Business and political leaders are becoming increasingly sensitive to some forms of discrimination. Modern societies rightly expect that equality in all spheres of life needs to be a reality and not just an aspiration or a political sound bite.
We now see political leaders solemnly declare that they want young people to be more prominent in political parties’ governance and decision-making. Similarly, discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, religious belief and race is being addressed more vigorously by business leaders. But one type of discrimination embedded in most Western societies seems not to trouble our social leaders. Ageism is alive and kicking.
Defining when people are considered too old to continue to be productive in society is somewhat subjective. Understandably, a septuagenarian surgeon with a sharp mind but impaired dexterity is considered too old to practise surgery.
Many TV networks must have a formal or informal understanding with their news anchors, especially women, that they should bow out of appearing on TV when they no longer meet the standards of perceived glamour that audiences expect. Similarly, some business organisations stop training their staff when they hit 50 and many even encourage them to retire early.
Most Western societies face severe demographic challenges. Yet we keep dumping people who are still healthy but do not fall in the ‘still young’ category as perceived by many. The social and economic consequences of this practice are underestimated.
Dumping older people on the human scrap heap simply because they have reached retirement age is a waste of talent and experience
Ageism seeps into mental healthcare. Older patients are often viewed by health professionals as set in their ways and unable to change their behaviour. But we all know of many youngsters who can be described in the same way. Dumping older people on the human scrap heap simply because they have reached retirement age is a waste of talent and experience.
Few countries have shown the kind of creativity needed to ensure that the experience and talent of older people are not wasted. This is particularly worrying at a time when the number of younger people joining the workplace is inadequate for the modern economy’s needs.
For instance, we still have hundreds of teenagers who do not benefit from the institutional system of vocational and academic education. These young people often end up doing menial jobs in the black economy where they are exploited. Some even end up becoming criminals at an early age.
Why not introduce schemes where older, retired people could mentor youngsters who have left the educational system without any qualifications? Experienced retired tradespeople can teach such young people a trade that will help them gain self-respect and improve their employability profile.
Age does not define the ability of political leaders to make people’s lives better. We all know of both young and old local and foreign political leaders who were totally unfit for purpose.
The recent US elections have shown that the absence of young political leaders does not upset the electorate as many seem to think. A septuagenarian president now leads the US, the Speaker of the House of Representatives is 80-year-old Nancy Pelosi, while 70-year-old Chuck Schumer is the majority leader in the Senate. Janet Yellen is 74 and runs the world’s largest economy with Federal Reserve chairman Jay Powell who is 67.
Whether we admit it or not, we are continually calculating the rate of depreciation on human life.
In this current medical crisis, we expect our medical professionals to play God and decide who gets treated when medical resources are rationed because of a shortage of hospital beds, vaccines or nursing staff.
The remaining life expectancy of patients is a cruel criterion to determine how to apply scarce medical resources no doctor should ever have to use.
NICE, the UK authority that decides what medicine is approved for the treatment of NHS patients, has a benchmark to determine treatment cost effectiveness. If a course of treatment is below £30,000 and can extend a patient’s life by one year, it is approved. If not, such treatment is not available on the NHS.
Refreshingly ageism has not killed our social conscience entirely. During the pandemic, most governments have prioritised scare vaccines to be administered to the more vulnerable older people. Similarly, the material costs to the economy will weigh mostly on younger people who will have to pay the government’s debt to rescue the economy today.
Politicians’ battle against racism, sexism and all the other ‘isims’ makes sense. It is about time they add ageism in their war targets.