$242,000. Per person. That’s the Genworth 2023 Cost of Care Survey estimate for average lifetime long-term care expenses in today’s dollars. I’ve seen this number appear in FIRE forums attached to some version of “nobody talks about this,” as if early retirees are sleepwalking toward a cliff they haven’t noticed.

We’ve noticed.

When you’re planning a 40-plus year retirement instead of a 20-year one, every large lumpy expense gets scrutinized, including our FIRE number breakdown. Long-term care belongs in that category alongside sequence of returns risk and pre-Medicare healthcare. I’ve been sitting with this number, running scenarios, thinking through what it actually means for a family like ours. Here’s where I landed.

Starting with a lower withdrawal rate builds the buffer in

The 4% rule was designed around a 30-year retirement. We’re targeting something closer to 45 years. Running at 3 to 3.5% withdrawal means we need a larger portfolio to hit our number, but it also means the portfolio has genuine room to absorb large, unplanned costs without blowing up the rest of the plan.

There’s no separate account labeled “future nursing home fund” sitting in our spreadsheet. The oversized portfolio is the buffer. If we never need it for long-term care, it grows and eventually passes on. If one of us spends two years in memory care at $7,000 a month, that drawdown happens inside a portfolio that was sized to handle it.

This is why 4% always felt a little thin for our situation. The rule is a starting point, not a destination. We want the cushion baked into the structure from day one.

The Co-Pilot’s nursing license is a real asset, not a fallback

The Co-Pilot is a registered nurse. Her license doesn’t lapse because she stopped working. She can reenter at any point, whether that’s per diem shifts in whatever state we’re parked in, travel nursing contracts that pay well and offer flexibility, or full-time income if something significant changed and we needed it.

I want to be precise about how I think of this. A fallback implies the plan failed. This is optionality that was built in on purpose. Our finances are structured so we don’t need that income. Having a licensed nurse in the family who could generate $60,000 to $80,000 a year on relatively short notice changes the risk profile of a 45-year plan in a meaningful way.

There’s a layer beyond the income too. If one of us ends up needing hands-on care at some point, having a medical professional already in the household changes what that looks like and what it costs. I’m not running that calculation coldly. It’s just part of the honest picture.

Building the Roth ladder because you can’t wait until you need it

Traditional pre-tax retirement accounts have a penalty problem for early retirees. We’ve been building a Roth conversion ladder since we started taking FIRE seriously. We are starting to convert a controlled amount of pre-tax money into Roth, staying inside a low tax bracket, and letting it season for the required five years before it’s accessible penalty-free.

What this buys is flexibility at different life stages. It also gives us control over our taxable income in a way that has downstream effects on almost everything else. Our ACA healthcare premiums. Our exposure to future RMDs. Our ability to absorb a large expense in a given year without triggering a tax disaster. The Roth ladder connects to all of it.

Starting early matters here. The ladder doesn’t work if you wait until you need the money. The five-year clock has to be running long before the withdrawals happen.

Geographic arbitrage goes deeper than cheap living

Living in an RV gives us something most FIRE households don’t have. We can move. If ACA options are better in one state, we park there. If assisted living costs become relevant decades from now, a memory care facility in rural Tennessee runs a fraction of the cost of one in coastal California. That mobility is part of our long-term care plan whether we consciously frame it that way or not.

The ACA piece gets underappreciated. Our healthcare premiums are tied to our Modified Adjusted Gross Income. Managing MAGI carefully means we can access real subsidies on the marketplace. That means the Roth ladder, the size of our annual conversions, and the sequence of our account withdrawals are healthcare cost decisions as much as tax decisions. Getting that wrong by a few thousand dollars in income can cost us thousands in premiums. Getting it right is one of the most important planning decisions an early retiree can make, and most people only figure that out after they’ve already made the expensive mistake.

Self-insuring for long-term care requires actually modeling it

If we retire at 3% withdrawal and a $5,000-per-month nursing home situation arrives 30 years from now, inflation-adjusted, that number is large. It’s also not mysterious. It’s a variable I can put in a spreadsheet.

I’ve run scenarios where one of us needs three years of full nursing home costs. In some of those runs, the portfolio handles it without major structural damage. In others, it’s tight. The point of running those isn’t to get a reassuring answer. The point is to know where the seams are and what the actual damage looks like, rather than treating long-term care as an unknowable catastrophe that lives outside the plan.

We’re also pricing out hybrid long-term care insurance. Not traditional standalone LTC, which has had its own rate instability problems over the past decade, but hybrid life and LTC products where the death benefit converts to a long-term care benefit if needed. The premium isn’t trivial. We haven’t decided yet. But we’re choosing between two real options we’ve actually costed, not between having a plan and not having one.

Kids are a variable, not a catastrophe

Lil Spark is two. Baby Spark arrived a few months ago. We started 529s for both of them early, partly because it was the right move and partly because this lifestyle generates relatives who want to give money on holidays, and “put it in the 529” is a cleaner answer than trying to redirect a well-meaning grandparent at a birthday party.

I won’t pretend kids don’t add complexity to a 45-year retirement plan. They do. But I’m less convinced they’re the financial variable that breaks everything than a lot of FIRE content suggests. Kids who grow up moving around, living with fewer fixed costs, and watching their parents talk honestly about money tend to absorb different values around it. I’m not banking on Lil Spark funding her own PhD and never asking us for anything. I’m just not modeling her as a liability either.

The 529s are funded and growing. Everything else we’ll handle as it comes.

Where this actually leaves us

If you're newer to this whole idea, start here.

$242,000 is real money. Inflation-adjusted over 30 years, it’s considerably more real. We’re not dismissing it or hoping it won’t apply to us.

What we’re doing is building a plan where the structure itself carries the weight. A lower withdrawal rate, a Roth ladder, professional optionality for the Co-Pilot, geographic mobility, and a willingness to actually model worst-case scenarios rather than avoid them. None of those individually solves long-term care. Together, they make it a variable that lives inside the plan rather than a threat that sits outside it waiting to collapse everything.

We don’t have this perfectly figured out. Nobody does. But we’ve thought about it, made real choices around it, and the plan we have is intentional. That’s the best I can honestly say.

p>

Want more real-talk FIRE strategies for families? See what we are building right now on the On Fire page.

Frequently Asked Questions