Smart
home

technology
—
often
in
the
form
of
a
voice-activated
virtual
assistant
that
can
automate
devices
in
the
home
—
can
be
a
tool
to
facilitate
aging
in
place.

Experts
on
the
topic
of
aging,
and
specific

programs
that
provide
this
technology
to
seniors,
have
illustrated
the
potential,
but
the
market
is
also
rife
with
different
kinds
of
products.

Having
first
compiled
a
“best-of”
list
of
smart
home
devices
for
aging
in
place
in
2020,
The
New
York
Times
recently

updated
its
list.
The
new
information
comes
from
consultations
with
doctors
and
smart
home
technology
experts,
as
well
as
advocates
at
groups
including


AARP
and

Aging
and
Health
Technology
Watch.

In
making
the
case
for
aging
in
place,
the
Times’
article
also
described
why
people
might
find
aging
in
place
to
be
a
preferred
option
for
later
in
life.

“In
many
cases,
the
costs
of
assisted
or
nursing
care
are
simply
too
high
and
out
of
reach,”
the
story
stated.
“A

2020
Genworth
survey
indicates
that
the
median
cost
of
assisted
living
in
the
US
is
around
$4,500
per
month
—
with
nursing
homes
costing
more
than
double
that.”

Smart
home
devices
are
not
a
replacement
for
dedicated
care
from
a
human
being,
the
story
noted,
but
they
can
be
“a
reliable
tool
when
you
or
other
caregivers
can’t
be
around
in
person,
providing
a
24/7
connection
to
help
ensure
safety,
assist
with
daily
tasks,
and
allow
you
to
check
in
on
a
loved
one.”

But
caregivers
or
seniors
may
have
legitimate
security
and
privacy
concerns
when
bringing
these
tools
—
which
often
involve
cameras
and
microphones
—
into
the
home.

“Safety
is
of
highest
importance,
and
if
a
person
has
to
be
home
alone,
a
way
to
monitor
them
is
reasonable
after
an
explanation
to
them
and
others
who
are
helping
to
care
for
them,”
Dr.
William
Dale
told
the
Times.
Dale
serves
as
professor
and
chair
of
supportive
care
medicine
at
the
Center
for
Cancer
and
Aging
at
cancer
research
hospital

City
of
Hope.

“It
is
also
important
to
note
that
if
a
person
can’t
be
safe
at
home
due
to
cognitive
impairments,
then
one
should
consider
a
different
living
arrangement,”
Dale
said.
“The
camera
can
only
observe,
and
it
still
requires
someone
to
monitor
and
act
quickly
on
a
dangerous
situation
that
occurs.
It
is
not
a
replacement
for
the
necessary
involvement
to
keep
someone
safe.”

That’s
why
it’s
important
for
caregivers
and
receivers
to
“partner”
and
adequately
discuss
such
technology
being
in
their
home.
This
involves
teaching
and
learning
about
the
devices’
presence,
their
functions,
best
practices
for
use,
and
the
ways
in
which
they
could
better

help
a
resident
feel
safer
and
more
secure,
the
Times
said
in
consultation
with
its
sources.

Related