Forced Retirement Goes Out of Style

Abstract

![Figure][1] AAU President Hunter Rawlings III CREDIT: ROBERT BARKER/UNIVERSITY PHOTOGRAPHY In the interview with J. Mervis (“On teaching, tuition, and talent,” News Focus, 16 March, p. [1299][1]), Association of American Universities (AAU) President Hunter Rawlings III puts forth the position that older faculty members should retire to make way for “the next generation to step forward.” His advocacy of “forced” retirement is out of step with reality. The socioeconomic model of retirement at 65 is no longer economically sustainable, and a substantial fraction of the “baby boom” generation have repeatedly indicated that they do not wish to retire. The scientific community should lead by example, demonstrating that people can and do make substantial contributions to their field and to society even at an advanced age. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), AAU, and others should be concerned solely with funding the most promising projects. If there is a preponderance of support going to older researchers, it is hopefully because their projects appear to hold the most promise of significant achievement and not simply because of the past track record of those applicants. NIH might also consider the possibility that the increasing average age of grant recipients simply reflects the changing demographics of the United States in general. Simply forcing older investigators to retire will not ensure that younger investigators of greater or at least equal talent will replace them. NIH, AAU, and their partners should be focused on locating and promoting the most talented scientists, regardless of age or academic standing. [1]: pending:yes