Risk, insecurity, globalization, and the destabilization of the everyday lives of millions of peoples across many nation-states signals the need for a re-framing of old age and aging. With growing economic and health insecurities and inequalities in life expectancy, precarity differs by and across age, class, gender, race, ethnicity, (dis)ability, and nation/citizenship, along with intersectional dimensions. European, Canadian, and North American scholars apply the concept of ‘precariousness’ and ‘precarity’, as developed by Butler (2009) and Standing (2010) to research, policy and practice in social gerontology. Portacolone reports on ethnographic research on precariousness in US older adults living alone with Alzheimer’s Disease or mild cognitive impairment, applying micro, meso and macro theoretical and policy perspectives. Craciun’s qualitative study examines precariousness in the case of older immigrants in Germany, as they confront insecurity and exclusion from main-stream society in old age, whilst demonstrating the possibility of a positive old age. Estes and DiCarlo focus on precarity in old age austerity politics and policy, examining US social movements that are catalyzing political advocacy and digital spaces in pitched battles aimed at preserving the Welfare State versus the ‘Precariate State’. Phillipson and Grenier illuminate the disjuncture between (a) theories and policies emphasizing productivity/participation, and (b) the rise of a global political economy promoting risk/instability. All of the presentations will explore the extent to which the ‘reconstruction of the life course calls for new directions in gerontology and critical perspectives in particular.
展开▼
