Permanent Personhood or Meaningful Decline? toward a Critical Anthropology of Successful Aging
Abstract
The current North American successful aging movement offers a particular normative model of how to age well, one tied to specific notions of individualist personhood especially valued in North America emphasizing independence, productivity, self-maintenance, and the individual self as project. This successful aging paradigm, with its various incarnations as active, healthy and productive aging, has received little scrutiny as to its cultural assumptions. Drawing on fieldwork data with elders from both India and the United States, this article offers an analysis of cultural assumptions underlying the North American successful aging paradigm as represented in prevailing popular and scientific discourse on how to age well. Four key themes in this public successful aging discourse are examined: individual agency and control; maintaining productive activity; the value of independence and importance of avoiding dependence; and permanent personhood, a vision of the ideal person as not really aging at all in late life, but rather maintaining the self of one's earlier years. Although the majority of the (Boston-area, well-educated, financially privileged) US elders making up this study, and some of the most cosmopolitan Indians, embrace and are inspired by the ideals of the successful aging movement, others critique the prevailing successful aging model for insufficiently incorporating attention to and acceptance of the human realities of mortality and decline. Ultimately, the article argues that the vision offered by the dominant successful aging paradigm is not only a particular cultural and biopolitical model but, despite its inspirational elements, in some ways a counterproductive one. Successful aging discourse might do well to come to better terms with conditions of human transience and decline, so that not all situations of dependence, debility and even mortality in late life will be viewed and experienced as "failures" in living well.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 71 · Cited by 340
- Authors
- Lamb, S.
- Affiliations
- Brandeis University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lamb, Sarah
- ORCID
- Lamb, Sarah
- Venue
- Journal of Aging Studies
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-04
- Volume
- 29
- Pages
- 41-52
- ISSN
- 0890-4065 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2089299950
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 37.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Aging Studies (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
- Keywords
- successful aging, personhood, individualism, active ageing, healthy aging, productive aging, independence, dependency, mortality, decline, biopolitics, cultural assumptions, older adults, India, United States, transience
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Anthropology, Cultural, Attitude to Death, Attitude to Health, Culture, Female, Humans, India, Male, Middle Aged, United States, Personhood
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review