Habitat-groupe-personnes-agees - Habiter-Autrement

Où vivre mieux ?
Le choix de l’habitat groupé pour personnes âgées
Summary
The report "Où vivre mieux? Le choix de l’habitat groupé pour personnes âgées" specifically
addresses one type of living environment available to elderly people today: community living.
It constitutes an extension of the report by Professor Carlson "Où vivre vieux? Quel éventail
de cadres de vie pour quelles personnes vieillissantes ?", published by the King Baudouin
Foundation in 1998.
It shows that elderly people have a very diversified range of living environments available to
them beyond the simple "home-institution" alternative to which they are too often subjected.
A large range of choices is available beginning with a private home in all its forms, to the
traditional institutions and the innovations that have been made to them, and leading to a
presentation of recent initiatives like the kangaroo habitat, family acceptance and community
living.
The report goes on to analyse community living for the elderly in greater depth. Using an
empirical approach, it collects the impressions of residents from seven community-living
homes registered in Wallonia and Brussels. Based on these interviews the report analyses the
accessibility of these environments and their viability as well as the residents’ well-being and
their quality of life.
Linking private and community life to differing degrees, community living homes appear to
have achieved a balance between security and independence. On the one hand, they provide
for security and peace of mind: the ability to call for assistance in the event of an accident, to
benefit from the support of the group in the event of problems, being in a group and putting
an end to their solitude. On the other hand, the essence of community living itself supports
independence as it promotes the autonomy, activity and independence of each environment
administered by its residents. Everyone controls his/her own intimate sphere and takes his/her
own independent decisions.
The range of environments analysed, while sparse, revealed certain homogeneity of the
residents within each project while the diversity among the different projects made it possible
for each to break find or create what corresponds best to its expectations.
This report answers questions about the economic viability of community living environments
by emphasising that the key to economic and legal success and stability lies in cooperation
with the public sector: financial support, stability, greater accessibility and recognition are
certainly the most important assets of such cooperation.
On the question of the accessibility of such environments to every type of person, regardless
of income, preferences, social, cultural or financial condition, this report points to diversity. It
found no contraindication or closed doors, and the range studied makes it possible to respond
to the specific needs of each group or type of resident.
278