice care is really good for this. As you related, UC Gal, it’s a 180 degree departure from the traditional hospital medicine model. It doesn’t surprise me at all that many medical personnel cannot make the transition, which is really too bad. Many hospice-related concepts can be beneficially applied to traditional inpatient care.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=UCGal]My mom’s cousin is a nurse who switched from being an ER nurse to being a home-care hospice pediatric nurse. It was a HUGE mindshift for her. And many medical personel can’t make the switch.

Hospital care, traditional medicine, is about doing whatever it takes, applying whatever technology can make an improvement, with less regard to the quality of life of the patient and family’s morale.

Doctors are totally in control in the traditional medicine mindset. Patients are not in the power position.

In hospice – the patient and their family is in control. They can make choices that may have a negative impact on time-till-death but a positive impact on happiness and emotional well being. My cousin had to advocate for a young boy with cancer to be able to join the cubscouts and go camping. (He really wanted to have some “normal boy” experiences – not live in a bubble.) The doctor felt it was too risky because of his weakened immune system. My cousin, the parents, and the boy were able to override the doctor because the boy was in a hospice program. Hospice is about pain management and quality of life, not life extension.

After her 20 years as an ER nurse, she LOVED being a hospice nurse. Even though the outcome was pre-determined (patients were terminal) it was about empowering the patient to live their remaining time as they wanted.

When my brother was nearing the end he was on the cusp of going into hospice. The transition was in place when he was told he could get an appt to a specialist he’d been trying to get in with. He was not allowed to do hospice if he saw the specialist because they were in conflict. As a family member, I wish he’d chosen hospice – he ended up spending his remaining weeks going through extreme surgeries and in the ICU and never made it back home. But it was his choice to make.[/quote]

I cannot say enough good things about hospice. As I mentioned in a post the other day, people (esp. Americans) are very much into “control” over their circumstances, and there’s never a time that you feel less in control than when you are very sick or dying.

You really need to learn “how to be sick”. I know that sounds stupid, but illness isn’t a natural state for most people, and not adjusting to the state of illness can be seriously detrimental to both the patient and his/her loved ones. Hospice care is really good for this. As you related, UC Gal, it’s a 180 degree departure from the traditional hospital medicine model. It doesn’t surprise me at all that many medical personnel cannot make the transition, which is really too bad. Many hospice-related concepts can be beneficially applied to traditional inpatient care.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=UCGal]My mom’s cousin is a nurse who switched from being an ER nurse to being a home-care hospice pediatric nurse. It was a HUGE mindshift for her. And many medical personel can’t make the switch.

Hospital care, traditional medicine, is about doing whatever it takes, applying whatever technology can make an improvement, with less regard to the quality of life of the patient and family’s morale.

Doctors are totally in control in the traditional medicine mindset. Patients are not in the power position.

In hospice – the patient and their family is in control. They can make choices that may have a negative impact on time-till-death but a positive impact on happiness and emotional well being. My cousin had to advocate for a young boy with cancer to be able to join the cubscouts and go camping. (He really wanted to have some “normal boy” experiences – not live in a bubble.) The doctor felt it was too risky because of his weakened immune system. My cousin, the parents, and the boy were able to override the doctor because the boy was in a hospice program. Hospice is about pain management and quality of life, not life extension.

After her 20 years as an ER nurse, she LOVED being a hospice nurse. Even though the outcome was pre-determined (patients were terminal) it was about empowering the patient to live their remaining time as they wanted.

When my brother was nearing the end he was on the cusp of going into hospice. The transition was in place when he was told he could get an appt to a specialist he’d been trying to get in with. He was not allowed to do hospice if he saw the specialist because they were in conflict. As a family member, I wish he’d chosen hospice – he ended up spending his remaining weeks going through extreme surgeries and in the ICU and never made it back home. But it was his choice to make.[/quote]

I cannot say enough good things about hospice. As I mentioned in a post the other day, people (esp. Americans) are very much into “control” over their circumstances, and there’s never a time that you feel less in control than when you are very sick or dying.

You really need to learn “how to be sick”. I know that sounds stupid, but illness isn’t a natural state for most people, and not adjusting to the state of illness can be seriously detrimental to both the patient and his/her loved ones. Hospice care is really good for this. As you related, UC Gal, it’s a 180 degree departure from the traditional hospital medicine model. It doesn’t surprise me at all that many medical personnel cannot make the transition, which is really too bad. Many hospice-related concepts can be beneficially applied to traditional inpatient care.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=UCGal]My mom’s cousin is a nurse who switched from being an ER nurse to being a home-care hospice pediatric nurse. It was a HUGE mindshift for her. And many medical personel can’t make the switch.

Hospital care, traditional medicine, is about doing whatever it takes, applying whatever technology can make an improvement, with less regard to the quality of life of the patient and family’s morale.

Doctors are totally in control in the traditional medicine mindset. Patients are not in the power position.

In hospice – the patient and their family is in control. They can make choices that may have a negative impact on time-till-death but a positive impact on happiness and emotional well being. My cousin had to advocate for a young boy with cancer to be able to join the cubscouts and go camping. (He really wanted to have some “normal boy” experiences – not live in a bubble.) The doctor felt it was too risky because of his weakened immune system. My cousin, the parents, and the boy were able to override the doctor because the boy was in a hospice program. Hospice is about pain management and quality of life, not life extension.

After her 20 years as an ER nurse, she LOVED being a hospice nurse. Even though the outcome was pre-determined (patients were terminal) it was about empowering the patient to live their remaining time as they wanted.

When my brother was nearing the end he was on the cusp of going into hospice. The transition was in place when he was told he could get an appt to a specialist he’d been trying to get in with. He was not allowed to do hospice if he saw the specialist because they were in conflict. As a family member, I wish he’d chosen hospice – he ended up spending his remaining weeks going through extreme surgeries and in the ICU and never made it back home. But it was his choice to make.[/quote]

I cannot say enough good things about hospice. As I mentioned in a post the other day, people (esp. Americans) are very much into “control” over their circumstances, and there’s never a time that you feel less in control than when you are very sick or dying.

You really need to learn “how to be sick”. I know that sounds stupid, but illness isn’t a natural state for most people, and not adjusting to the state of illness can be seriously detrimental to both the patient and his/her loved ones. Hospice care is really good for this. As you related, UC Gal, it’s a 180 degree departure from the traditional hospital medicine model. It doesn’t surprise me at all that many medical personnel cannot make the transition, which is really too bad. Many hospice-related concepts can be beneficially applied to traditional inpatient care.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=UCGal]My mom’s cousin is a nurse who switched from being an ER nurse to being a home-care hospice pediatric nurse. It was a HUGE mindshift for her. And many medical personel can’t make the switch.

Hospital care, traditional medicine, is about doing whatever it takes, applying whatever technology can make an improvement, with less regard to the quality of life of the patient and family’s morale.

Doctors are totally in control in the traditional medicine mindset. Patients are not in the power position.

In hospice – the patient and their family is in control. They can make choices that may have a negative impact on time-till-death but a positive impact on happiness and emotional well being. My cousin had to advocate for a young boy with cancer to be able to join the cubscouts and go camping. (He really wanted to have some “normal boy” experiences – not live in a bubble.) The doctor felt it was too risky because of his weakened immune system. My cousin, the parents, and the boy were able to override the doctor because the boy was in a hospice program. Hospice is about pain management and quality of life, not life extension.

After her 20 years as an ER nurse, she LOVED being a hospice nurse. Even though the outcome was pre-determined (patients were terminal) it was about empowering the patient to live their remaining time as they wanted.

When my brother was nearing the end he was on the cusp of going into hospice. The transition was in place when he was told he could get an appt to a specialist he’d been trying to get in with. He was not allowed to do hospice if he saw the specialist because they were in conflict. As a family member, I wish he’d chosen hospice – he ended up spending his remaining weeks going through extreme surgeries and in the ICU and never made it back home. But it was his choice to make.[/quote]

I cannot say enough good things about hospice. As I mentioned in a post the other day, people (esp. Americans) are very much into “control” over their circumstances, and there’s never a time that you feel less in control than when you are very sick or dying.

You really need to learn “how to be sick”. I know that sounds stupid, but illness isn’t a natural state for most people, and not adjusting to the state of illness can be seriously detrimental to both the patient and his/her loved ones. Hospice care is really good for this. As you related, UC Gal, it’s a 180 degree departure from the traditional hospital medicine model. It doesn’t surprise me at all that many medical personnel cannot make the transition, which is really too bad. Many hospice-related concepts can be beneficially applied to traditional inpatient care.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!!

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!!

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!!

[Author]

Posts