If you are the higher earner in your marriage, you probably know the best strategy for claiming Social Security: Wait. For each year you delay between age 62, when you can first draw benefits, and 70, when those benefits top out, your monthly check rises as much as 8 percent. This can make a big difference to your spouse should you die first, since your partner will receive your larger benefit as a survivor instead of his or her lesser one. But when should you claim if you’re the other spouse? That was the question from Patty Ronau-Cramer, 60, and Dave Cramer, 68, who live near Toledo, Ohio. “Would it make sense for me to claim at 62?” wrote Patty. “This whole Social Security thing is confusing.”

Yes, to call Social Security “confusing” is an understatement. So for guidance, I reached out to three financial professionals well versed in its intricacies: Marcia Mantell of Mantell Retirement Consulting, William Reichenstein of Social Security Solutions and Laurence Kotlikoff of the web tool MaximizeMySocialSecurity.com.

The Cramers lead a modest and comfortable life. Dave, retired from jobs as a park ranger and a maintenance man, plays in senior softball and golf leagues. Patty works part-time at a printing company and helps care for her 95-year-old mother, who lives nearby. They’re living on Patty’s $1,000 monthly income and Dave’s $1,100 monthly pension, supplemented by withdrawals from their $10,000 savings account. They have roughly $500,000 in retirement savings that they haven’t touched, and they’ve paid off their mortgage.

The Cramers’ planned expenditures are modest, too. They like to go camping, and Patty would like to upgrade from the tent they use to a camper. They’ll eventually have to replace their furnace and windows. But what they really want, Dave says, is time: “Time to do things we both enjoy on an everyday basis.”

That feels particularly urgent, because Patty’s older sister waited until her full retirement age to retire and claim Social Security. Her husband died soon afterward. “My sister kept putting things off,” says Patty. “I just want to quit my job and be happy.”

But claiming at 62 has a cost. It would limit Patty’s monthly benefit to $1,120, not the $1,600 she’d get by starting at 67, her full retirement age. That difference adds up to almost $5,800 per year. Social Security’s inflation-adjusted benefits help insure your quality of life as you age, and the value of that insurance rises the older you get. Kotlikoff, for example, estimates that if both Cramers live to be 100—remember, Patty’s mom is 95—Patty would give up nearly $50,000 (the value today of future cash flows) by retiring at 62, not 67.

On the other hand, by retiring at 62, Patty would replace her salary with a slightly higher Social Security benefit and have more time for pleasures like camping with Dave. Should Dave’s life span be closer to the average, the financial benefit of Patty’s delay in claiming isn’t so clear. (“I know this might sound morbid, but there’s more longevity on my side of the family than Dave’s,” says Patty.) The key to this scenario is Dave’s maxing out his benefit by waiting until 70 to claim. That way, his monthly payment, which would have been about $1,900 at his full retirement age, will begin at $2,482. If Patty outlives him, she’ll start receiving his full benefit instead of her own. “They get lots more income while both are alive,” observes Mantell, “and he protects her income if he is the first to die.”

The Cramers have decided: When Patty turns 62 next fall, she’ll join Dave in retirement and claim Social Security. Dave will wait until he’s 70, in 2025, to claim his maximum benefit. “This will give us an opportunity to travel and be together more,” says Dave. Patty agrees: “If I were to wait to full retirement age, he’d be 75. Who knows what’s going to happen?”