IDEAS: ‘The elderly’ casually dismissed as expendable in age of coronavirus

Credit: DaytonDailyNews

Kate de Medeiros, professor of gerontology and a research fellow at the Scripps Gerontology Center at Miami University in Oxford, says those 65 and older are of

Credit: DaytonDailyNews

NOTE from Community Impact Editor Amelia Robinson: This opinion piece by Miami University professor Kate de Medeiros appeared on the Dayton Daily News Ideas and Voices page Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2020.

Among all the havoc that the coronavirus has wreaked on our society and our economy, perhaps the most quietly pervasive – and therefore the most insidious – is the casual dismissal of “the elderly.”

ExploreCoronavirus: Free daily calls aim to keep Ohio seniors connected during pandemic

The term itself should be retired for good – a blanket label that demeans an entire demographic group as frail and vulnerable based only on chronological age.

Kate de Medeiros is professor of gerontology and a research fellow at the Scripps Gerontology Center at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. Twitter: @Kate_on_aging
Kate de Medeiros is professor of gerontology and a research fellow at the Scripps Gerontology Center at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. Twitter: @Kate_on_aging

Credit: Scott Kissell

Credit: Scott Kissell

Similarly, in the age of COVID-19, we run the risk of creating an ageist backlash with unfair attitudes toward two vulnerable populations: people older than 65 and people living in long-term care facilities such as nursing homes. This ageism demeans all of us.

The subtext is far from subtle, from anonymous internet trolling to the most exclusive centers of power in Washington, D.C. We are told that somehow, older Americans are expendable, that warehousing them into one place will keep the rest of the country safe.

Explore 83-year-old Dayton woman walks miles a day at home, while calling friends and family

It is ironic that perhaps the most trusted American on public health issues is 79-year-old Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Disease and advisor to six presidents. As I have argued elsewhere, I have yet to see him referred to as “the elderly Dr. Fauci” or as “Dr. Fauci, an active senior.”

Why?

Because he is strong, smart and active – descriptors that are taken for granted in younger people but that have to be “proven” by older people.

The truth is this: Age 65 should not drive public-health policy or public perception. People age at very different rates. Age 65 is only relevant as an age when some people are entitled are entitled to benefits such as Social Security. Nothing else.

As we combat the most dangerous public-health crisis in a century, our language reveals our values. I agree that we cannot ignore aging or gloss over the changes that can occur over time as one ages. But people age differently because they live differently – genetics, lifestyle, access to health care, and so on. To assign the same language to people with a mind-bending variety of skills and capacity demeans all of us and robs us of their contributions.

ExploreGOLDEN NUGGET UPDATE: The ‘For Sale’ sign is up, and the asking price is $1.5 million

Perhaps our future includes a vaccine that keeps us all safe. Maybe we will care more for each other and prioritize the public health. I hope so. I also hope that we will reaffirm the value of every member of our society, leaving “old” attitudes behind.

Kate de Medeiros is professor of gerontology and a research fellow at the Scripps Gerontology Center at Miami University in Oxford. Twitter: @Kate_on_aging