Abstract
Aged persons often suffer deprivation and unhappiness, as a direct result of how they are cared for—or, rather, not cared for. Various attitudes held about aged persons can be shown to play a role in these ethical blunders. Aged persons often become as dependent as children, yet we fail to meet their needs as we would those of children. If we imagine treating children as we sometimes treat aged persons, it quickly becomes clear that there are problems with the way some care for aged persons is conducted. This has to do with, for example, our notions of obligation and conceptions of reasonable cost-saving measures. The needs of aged persons bow to the needs of institutions caring for them. Without adequate or trained staff, residents must endure indignities and discomfort. Although cognitive decline is often part of the aging process, rather than finding ways to respectfully accommodate it, aged persons are restrained, talked down to, or ignored. There is much discussion concerning the rationing of care for aged persons as their number continues to increase. Prominent among such discussions is the notion that in order to ensure that there are enough resources to care for younger persons, care for aged persons, especially life-extending care, must be restricted. Reasonable and sound arguments can be made in favor of rationing care without including age as a determinative factor. Our ideas about who should get care, what that care should be like, how much they should get, and who should pay for it result more from attitudes toward, than facts about, aged persons.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call