We are at the beginning of a new social revolution, that of the elderly. As much as there are still many people who refuse to believe it, Marijé Goikoetxea (Bilbao, 1961), PhD in Human Rights, psychologist and professor at the University of Deusto with a long career as a consultant on healthcare ethics, assures that it is evidence that We are going to be a society of older people and that is going to change everything, from architecture to politics, including the economy, ways of relating or even language. The change in the latter is already detected among those who work in this field: instead of talking about aging they talk about longevity.
"Language discriminates and generates concepts and narratives: if I talk about aging, I'm talking about a process of decrepitude; if I'm talking about longevity, I'm talking about a process where life is longer and there can be many lives in one life, and at each age it's your turn. reconfigure a new one", Goikoetxea justifies during an interview with La Vanguardia on the 25th in Barcelona, where he gave a conference organized by the "la Caixa" Foundation's Senior Citizens programme.
Beyond this modification of terms, what other changes does longevity promote in Spain?
Some economic, such as the growth of the silver economy, because there is a great niche of business and benefits beyond residences. But also changes in pension or care policies. And a social change, because there are beginning to be many people with many capacities, many skills and a lot of knowledge who reach retirement and people begin to talk about how not to lose all that added value, how this knowledge can benefit companies and the rest .
But the majority are still those who think that, after a certain age, little can be done or expected from life. How do you overcome that ageism?
I think part of it has to do with the roles and patterns we are given. The way to understand a good old age was that there were other people who controlled your life and you adjust to losing control over it and dedicate yourself to being entertained. And if that entertainment contributed to reducing health problems, all the better, because that way you cause less health spending and fewer care problems. But that model, that vision, is already in crisis.
Because? What has changed?
Those of us who have been educated in autonomy and who have always decided on our lives reach that age (retirement) and we do not accept that we are going to lose control of it, we want to continue taking responsibility for it, including the limits that the age. And that is a completely new situation. And complex. Because it's not just that we want to be the protagonists of our lives, it's that we're also diverse, and that collapses the idea of having a model of aging because those over 60 don't fit into a single mold: they are people each with a biography that does not stop
To that expired "entertaining aging" you contrast "aging with meaning". What is it referring to?
Human beings have to get it right in our lives, feel that what we live today is worth it. And if that is the maximum that moves us to carry out projects until we are 60, it cannot be that for the decades that follow at that age they tell us that it does not matter if what we live makes sense or not. People cannot live without meaning, and that does not mean doing something that makes us happy. Sometimes what makes sense is something that makes you suffer, takes away your health or harms your economy, but that is worth it to you. Because if what we do is not valuable to us, it is very likely that we will end up with a demoralization syndrome.
What syndrome is that?
It is existential loneliness that ends up transforming into an anticipated desire for death because the person feels that what they have left to live is not worth it; or she intuits that she is going to have to experience situations of suffering or that she does not want to experience it because others decide for her; or feel that he does not have the resources to attend to his fragile situation.
How is it solved?
It is difficult, what you have to do is prevent it. The "la Caixa" Foundation's Always Accompanied program has this virtue, which begins by detecting people with unwanted loneliness and connects them with others, the volunteers, who, since they do not charge to visit them, make them feel that they are valuable in themselves, establish relationships of trust and it is easier for them to come out of their loneliness and feel better.
And what can each of us do to adapt our life project and age satisfactorily?
After the age of 65, three phenomena will occur in the majority of people: a personal identity crisis, the loss of relationships and the appearance of deficits that will lead us to lose control over our lives to a large extent.
You have to be realistic about that and consider how you are going to organize yourself to live this new stage in a way that makes it worthwhile for you, see what support you have for it and, where you will find it, where you will find it.
Because we have to take responsibility not only for our capacities but also for our limitations in order to be able to decide on our deficits and not be other people, perhaps with other values, who take care of it.
What do you mean that an identity crisis awaits us?
What our society returns to us as an identity has a lot to do with work and professional life. If you ask me what I am, I'll tell you that I'm a psychologist and a teacher, so the moment I stop being one, the first question I'll have to ask myself is 'what am I?' Therefore, asking yourself that question, thinking about what is going to give me an identity, is important. I can be an activist for the rights of the elderly. Or grandmother with full availability for my children... Each one decides what is going to make sense in that stage of life.
Regarding the loss of relationships, the loneliness of the elderly is a concern, but the majority prioritize aging at home instead of in places where they would socialize more. Because?
Because your identity is maintained there and you also feel that you are in a place that you control. That way you feel more capable and appreciate yourself more. In addition, the home maintains your personal history and gives you more evidence that living has been worth it and can continue to be worth it. You feel less alone because through the objects in the environment you establish relationships of emotional bond with people who are not there.
One of the most reiterated demands by the elderly is that they be allowed to age with dignity, that they not be discriminated against. Because? Are they treated badly?
Only those who do not esteem are mistreated, and only those who do not esteem themselves are not esteemed. We have learned it in violence against women. Hence, if I have a society that esteems me less because I am older, I internalize this idea that I am worth less, then they esteem me less and treat me worse: it is a vicious circle. On the other hand, if I, whether I am a child or an old person, am a person who is taken into account, who intervenes in what happens around me, who listens to my opinion even if I am not always listened to, my self-esteem will increase and I myself will tolerate less than someone don't take me into account.
On the other hand, as with the gender approach, when you put on the glasses that focus on the dignity of the elderly, you suddenly discover that they are valuable and, therefore, deserve to be well treated.
And what should this good treatment translate into?
The first thing is to recognize that person as unique, different, with a specific identity and a specific history. I mean, meet him. And once you know her well, see what support you can give her so that her life is good.
Some of these supports will be rights and others will not, and it must be society that decides which ones, because it is not easy to decide things for everyone when there are not older people but older people: each one is different.
But at least we have to establish one: the right to freedom, to guarantee that the person can continue to freely decide how they want to live, at any age. For example, if it is essential for me to live with my pet, I will have to think about how it is achieved, not tell me that in residences or in my circumstances it is not possible and that's it.
