At 92, Helen thought she knew exactly what she wanted from the years ahead.

She wanted to stay put.

Not just in any house, but the house – the one she and her late husband built more than 40 years ago in Avondale Heights. The home where they raised their two children, where birthdays were celebrated, arguments were had, and memories were made. The home surrounded by friends, relatives and a support network all within walking distance.

After losing her husband, Helen remained fiercely independent. She was still managing on her own, but her children could see the signs of ageing creeping in. Their worry wasn’t dramatic – it was practical. What would happen if she fell? What if she needed daily help? Could she really live alone indefinitely?

Helen’s answer was clear: she wasn’t moving. Not to aged care. Not in with her children. She wanted to remain in her own home for as long as possible.

A family challenge many older Australians face

Helen’s situation will sound familiar to many families.

She owned valuable assets – her family home and a former residence now rented out as an investment property – but her income was limited. The house itself also needed work. Built decades earlier, it wasn’t designed for ageing in place, and certainly not for accommodating a growing family.

After many conversations, the family agreed on a plan. Helen’s son, along with his partner and three children, would move in with her. They would support her day-to-day needs and ensure she was never alone.

But for that to work, the house needed a significant renovation – extra bedrooms, more living space, and modernised bathrooms and kitchen to make the home safer and more comfortable for Helen.

There was also a deeper concern quietly sitting in the background: fairness. Helen was determined to treat both her children equally when it came time to distribute her estate.

Considering a reverse mortgage

The solution came in the form of a reverse mortgage – a financial option that allows older homeowners to access equity in their property without selling it or making regular repayments.

In Helen’s case, a reverse mortgage of $400,000 was arranged. Around $300,000 was used to fund the renovation, transforming the home into a space that worked for three generations. The remaining $100,000 was set aside as a contingency – a buffer for unexpected health care needs and eventual funeral costs.

Importantly, Helen retained ownership of her home and could continue living there for life.

The family also agreed on how assets would be handled in the future. Helen’s son, who moved in and helped care for her, would eventually inherit the family home. Her daughter would inherit the investment property. It was a plan that felt fair, transparent and respectful of everyone involved.

Peace of mind – for everyone

For Helen, the biggest win was staying exactly where she wanted to be, surrounded by familiar faces and daily family life. For her children, there was reassurance that their mother was safe, supported and not isolated.

And for the grandchildren, the arrangement created something rare: a genuine multi-generational household, with a grandmother at its heart.

Reverse mortgages aren’t right for everyone, and they require careful consideration and independent advice. But for Helen and her family, it offered something invaluable – choice.

Choice to stay. Choice to plan. And choice to age on her own terms, in the home she built from the ground up.