OMG, another blog on what makes for Successful Aging. Pundits everywhere are voicing how to have a successful old age. They stress the importance of judicious retirement planning, often phrased as accumulating adequate retirement savings. Those with an unsavory agenda often feed on a natural fear of running out of money in one’s so-called golden years. “So start building that nest egg now. Here are some helpful financial vehicles.”
These concerns are a natural outgrowth of the graying of America. On average, males born today will live to see 77. Their female counterparts will outlast their men by some four years, living to 81. By contrast, a person born in 1900 had a life expectancy of less than fifty years. Having stated these often-cited demographics, let me assure you that my agenda has no commercial overtones. My intent is to lay out some ways of thinking about the experience of aging from the perspective of a retired gerontologist. This blog is about some ways of looking at successful aging and how it might be measured. We social scientist types are always looking for ways to quantify and measure what we study so we can feel like real scientists.
But first, let’s take a closer look at those longevity stats. Are we to conclude that our nineteenth century forebearers were somehow less fit than today’s males? Not in the least. Tales of pioneer hardship and group photos of miners and lumberjacks attest the opposite.There is a companion statistic to the longevity increase that isn’t so well known. Although life expectancy at birth has increased markedly, it is because the chance of dying in one’s early years has greatly diminished, mainly due to modern medicine. However, if the nineteenth century male made it beyond 50 to say 60 or 70, the number of years he would on average have left to live is almost the same as today’s male. Maybe a year or two less is all, despite the miracles of current day geriatric medicine. Which is to say that in earlier times those who made it beyond early adulthood were a hardy bunch of survivors that had grown used to staying alive.
But back to the average person. A century ago, that average sixty-year-old was already dead. So much for retirement planning back then. That same person today not only makes it to retirement, but can expect an extra ten, fifteen, or more years on this earth. Whether and how one manages to enjoy and find fulfillment in these bonus years or instead struggles through them in hardship and misery, that is the crux of successful aging.On a personal note, it is a question that has intrigued me throughout my adult life, spent as I mentioned earlier, in the field of gerontology. Over the final twenty-two years of my career until I retired at age 68, I managed a non-profit continuing care retirement community. It was a satisfying period of employment in which I got to stare old age in the face. By that I mean in the “faces” of my residents, in all its diversity, in all its triumphs and tragedies.
You’d think after a career in this field I’d have the definitive answer to that big question. But such is not the case. For ultimately, there is no pat answer to what constitutes successful aging, or its converse. My only advantage over the proverbial man in the street is that if I’m so inclined, I can cloak my answers in scholarly jargon, which is to say baffle them with bullshit.In the remainder of this blog, I will steer away from pontificating about definitive answers. Instead, I invite the reader to indulge me in a quasi-scientific thought experiment, with just a smidgen of the scholarly brown stuff. My aim is more modest, which is to throw out some (hopefully interesting) thoughts on the subject. I begin with a basic question: Is successful aging an objective or a subjective state of being?
If an objective state, successful aging should relate to a set of external properties or characteristics of the oldster, what researchers term “variables.” Some examples might be amount of retirement income, health status, number of friends, one’s social standing. The enterprising social scientist interested in devising an objective measure of successfulness might create a research inventory consisting of a set of items that address the above and other objective attributes, with the requirement that each item be amenable to numerical measurement, for example, on a scale of one to five.
Using this scale for the variable “income,” a person would be assigned a numerical score according to placement in one of five income ranges, with a score of one being an income range associated with bare subsistence, and a score of five being the range associated with financial affluence. The assumption (the “research hypothesis” in social science lingo) is that a person’s score is directly related to degree of objective aging success.
Suppose that the social scientist inveigles a group of aged individuals, his research subjects, to submit to his “successful aging” inventory. After each item has been scored according to the life situation of a given subject, the individual scores are then summed to derive an overall successful aging score. A perfect score would be 50 for an inventory of ten items each scaled from one to five.
The scientist does some cogitating and decides that any score of 40 or above represents successful aging, with above 45 as extremely successful. Moderately successful might lie between 30 and 40, and so on. With a score approaching ten (ten being a “one” on every item) this unfortunate is likely sleeping in a shelter, or worse, in shop doorways.
Then another scientist, a contrarian, comes along and asks the objectively successful oldster who scored, say 44, Are you happy with your life? Some affirm the score and respond something like yeah, life is pretty much okay for me, especially considering the alternative. But then others with a similar score answer with their personal truth, old age sucks. Not exactly the response of a successful oldster.
So this researcher goes back to work and develops a set of subjective measures related to how one is experiencing his/her late life years. These could be such criteria as having good memories, or a sense of having accomplished life purposes, or straightforward questions such as are you happy with your life now, and do you look forward to tomorrow.
I’m speculating here, but successful aging as a state of mind likely involves the ability to live in the moment and experience it fully. An apocryphal example is the Zen Buddhist who accidentally falls off a cliff and although headed for certain death, yet in transit admires a flower on a ledge halfway down.
An interesting follow-up project might be to study the degree of correlation between the scores derived from objective measures and those derived from subjective measures. I suspect there would be some positive correlation, but I seriously doubt that it would be anywhere near a hundred percent. Such a study has possibly been done, but I have lost touch with the research side of aging studies, being retired after all, and with other fish to fry.
Not to preach, okay just a little, but measures to increase the chances of successful aging need to begin before one gets there. Virtually everyone agrees that continued good health is paramount. If so, lifestyle habits and practices that promote health should take center stage during middle adulthood or earlier. It won’t guarantee success, but an unhealthy lifestyle is more likely to contribute to a miserable old age, supposing one even gets there.
At 84, do I regard myself as an example of successful, or at least reasonably successful aging? I think that’s one I’ll keep to myself, at least for now.
