CHILDHOOD AND OLD AGE: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES AT THE EXTREMES OF THE LIFE COURSE AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTHCARE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/revgeov17n3-212Keywords:
Aging, Child, Health Vulnerability, Patient-Centered Care, Humanization of CareAbstract
Childhood and old age represent extremes of the life cycle and are often associated with vulnerability, dependence, and an increased need for care. This approximation, present both in the social imagination and in clinical practice, may encourage more empathetic attitudes, but it may also produce relevant distortions, especially in the care of older adults. This study aims to critically analyze the similarities and differences between childhood and old age, exploring biological, cognitive, functional, and social dimensions, as well as their implications for healthcare practice. This is a qualitative and interpretative narrative review based on indexed scientific literature and institutional documents. Although both groups share greater physiological vulnerability and need for support, they differ substantially in terms of autonomy, identity, accumulated experience, and social role. The risk of infantilization of older adults is highlighted as a practice still present in healthcare settings. It is concluded that recognizing such similarities must be accompanied by a critical understanding of their differences, making it essential to adopt person-centered, ethically oriented care that is sensitive to the singularities of each stage of life.
Downloads
References
1. World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. Geneva: WHO; 2015. Disponível em: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241565042
2. Beard JR, Officer A, de Carvalho IA, Sadana R, Pot AM, Michel JP, et al. The World report on ageing and health: a policy framework for healthy ageing. Lancet. 2016;387(10033):2145–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00516-4
3. Butler RN. Age-ism: another form of bigotry. Gerontologist. 1969;9(4):243–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/9.4_Part_1.243
4. Veras RP. Envelhecimento populacional contemporâneo: demandas, desafios e inovações. Rev Saude Publica. 2009;43(3):548–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102009000300020
5. Sociedade Brasileira de Geriatria e Gerontologia. Tratado de geriatria e gerontologia. 4ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan; 2017. (livro)
6. National Institute on Aging. Aging and cognition. Bethesda (MD): National Institute on Aging; 2020. Disponível em: https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/cognitive-health-and-older-adults
7. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Washington (DC): US Government Printing Office; 1979. Disponível em: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html
8. Tinetti ME, Fried TR, Boyd CM. Designing health care for the most common chronic condition—multimorbidity. JAMA. 2012;307(23):2493–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.5265
9. Epstein RM, Street RL Jr. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9(2):100–3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1239
10. Dannefer D. Cumulative advantage/disadvantage and the life course: cross-fertilizing age and social science theory. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2003;58(6):S327–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/58.6.S327
