‘The land of faery … where nobody gets old’

“The Land of Faerie - where nobody gets old” is The Land of Heart’s Desire in the poem by W.B. Yeats. Today, this is what everybody seems to desire: not to grow old. Or, is it that in our rapidly ageing population the whole notion of “old” has been taken to a new level? Forty is the new 30; 70 the new 60 and so it goes.

I want to challenge the way older people are defined, treated and considered (or not) by our society.

I identify essentially three broad groups along a continuum. These groups range from those of 50 or so, who are still actively employed, or seeking employment - but at the same time preparing for retirement (essentially the Baby Boomers). Then there are those in the early years of retirement, active still in the community, pursuing their chosen retirement activities, but many also volunteering in the service of others in the community. We come then to those who are more elderly - some of whom may be frail and/or in ill-health, and of whom some 5.24 per cent may require access to residential aged care.

But - older people cannot be lumped together in homogeneous groups. Even within each of these three groups, no two people are alike; while essentially they may wish for the same outcomes, the optimal means of providing that for each one may be totally different.

It is impossible even to ring around these broad groupings with parameters of age - for we all know that there are some people who are never old, and some who are never young!

To me, and I believe to the vast majority of people, age is a psychological not a chronological phenomenon - until the realities of the physical catch up with us - and even then, a certain accommodation between the two may be achieved.

Our real challenge is a seamless progression along this continuum of retirement and aged care, in which people are treated as individuals, not stereotypes.

It may be that we need to better define what we mean by “retirement”, “old”, and “ageing”, so we are all heading in the same direction. For as Humpty Dumpty said to Alice well over a century ago:

When I use a word, it means what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less. Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass.

Looking to my Macquarie Dictionary for a definition of “retirement” I found:

• Retirement: the state of being retired.
• To retire: to withdraw from office, business - or active life.

Some people may wish to retire from active life but do you know anyone?

And what do we mean by “ageing population”? Everybody is “ageing” from the time they are born. By 2020 some 25 per cent of the Australian population will be aged over 65, and in fact right now 25 per cent of the NSW population is aged over 55. According to the media (and perhaps public opinion?) the framing is alarmist: we use language like “a drain on our economy … our health system, our environment, our services”.

I question the language of older people as a burden to the economy.

Older people are not simply existing in an unsustainable vacuum of decrepitude and senility: many pieces of research show that they continue to contribute more to the economy than they take out. A recent South Australian survey of almost 400 people aged 65 to 101, found that 26 per cent provided loans or gave financial help to relatives; 50 per cent helped care for other adults outside the household; 33 per cent were involved in volunteering - those aged 85 to 101 engaging in productive activities for about 27 hours a week, while the "young" elderly devoted 44 hours a week to economically useful work inside or outside the house.

Based on the sample, the economic contribution of South Australia's 200,000 elderly was estimated at up to $1.38 billion a year. The cost of providing aged care was $1.8 billion.

We speak of our ageing population as if somehow they have landed on our planet - aged, frail, in need - destined to drain our resources, our economy, and our services. Yet it is these same people who built the Snowy Mountain scheme, the Harbour Bridge, our cities and our rural economies.

They were the architects of social and economic policy, the ambassadors and politicians, the agenda setters that helped create the UN, UNESCO, the WHO and much more. They have contributed decades of their lives paying taxes, buying goods and services, raising families, caring for less fortunate family members, and volunteering. It is they, in fact, who designed, toiled and launched the world we now live in and enjoy here in Australia.

One could say that growth in the economy should be shared by everyone; that the gains made now were built on the foundations and infrastructure created by older people when they were younger - and indeed, those foundations continue to be strengthened by the spending of their retirement incomes. It can also be said that the way we treat older people reflects on our integrity as a nation.

So what do I want as I progress along this continuum that we all inevitably must progress?

I want to know that in this community in which I live I will have choices and be recognised as a valued member of the community, treated with dignity and respect whatever my age, cultural background or state of health.

Remember Humpty Dumpty? “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more, nor less”. This, to me, is the concept of retirement: choices! Older people living out their lives to their full potential, whatever they choose that to mean.

Yet I want to know also, as I age and my needs may change, that I can expect responsive systems which promote a healthy and active life-style - and also provide quality care as and when needed.

I want to know that - as far as possible and for as long as is feasible - my choices include the option of staying in my own home, and being supported in that choice - but that if I do have to take the option of seeking residential care I will not be incarcerated in a ghetto for the elderly.

I want to know that, if I choose to retire into a certain environment, that environment is going to retain those qualities which drew me there in the first place. I am talking about perceptive and informed change, which encompasses progress with sensitivity both to the physical environment and the social expectations of the community.

I want to know that my retirement income, be it from any one or a mix of the three pillars of superannuation, savings or pension, will be sympathetically protected and supported to the full extent possible.

Much is made of the increasing demands of an ageing population, dependency ratios, and the need for future retirees to ensure that they are self-supporting. There are many people who will never be in that happy position, particularly single women who have been in and out of the workforce during child-bearing years, and may never have attained the equivalent salary levels of their male counterparts - thus affecting their ability to contribute to their superannuation. Even for those who are in a happier position, their assets are finite; with greater longevity, they have to stretch further and further.

I want to know that the dispensation of Local, State and Commonwealth services on which I may have to draw at some time are dispensed efficiently, effectively, and with sympathy and respect. I want to know they are dispensed without stigma being attached to their acquisition, without being regarded as a burden on the community; that it is I who am the cause of a financial crisis in our society.

You may remember Mrs Doasyouwouldbedoneby in Charles Kingsley’s The Water Babies?

How would you like to be “doneby” as you reach the precipice of ageing? - the “vale of years”? Are you prepared to “do-as-you-would-be-done-by”?