Leaving no one behind: successful ageing at the intersection of ageism and ableism

  • Background The concept of ‘successful ageing’ has been a prominent focus within the field of gerontology for several decades. However, despite the widespread attention paid to this concept, its intersectional implications have not been fully explored yet. This paper aims to address this gap by analyzing the potential ageist and ableist biases in the discourse of successful ageing through an intersectional lens. Method A critical feminist perspective is taken to examine the sensitivity of the discourse of successful ageing to diversity in societies. The paper analyzes how ageist and ableist biases can manifest in the ways we conceptualize ageing, drawing on examples in the context of mental health. Results We argue that the conventional approach to successful ageing is limited in its ability to account for the experiences of people who have faced intersectional discrimination throughout their lives. Drawing on examples in the context of mental health, we explore among othersBackground The concept of ‘successful ageing’ has been a prominent focus within the field of gerontology for several decades. However, despite the widespread attention paid to this concept, its intersectional implications have not been fully explored yet. This paper aims to address this gap by analyzing the potential ageist and ableist biases in the discourse of successful ageing through an intersectional lens. Method A critical feminist perspective is taken to examine the sensitivity of the discourse of successful ageing to diversity in societies. The paper analyzes how ageist and ableist biases can manifest in the ways we conceptualize ageing, drawing on examples in the context of mental health. Results We argue that the conventional approach to successful ageing is limited in its ability to account for the experiences of people who have faced intersectional discrimination throughout their lives. Drawing on examples in the context of mental health, we explore among others the link between depression and disabilities. Furthermore, we shed light on the negative impact of ageist and ableist attitudes concerning the diagnosis and treatment of dementia. Discussion We demonstrate how diversity is often overlooked in discussions of ageing well, and how ageist and ableist biases can manifest in the ways we conceptualize ageing. We argue that focusing solely on the health status as a means of achieving success fails to adequately counter ageism for all people. We further emphasize the role of structural factors, such as ageist attitudes, in shaping the experience of ageing and exacerbating health inequalities. Conclusion Overall, our findings emphasize the need for a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of ageing and therefore an intersectional approach to conceptions of ageing well that recognizes and addresses the biases and limitations of current discourses. Thereby, this paper offers valuable insights into the complex intersections between age and disabilities from a bioethical perspective, highlighting the need for a more inclusive and intersectional approach to ageing.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Statistics

Number of document requests

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Elisabeth LangmannORCiDGND, Merle Weßel
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-opus4-1159295
Frontdoor URLhttps://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/115929
ISSN:1747-5341OPAC
Parent Title (English):Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
Publisher:Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Type:Article
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2023
Publishing Institution:Universität Augsburg
Release Date:2024/10/18
Volume:18
Issue:1
First Page:22
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-023-00150-8
Institutes:Medizinische Fakultät
Medizinische Fakultät / Professur für Ethik der Medizin
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Licence (German):CC-BY 4.0: Creative Commons: Namensnennung (mit Print on Demand)