Childless NOT in the media

I was listening to the news last night as I was cooking dinner. I was already annoyed at other news I'd had to listen to all afternoon, at disingenuous male politicians gaslighting the rest of us, and was feeling annoyed. So I guess I was primed to be bugged. Then I head a news item that said that "about 80% of New Zealanders are not confident that their loved ones will get the care they need in aged facilities."

This infuriated me for a number of reasons, not least because the aged will not get the care they need/we will need. Although that is no surprise given the funding and staffing difficulties that beset the sector. But the report itself annoyed me. (Having already reached a heightened level of grumpiness, due to the aforementioned gaslighting, poor reporting, and grammatical errors driving me crazy throughout the day.) But this report annoyed me for three main reasons:

The first is the very lazy reporting and statistics. Current statistics (or at least, those from 2021) show that 19% of the population are aged 14 and under. "80% of New Zealanders" effectively means every single Kiwi aged about 16 and over. So essentially, they are saying that every single person in my country is concerned about aged care facilities. It sounds horrifying. But think about it another way. If you were asked the question, "are you confident that your loved ones will get the care that they need?" would you answer "yes"? No-one can be 100% confident of that. So of course they said they weren't confident, or perhaps answered, "not sure" (which of course, qualifies as "not confident"). That's normal! After all, most people haven't even thought about it. I'd like to see the study itself. But as it was presented, it was a meaningless question, and becomes an even more meaningless statistic.

Secondly, maybe they asked about "loved ones" purely to increase their database of respondents, rather than focusing on a smaller group. But they assume that all the elderly, or those needing care in aged facilities, have loved ones who may help them. It deliberately erases the needs of those who don't have "loved ones" as not worth reporting. It doesn't even consider them. Doesn't even imagine that there might be people who are alone. That's what really annoyed me. Because of course, as a No Kidding couple, the Husband and I won't have "loved ones" there to vouch for us, to look for good care, to ensure we are safe and comfortable and happy. But it is easier for researchers and the media to pretend we don't exist. After all, when writing headlines and appealing to the masses to sell advertising, it is easier to prey on the emotions of people who will think about their own parents or grandparents in a vulnerable position, rather than some invisible childless people no-one knows or cares about. We don't make headlines. We're not good clickbait.

Finally, why didn't they ask the people who were actually facing this prospect in the next 10 or 20 years? That would deliver a much more accurate picture of the perceived state of aged care in New Zealand. Maybe they should have approached those in the age groups who had begun to think about this - if not 50 and over, maybe 60, or even 70! They are the ones who will have to consider their needs, and how they live out their old age. Talk about ageism in action. Not to mention the pronatalism of assuming that your only value is how other, younger, people are related to, and feel about, you? 

Grrr.