One of the problems in our ageing society is the pressure the older person puts on the younger members of the family
In my day people died in their mid to late 60s which is 10 years earlier than the the current norm. People died, often quite quickly through diseases which today would be 'controlled' and life extended.
No one would want to halt progress in medicine and the healing of the sick but when does the concept of a person being sick merge into the recognition that sickness becomes ageing. Should we judge the extension of life beyond a certain stage differently from healing a potentially healthy person.
In my day people died in their mid to late 60s which is 10 years earlier than the the current norm. People died, often quite quickly through diseases which today would be 'controlled' and life extended.
No one would want to halt progress in medicine and the healing of the sick but when does the concept of a person being sick merge into the recognition that sickness becomes ageing. Should we judge the extension of life beyond a certain stage differently from healing a potentially healthy person.
It's that description of a "potentially" healthy person which is at the nub of the question.
Of course each person is different and for some longevity is their norm, but for the bulk of the population their natural lifespan is in danger of being artificially extended simply because the medical tools to do so exist.
The question to now ask is, "what sort of stress on the immediate family does this longevity bring"?
In a world were the extended family were contained within the neighbourhood, the responsibility and the functionality of looking after the older parent was shared. Other siblings, Aunts and Uncles, Cousins, friends, were all there to pop in and keep an eye on the old relative and no specific person felt the pressure.
Today in our atomised society, with husbands living away from their wives,with children making their future overseas it often falls to one member in the family to shoulder virtually the whole weight of day to day concern for the frail parent.
Historically it has often fallen, probably unfairly, to the daughter to be landed with the job and perhaps this aligns with the female shouldering the brunt of child rearing in general. Often putting "her needs" on the back burner until the parent has died or the children grown up.
This role that women play is not out of balance with their role towards the sustainability of the species which, if it were up to men (regardless of the birthing role) I'm sure we would soon die out.
It's not irreversible but are men more individualistic, immured in their own world or is it that women, taking their child rearing responsibilities become more caring generally and continue to display this sympathetic bond towards the parent.
Life so depends on what you make of it and one should be on guard of placing responsibility towards a parent who have enjoyed their life, before the responsibility towards yourself. It's the nature of life that we have a term and that from a parents point of view there is no greater satisfaction than seeing ones daughter or son happy and successful, irrespective of what they choose to do or where they choose to live.
Of course each person is different and for some longevity is their norm, but for the bulk of the population their natural lifespan is in danger of being artificially extended simply because the medical tools to do so exist.
The question to now ask is, "what sort of stress on the immediate family does this longevity bring"?
In a world were the extended family were contained within the neighbourhood, the responsibility and the functionality of looking after the older parent was shared. Other siblings, Aunts and Uncles, Cousins, friends, were all there to pop in and keep an eye on the old relative and no specific person felt the pressure.
Today in our atomised society, with husbands living away from their wives,with children making their future overseas it often falls to one member in the family to shoulder virtually the whole weight of day to day concern for the frail parent.
Historically it has often fallen, probably unfairly, to the daughter to be landed with the job and perhaps this aligns with the female shouldering the brunt of child rearing in general. Often putting "her needs" on the back burner until the parent has died or the children grown up.
This role that women play is not out of balance with their role towards the sustainability of the species which, if it were up to men (regardless of the birthing role) I'm sure we would soon die out.
It's not irreversible but are men more individualistic, immured in their own world or is it that women, taking their child rearing responsibilities become more caring generally and continue to display this sympathetic bond towards the parent.
Life so depends on what you make of it and one should be on guard of placing responsibility towards a parent who have enjoyed their life, before the responsibility towards yourself. It's the nature of life that we have a term and that from a parents point of view there is no greater satisfaction than seeing ones daughter or son happy and successful, irrespective of what they choose to do or where they choose to live.
No comments:
Post a Comment