"A test of a people is how it behaves toward the old."

“A test of a people is how it behaves toward the old. It is easy to love children. Even tyrants and dictators make a point of being fond of children. But the affection and care for the old, the incurable, the helpless are the true gold mines of a culture.”

A J Heschel wrote this 50 years ago, and he is more right now than he was even then. Why? Because today there are new and unprecedented challenges to living on into older age, and they contribute towards the reduced value of human being in market terms, and especially as each human being grows older.

Consider:

the digital age and multiplying forms of social communication which leave many behind in the technology is the way to go stakes

the global recession and the remorseless demands of the manufactured idol called Austerity

market criteria in social care and the barcoding of every act of community service paid for by tax payers

the fixation of Government on the bottom line without addressing the humanely critical questions of how that bottom line is reached

globalisation and the emerence of mega-structures of business, economics and finance, which means decisions made thousands of miles away by unaccountable corporations have immediate local impact on the wellbeing and welfare of people helpless to influence those decisions

cultural, ethnic and religious pluralism coinciding with a time of unprecedented polarisation in precisely these contested but rich areas of human experience.

It is a hard world in which to be old.

Affection and care for the old is a principle that Heschel derived not from a mere humanism, but from a humanism rooted in Torah, and in the deep quarries of prophetic visions of social justice, and concepts like mercy, righteousness and law as a constraint rather than an excuse for exercise of power over the vulnerable. As a Christian I identify with such theologically fuelled ethics.

As an example of much of the above, let me describe a recent scenario. I am currently minister of a church in a trown where the local authority is in the middle of a consultation with residents in sheltered accommodation. Care homes in this Local Authority have until now had a full time warden, a laundry and a social room or residents' lounge. The necessity, cost-effectiveness and long term viability of each of these services is being questioned by the Council as provider. And as happens with most consultations, there is a widespread perception that this is a soft approach to what will become hard realities.

The residents' lounge is a place where residents sit and meet and share experience, where friendships are fostered, relationships negotiated and developed, where social entertainment and conversation are encouraged. At a time when loneliness and isolation are described as epidemic amongst the older population, the removal of this facility would lack moral imagination, and instead would demonstrate the kind of social selfishness that lurks beneath the euphemism 'hard choices', and "essential cuts." 

The presence of a Warden ensures that concerns and worries about health or being able to cope, issues about mobility, safety and maintenance, are borne by someone who understands, knows the people involved and has the network to ensure what is needed is available. As for the laundry, none of the residents have washing machines as they were told on entry that a laundry was provided; so in the event of laundires being closed, what are residents to do but buy and have installed a washing machine?

When decisions like these are taken, it is unhelpful and unfair to assume local politicians are heartless, thoughtless, or haven't agonised over the cost and consequence of such changes. It's clear with this Local Council that there is deep discomfort that such cuts, changes, adjustments, are even mooted for discussion, and may be thought necessary - but cuts will still happen, if not here elsewhere. Unless of course there is such pressure as forces a change of direction.

But if not here, where else are savings to be made? And therein lies one of the key social issues of our times. What is not up for discussion, it seems, is the need for savings to existing budgets. Why? Because there are limited funds available from Local and Central Government sources. Can these resources be strengthened by increases in revenue? Yes, by raising Council Tax, but that would itself be an unpopular decision, and one that the Scottish Central Government will not make because it is a major plank in their appeal to the electorate - and an election is scheduled in 6 months time.

But I as a member of that electorate would gladly pay more in Council Tax to enable the continuance of our care for our older people. A laundry, a lounge, and a Warden are not luxury options, but represent socially responsible and responsive care. Somewhere in all of this, Christian communities will have to think through what it means for a wealthy country (and we are one of the wealthiest in the world) to save money by making life harder for older people. 

And yes the same case needs to be made for those who are poor, homeless, socially vulnerable, and in need of social support. But Heschel's words are piercingly precise in their diagnosis of a society's illness by looking at how we treat our elderly people. We need to pay attention to his description of where the true gold mines of a culture are to be found - in respectful care for our older people.  Those gold mines are not to be found in budget cuts to essential services to people on whose life and work our society has been built.

Comments

[Duncan]

Thanks Jim.
I was meeting with someone yesterday whose organisation is working with young people (16-24) faced with with homelessness, addictions and mental health issues.The kind of choices that they are currently facing in terms of cuts mirror the ones you are highlighting in relation to the elderly. We are only at the very beginning of this 5 years of further austerity and the general consensus seems to be that much worse is ahead.