Sep 30, 2009
"The World Won't Be Aging Gracefully. Just the Opposite."
Sep 29, 2009
I'm ugly. Is it my fault?
"Now everything smells.It's hard to understand the view from the hospice bed. Can we say that we've been given less than six months to live? Can we feel the humiliation of being completely dependent on others for care? Can we understand the feeling of being trapped by diagnosis, trapped by strangers, trapped by a body that just... dies?
The piss in the pot beside my bed,
my powdered feet that I can't reach,
my metal chair. The woman who used it last
died and left her smell."
In an anthology of poems about old women titled Only Morning in Her Shoes, I found Susan Fantl Spivack's poem, "I'm ugly. Is it my fault?" This poem shares the mind of an old woman who is in hospice care. She details an existence where a soul snarls against unchangeable circumstances.
At some point in our lives, we all think about our mortality. We fantasize about heroic deaths, cringe at horror movie endings, imagine what the world might be without us.
I find that this poem focuses attention on something we only imagine and usually shudder to think about. There are reasons why many people are leery of hospices. It brings us too close to our own mortality, the possibility that we too could one day be trapped by the same metal railings, doomed to die in a place were strangers with strange and terminal illnesses are recycled through as the bedsheets change. Hospices are nothing like our greatest fantasies and most horrible horror movies. This poem gives voice to the grit, the truth of an old woman in a place where dreams and nightmares have often perished in reality.
Slate's Geezer Issue One Year Later: Pimp My Buick!
Slate's Geezer Issue One Year Later: Geezers Need Excitement
Mid-Life Crisis: Fact or Fiction?
Smells Like Middle-Aged Spirit: High School Reunion
Geezer Issue One Year Later: Oh, the Wrinkles You'll Get!
Wrinkles. A craggy nemesis completely noticed. In the now-vogue rush to capture eternal youth, where do wrinkles stand today? Should we taut them for professional appeal? Inject them into oblivion for celebrity status? Should we keep them for distinction? Deepen them with our various lifestyles?
Wrinkles, Amanda Fortini says, are something people now have a choice to keep or erase. And to me, there is nothing more exciting than the freedom of choice! Not only do I have options to choose when I physically age, but I can choose how I age and what I age into. My gender, skin color, and, FINALLY! facial features are mine to control! But what, then, does that do to the idea of aging?
When the physical process of aging can be changed, age becomes a sort of taboo. Do you ask him if he has ID for that alcohol? Are those his children or his grandchildren? Is she really 55 or is she lying to get the senior discount price? With the option to change your physical age, it becomes so much harder to trust things at face value. Here it is, case in point, that nothing may be as it seems.
People aren't transparent enough as it is. These cosmetic procedures make interaction even less sure. Wrinkles are something won from a lifestyle, and this vogue concept of eternal youth makes it harder to find out who a person really is. Personalities are usually mapped out on the face! I think that the choice of aging is a depersonalizing one.
Slate's Geezer Issue One Year Later: The Senior-Citizen Cookbook
The author explores the subject in such a way that makes it light yet informative. The text warns readers of the importance of getting enough nutrients while poking fun at "nutri-lingo," for example. It cautions of a weakening in one’s sense of smell that will take place, which affects the ability to distinguish flavors, which apparently inevitably leads to “nibbling at different foods […] perpetually unable to get the emotional satisfaction that you once did from any particular meal.” This poses several dangers to the elderly, such as the threat of obesity-related disorders resulting from malnutrition. What’s more, the subtle use of statistics to illustrate the presence of hypertension in the elderly also serves as forewarning for the aging.
It was interesting how the author drew a line between the young and the old. The young chefs are said to “add and add and add” while it is the old that “take and take and take.” This adds to the cautionary tone of the piece and makes readers more conscious of what they eat as they age – which may be both a bad and good thing.
Slate's Geezer Issue One Year Later: Full Metal Socket- How Seniors Become Cyborgs
My Little Comma
Slate's Geezer Issue One Year Later: Naughty Nursing Homes: Is it time to let the elderly have more sex?
Engber tastefully describes in "Naughty Nursing Homes" a typical nursing home bedroom as containing “narrow mattresses with very little privacy” in which “nurses enter […] without knocking.” And he couldn’t be more on target. Nursing home residents should be treated as prisoners simply because it’s essential that we keep an eye out for inappropriate, intimate relations between them. Right?
Where do we draw the sticky line when it comes to this type of behavior? How do we really know that the aging are fully alert and aware of the decisions they make? The sex dilemma in nursing homes is one that society hasn’t resolved quite yet. With the massive litigation war going on out there, nursing home staff are justly “queasy about sexual expression” because “they’re afraid of getting sued.” So now may prove the opportune time to change our policies and our minds about what we deem as appropriate behavior for the elderly…
I’m not quite certain when it became the norm to stereotype and categorize all elderly people, but Engel makes an interesting stab at underlining the lack of power elderly are bound to feel when confined to the boundaries of a nursing home. Maybe it is time to reevaluate the prospects we face as we grow older. I’m interested in how our current system of caring for the elderly could truly be improved to give our aging population a greater sense of accomplishment, self-worth, and happiness throughout their final years.
The Kidult Pandemic
I’m not quite sure when being a 29-year-old still fully dependent on and residing with mommy and daddy became a notion to be proud of. Let’s face it, an Xbox 360, flat screen television, and jammies with the crease ironed down the middle just how you like it courtesy of mother is not an ideal scene in a bachelor’s pad. As a society we need to step up and inform these adultescents afflicted with this Peter Pan syndrome of their lifestyle’s deleterious nature. Not only does it burden their family members with the unwanted responsibility of caring for them long after they are fully capable of up keeping themselves, but it also robs them of adult experiences such as stable, meaningful relationships and how to hold a steady, dignified occupation.
Although some of us do agree with Dorothy's expression, “There’s no place like home,” there comes a time when we all need to spread our fairly new wings, depart from the nest, and clumsily venture out into the world to discover all it has to offer. The psychologist Jeffrey Arnett notes, “society has finally evolved to the point where pursuing the pleasures of irresponsibility is practical into your late 20s and beyond!” If what we have to look forward to is a society of kidults slouching around viewing lawns, parenthood, mortgages, retirement plans, or anything associated with maturing and adulthood as defunct, then we are in a world full of trouble in the decades to come.
Make Money or Kill Granny?
Thomas, for the most part, outlines both sides of why the U.S. health care system keeps so many elderly persons alive. On one side, patients psychologically want to maintain human contact and sometimes it is through doctors. On the other side, Medicare is on a fee-for-service insurance systems where doctors are paid for the number of treatments and test they perform on a patient. This system seems unnecessary; however Medicare wants to "encourage hope" in all their patients. Aren't doctors' main purpose to save lives than "kill" lives? How can U.S. health care improve its quality of service to its patients' emotional need versus their physical needs?
"The real problem is unnecessary and unwanted care." America pays for the unnecessary, which in itself sounds unnecessary and foolish. Who has the final say in keeping a patient's life alive? The family? Patient? Doctor? Health-care? Government?