San Diego Union-Tribune (Sunday)
‘Elderly’ a label that can be avoided
If you are 65 and older, would you describe yourself as “elderly”? I’m going to guess most readers would answer no. In fact, many might take offense to it.
That certainly was the case with reader Lisa Smith of Lake San Marcos, who objected to a headline on the front page Sept. 18. The headline read, “FDA panel backs booster for elderly or those at high risk.”
The panel was referring to those 65 or older.
Smith is 74, and does not see herself as “elderly.” Indeed, she said she plans on traveling for another five years “before settling in.”
She said she became “unhappy about the derisive nature of ‘elderly’ ” perhaps 10 years ago after seeing a story about a woman rescued from Cowles Mountain and was called “elderly.” Smith said there was a strong suggestion that she should not have been up there. But she was in her 60s and a marathon runner, Smith recalled.
About age 62, Smith retired, sold her houses in Pauma Valley and Alvarado Estates and moved to the La Costa Glen community in Carlsbad. She said it was “wonderful.”
“There I met an amazing bunch of folks, ages 60s (to) 100s. There were folks with age-related challenges, but most who were physically and mentally as sharp as anyone.”
Dr. Dilip V. Jeste, a geriatric neuropsychiatrist and a senior associate dean for Healthy Aging and Senior Care at UC San Diego, said “elderly” is considered stigmatizing and offensive. He noted the recommended term is “older adults.”
He said the U.N. has declared that “elderly” not be used because it implies frailty and disability. “Many people in their 60s, 70s, and even 80s are reasonably healthy and high functioning,” he said. “They are not frail or disabled. There is a lot of ageism in the society — meaning that people over a certain age (e.g., 65) are considered as being uniformly frail and disabled. Thus, it is similar to sexism and racism in that it stereotypes people based on a characteristic over which they have no control — in this case, chronological age.”
In an article, “When Does Someone Become ‘Old’?” in The Atlantic in January 2020, writer Joe Pinsker says “elderly” is a term that was more common a generation ago. He writes that the word “is hardly neutral — it’s often associated with frailty and limitation, and older people generally don’t identify with it.”
The Associated Press Stylebook, which the U-T uses as a guide, says “older adult (s), older person/people are preferred over senior citizens, seniors or elderly as a general term when appropriate and relevant.”
It suggests being specific if possible, such as “new housing for people 65 and over; an exercise program for women over 70,” for example.
“Definitions and understandings vary about the age range denoted by the term older adult, as well as by the terms senior citizen, senior and elderly,” the AP says.
However, the news organization says, “elderly” is acceptable in headlines when relevant and necessary because of space constraints. The U-T used the term in a headline, but I wonder if it could have been reworded, while still fitting.
“FDA panel backs booster for 65 and up, or high risk” might have fit, and it would have avoided “elderly,” which I think the U-T should strive to do.