At a recent Otago District Health Board meeting board member Mr Thomson, who also chairs the Hawkesbury Trust which provides care for the intellectually disabled, urged management to talk to health-care providers to determine the situation.
He believes there may be alternative and more appropriate care available for some of the under-65s.
The board has been concerned for some time about the lack of aged-care hospital-level beds in the community which has put pressure on the board's hospital services.
McGlynn Homes owner Tim Hannagan, asked to comment later, said it could be assumed there were also physically disabled under-65-year-olds in Otago who could be transferred from rest-home care to a more appropriate setting, although he did not know how many.
His organisation provides residential homes offering "resident-centred care" for under-65-year-olds with physical disabilities in several centres in Otago and Southland.
Most, but not all of McGlynn's six-bed homes had waiting lists, as does its 12-bed rehabilitation and respite care centre in Maryhill, Dunedin.
He agreed it was not ideal to have younger people in aged-care facilities, although this was sometimes the "option of last resort".
A report last year had shown there were 583 physically disabled people under 65 living in aged-care facilities nationally, Mr Hannagan said.
Mr Thomson told the board he did not accept the situation was as advised by regional planning and funding manager David Chrisp.
While the Ministry of Health knew who it was funding, it did not know the individuals involved and whether they could be shifted into more appropriate facilities.
He asked Mr Chrisp to talk to community providers and not just rely on what the ministry told him, which would be the "same flannel".
Mr Chrisp told the meeting there were people in long-stay hospital care in rest-homes in the community who were under 65, some with physical disabilities and some with intellectual disabilities.
The ministry had advised that they were there because there was no age-appropriate residential care in their area.
This often happened in areas outside the major centres.
In those circumstances, it was not economic for the ministry to establish a community home and the default position, although it was accepted it was not ideal, was using rest-homes.
Also, it needed to be remembered some people may have been in such care for so long they regarded it as their home and were reluctant to move.
Speaking after the meeting, Mr Thomson said he was not being critical of the care provided for under-65 people in rest-home care.
It was a situation which dated back to the closure of the Cherry Farm complex.
His comments arose because he had been advised of a provider, who he did not wish to name, who would be quite happy to look for more appropriate placements of its under-65-year-old clients with other service providers.
If providers knew their beds could be filled by the elderly, so they would not lose money, they might be willing to explore the possibility of clients transferring to a more appropriate setting.
The needs of individuals involved would have to be properly assessed before any transfers occurred.
Mr Thomson said he did not know how many beds could be freed up, but if it was just four or six, that would be helpful.
