Stop these ageist labels!
‘Any housing provision must meet older peoples’ aspirations rather than needs.’ This was the conclusion reached at a recent meeting of the 20/20 Project partners, who have recently published their manifesto road-mapping the new initiatives and policies for housing and care services for older people they would like to see implemented by the year 2020. The 20/20 Project aims to work through a vision that underlines the need to develop existing services, such as sheltered and extra care housing and telecare services to meet new types of demand and demographic change. The final Vision report will launch in October 2005.
For many of the 550 million people over 60 around the world, age is the label that makes other aspects of their life invisible. Unjustifiable discrimination of older people based on irrelevant grounds hinders progress towards achieving the 2020 vision. Speaking on behalf of the partners, 20/20 project manager, Michele Hollywood, said: ‘Ageism is at the heart of how we think and consequently provide housing and care services for older people. Even the language used to describe it labels and disempowers older people - ‘sheltered’, ‘extra care’, ‘assisted living’, and ‘residential care’.
Age discrimination is the symptom of the continuing low status of older people in society. An environment based on equality and fairness is key to delivering person-centred care and recognising the importance of older people’s individuality and dignity. ‘Car manufacturers have adapted particular models to suit older drivers, for example, but they are not branded as ‘cronie-wagons’ and the models suit all. That older sector of the population, say from 60 and above, are not homogenous. Like younger people, they have different attitudes towards and expectations of life,' Ms Hollywood added.
Such ideas are also integral to the health care older people receive. Medical treatment for older people should also seek to meet individual wants. Beating illness in older people is crucial, but creating an atmosphere of care where quality of life, choice and equality are paramount is also vital. This point of view does not equate to a recent consultation document issued by NICE which suggests that if an older person could suffer worse side effects than a younger person, from a particular medicine, for instance, that they should not be prescribed it. When given the choice they may want to have access to it. Moreover, NICE findings that only 12% of people thought extra money in the NHS should be spent on those over the age of 65, neglects the fact that this figure may well be swayed by the age of respondents as, the nearer you are to failing health, one can suggest, the more you might want the resources focussed on you.
Media coverage of older people is also not always positive. For example, in an article from The Times, entitled ‘Crouching grannies, hidden tigers’ (July 16 2005) there is discussion about the benefits older people in North London are reaping benefits from participating in t’ai chi classes that help body and balance, reducing the risk of serious injury or death from falls. Although media coverage of activities that uphold older people’s quality of life and good health is welcome, the headline – ‘Crouching grannies, hidden tigers’ inadvertently labels older people as being weak and disempowers them. Similarly, although older people are increasingly using the internet and modern technology, in an article from The Guardian, entitled ‘Surf’s up for the over 50’s’ (May 26 2005) older people are labelled as technophobes who are unable to break through ‘the invisible technophobic barrier.’
Clearly, ageism is still rife and underlines the fact that the older person is not consistently considered as an individual. The 20/20 Project seeks to do away with such categorisation and pigeonholing, emphasising the link between good housing and health, independence, dignity and well-being.
