Aging in place is something most people want to do, even if they are unfamiliar with the phrase. Aging in place means that Grandma could stay in her own home as long she's able, and that she wouldn't be forced to move out if her care needs increased. The concept isn't limited to deed holders and renters—residents in retirement communities want to age in place as well, staying in their current abodes even if their care needs increase. The question is: are retirement communities on the same page as their residents?

Eighty-eight-year-old Sally Herriot could answer that question. As a resident of Channing House, a continuing care retirement community in Palo Alto, California, she was content living in a comfortable one-bedroom apartment with round-the-clock assistance from caregivers she hired personally. Herriot frequented the opera and stayed abreast of current events; she refused to let her limited mobility or waning eyesight compromise her quality of life. Unfortunately for Herriot, according to the continuing care contract she signed years ago when paying the facility's $180,000 entrance fee, maintaining that lifestyle is not her choice—at least not when facility administrators and health care staff decide her care needs can best be met by a higher level of care.

In October 2007, an AARP attorney filed a lawsuit on Herriot's behalf. In response to extensive media coverage, Channing House posted a response regarding the legal proceedings on their Web site. In the statement, Channing House expressed the legal right—and responsibility—to provide care and supervision to their residents in the milieu best suited to their individual health needs. Whether you think Herriot should not be forced to move, or whether you side with the nonprofit corporation, the reality remains: she won't be leaving without a fight.

If you or a loved one is considering moving into a continuing care retirement community, it's imperative that you clearly understand any contract you are asked to sign. Consult an elderlaw attorney for more complicated contracts. Assisted living is not the only option for securing assistance with activities of daily living. Adult day care centers are ideal for seniors who can still bathe and dress themselves but want to remain social and involved in their communities. In some cases, they may need rehabilitative services, which are readily available at adult day health care centers. For seniors who require greater assistance with the fundamentals of self-care—feeding, bladder management and personal hygiene, for example, an in-home caregiver can be hired, without a physician's recommendation, to provide nonmedical care in a person's home.

If you decide to move into a senior community, you may want to consider a naturally occurring retirement community, or a NORC. As the name implies, a NORC is a community or neighborhood where residents remain for years, and age as neighbors. In some cases, an organization connected to the existing community develops a supportive services program to assist with aging in place; in other cases, residents form a board to arrange support and services the group can access. Services can include transportation, housekeeping, social activities, meals, case management, information and referral, and health screenings. In light of Sally Herriot's predicament, perhaps more seniors will lean toward this contract-free option for living independently—with support when they decide it's needed.