TEACHING GERONTOLOGY March 1, 2002 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx In this issue: - 4th Edition of CONCEPTS & CONTROVERSIES - Psychology of Aging Institute - Classroom Controversy - Privatizing Social Security - Enron Collapse and Retirement Income - Is Spend-Down Immoral? - Pushing the Limit xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx NEW EDITION OF TEXTBOOK The 4th edition of AGING: CONCEPTS and CONTROVERSIES (Pine Forge Press, Sage Publications, 2002) is now available. The book teaches gerontology through "great debates" around topics like assisted suicide, privatizing Social Security, extension of the human lifespan, and the search for meaning in later life. Details about the new, fourth edition are available at http://www.pineforge.com/ Copies of AGING: CONCEPTS and CONTROVERSIES are available to qualified college faculty to review for course adoption. For questions about review copies, call Sage Publications for Customer Care at 1-800-818-7243 (805-499-9774 outside the U.S.) or e-mail textbooks@sagepub.com. ---------------------<<< >>>------------------------ PSYCHOLOGY OF AGING INSTITUTE PSYCHOLOGY OF AGING: Summer Institute at St. Scholastica College, Duluth Minnesota (July 21-31, 2002). Faculty include K. Warner Schaie, Timothy Salthouse, and other distinguished psychologists. NIA funding covers travel expenses and all support costs for applicants selected to participate in the program. Deadline for completed application is May 1, 2002. For additional background on the program, visit the website at: www.css.edu/depts/grad/nia To request application materials or other information, contact Chandra Mehrotra at: College of St. Scholastica, 1200 Kenwood Ave., Duluth, MN 55811; or email at: cmehrotr@css.edu ---------------------<<< >>>------------------------- CLASSROOM CONTROVERSY OPINIONS and DEBATES. "It's not cool to express opinions," said one young man to his professor in a gerontology class. He was telling us something we need to remember. Students may come up to a teacher after class to express their views, but the real challenge is how to create and legitimate passion and excitement in the classroom discussion itself. Not easy, we have to admit. Serious issues arise: for example, what is the difference between dogmatic opinions in contrast to logically developed positions? How do we encourage expression of views if those views are attacked or rejected by classmates? One interesting approach to dealing with this problem is to assign students to read material that they won't agree with, and then ask them to explain why. Or to come up with points defending a view that they have already rejected. In giving feedback, it can be helpful to ask students to identify consequences of positions they've taken: to focus on fuzzy language, unexamined assumptions, weak inferences, doubtful "facts" and so on. This approach lends itself to new kinds of test questions: for example, "Identify the unwarranted assumptions in the following paragraph." GERONTOLOGICAL CORRECTNESS? Bringing opinions overtly into the classroom demands that teachers be more conscious about their own values and biases. Of course, here we, as teachers, remain role models for our students. Like parents, we teach best by example. Thus, if we are dogmatic about holding the "right" opinions, then students quickly catch on as to what views are "gerontologically correct." The whole point of teaching through debates is to overcome that tendency, in ourselves as well as in our students. It's not easy, I admit, but it's a lot more interesting than the alternative. -----------------------<<< >>>------------------------ PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY President George W. Bush campaigned on a platform to privatize Social Security. But the Enron collapse and loss of 401(k) pension investment has taken some of the wind out of the sails of that campaign. Moreover, a blue-ribbon Commission appointed by the President last year failed to come to a conclusive recommendation on the subject of privatization. "The commission was appointed to restore financial integrity to Social Security," says Brookings Institution economist Henry Aaron, a liberal. Aaron added, "The three proposals [put forward by the Commission] either fail to do that or entail enormous reductions in the guaranteed, basic benefits." However, other commentators endorsed the commission's work. David John, a conservative policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said, "They have made the case for including personal retirement accounts within Social Security." AARP's Director of Public Policy John Rother predicted that no major action on Social Security would be likely before 2003 or perhaps 2005. (Quoted in the AARP Bulletin On-Line, January, 2002) The idea of private Social Security retirement accounts remains very popular with the public. A national Roper poll in February found that Americans were in favor of the idea by a margin of 63 percent to 33 percent, which is virtually the same as results of a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll conducted in November, before the Enron scandal (see below). For more on the debate over privatizing Social Security, including a list of websites helpful for students, visit: http://www.pineforge.com/moody/social.htm QUESTION FOR STUDENTS: Should the federal government be protecting employees from investing as much money as they want in their own corporation's pension plans? Compare student responses here with the "right to folly" discussed in the Controversy "Should Older People Be Protected from Bad Choices?" For arguments pro and con, visit: http://www.pineforge.com/moody/protect.htm ----------------------<<< >>>------------------------ CONSERVATIVE VIEW ON SOCIAL SECURITY Libertarian conservatives favor the idea of privatizing Social Security. But would privatizing Social Security threaten women and minorities? Liberals say yes, but conservatives take a different view. The libertarian Cato Institute has joined with the National Black Chamber of Commerce to cosponsor a conference on "Social Security and African-Americans: Race, Retirement, and Reform," on March 19, 2002. The conference will examine whether the current Social Security system is fair to African-Americans; the need to increase saving and investment in the African-American community, and whether a system of individual accounts would help or hurt African- Americans and other minorities. Prominent African-American speakers include former Congressman Floyd Flake, gerontologist Percil Stanford, policy advocate Robert Woodson and others. On April 9, 2002, the Cato Institute will sponsor a conference on "Social Security Reform: A Women's Issue." On May 21, the Cato Institute and the Hispanic Business Roundtable will hold a conference on "Social Security and Hispanic Americans," to examine issues around how Social Security privatization will impact on the Hispanic community. The Cato Institute publishes a regular e-newsletter expounding its view in favor of privatizing Social Security. For an e-Subscription to "Social Security This Week" visit: http://www.socialsecurity.org. --------------------- <<< >>>------------------------ The Population Reference Bureau, has just published a bulletin report on ELDERLY AMERICANS. To order call: (800) 877-9881. ----------------------------------------------------- ENRON COLLAPSE and RETIREMENT The collapse of Enron and the loss of retirement funds by thousands of employees has made many Americans very wary about the idea of privatizing Social Security. On the other hand, consider the following letter to the editor, published in the February 7, 2002 edition of The Washington Times: To the Editor: I am in a situation with my retirement funds similar to that of many former Enron employees. Both I and my employer make contributions to the fund, but I am not able to diversify or control the fund. The fund also brings in only about 3 percent per year, and there are better options available in which I cannot participate. There is ongoing talk that the fund may collapse and leave me with nothing, but I cannot opt out of the fund. Every attempt to give me more rights to control my fund is met with resistance. Oh, by the way — my fund is called Social Security. PHILLIP MONTGOMERY Huntingtown, Md. -------------------------------------------------- Comment by the Editor. The fallacy in this letter is that even under the worst circumstances, the Social Security Trust Fund in 2038 would still be able to pay 75% of benefits owed-- which is not at all equivalent to Enron leaving 401(k) owners with absolutely nothing as unsecured stockholders. As for diversifying-- a very good argument against holding retirement assets in a single company stock-- nothing could be more diversified than Social Security ownership of U.S. Treasury Bonds; or, under an alternative privatization scheme, ownership of index funds for the entire stock market. Achieving maximum diversification along either of these lines does mean diminished "control," which is why it's called social insurance, whether in public investment or collectively privatized. What seems clear is that the Enron debacle has changed the terms of debate over privatizing Social Security-- and created widespread unease and lack of trust in the private marketplace, perhaps matching the longstanding lack of public trust in the future of Social Security, whether justified or not. ----------------------<<< >>>------------------------- IS MEDICAID SPEND-DOWN IMMORAL? Did you ever get into a debate about whether it's right for wealthy people to deliberately "spend-down" their assets in order to qualify for Medicaid? This topic is sure to get the juices going among students. Americans commonly (and mistakenly) believe that Medicare pays for long-term care. In fact, Medicaid is by far the most significant government payment source: "The truth is that throughout the United States, elderly people who qualify medically for nursing home care, can qualify easily for Medicaid nursing home benefits--without spending down significantly--even when they have median income and assets. People with much higher income and assets can also qualify quickly with advice from a Medicaid estate planning attorney. These facts help to explain the public's perception that the government pays for long-term care." (Center for Long-Term Care) A recent study by the Health Insurance Association of America found that only 25 percent of people 55 and over believe that they or their family would be responsible for long-term care expenses. A recent "LTC Bullet" publication estimates that the proportion of nursing home costs paid by Medicaid has gone up 10 percent in the past 10 years, while the pro- portion paid out of pocket has gone down 10 percent. If you want to read a hard-hitting attack on divestment planning and other methods practiced by elderlaw attorneys, look at "The Myth of Unaffordability: How Most Americans Could, Should, and Would Buy Long-Term Care Insurance." The full text is available on the website for the Center for Long-term Care at: http://www.centerltc.org You can see links to both sides of the debate over financing long- term care at http://www.pineforge.com/moody/provide.htm -------------------------------------------------- QUESTION FOR STUDENTS: Is long-term care insurance really just "asset protection insurance" that subsidizes inheritance of wealth? Who really needs private long-term care insurance? What are the reasons, pro and con, when people consider buying long-term care insurance? FUTURE FORECAST on MEDICAID Medicaid is partly funded by state governments and constitutes a large and growing chunk of state budgets. With the current recession and declining state government revenues, many states will be hard- pressed to maintain Medicaid levels in the past. Look for new debates on the subject "Should Families Provide for Their Own?" when it comes to long-term care. QUESTION FOR STUDENTS: Is long-term care insurance really just "asset protection insurance" that subsidizes inheritance of wealth? Who really needs private long-term care insurance? ---------------------------------------------------- PUSHING THE LIMIT "If science cured every known disease of the elderly, you'd add only 15 years to current life expectancy," says Dr. Leonard Hayflick, professor of anatomy at the University of California, San Francisco, and author of HOW AND WHY WE AGE. But what would happen if we didn't die of diseases? Accidents and age-related decline in organ function would then become leading causes of death, but we might push closer to a hypothetical maximum lifespan of 125 years. Quoted in TIME Magazine: "Can We Learn to Beat the Reaper?" http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020121/aging.html For more on the debate in the biology of aging on "Why Do We Grow Old?" visit: http://www.pineforge.com/moody/growold.htm xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx This quarterly electronic newsletter, edited by Harry (Rick) Moody, is published by the Institute for Human Values in Aging in cooperation with Pine Forge Press (Sage Publications). TEACHING GERONTOLOGY contains items of interest to improve the teaching of aging. To submit items or request subscription changes, contact teachgero@yahoo.com (c) Copyright 2002; all rights reserved. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx