Day 5

Today's FGD was very interesting and eye-opening for me in terms of understanding the differences within the elderly demographic in Singapore, and also in terms of being able to see quite clearly the difference in socio-economic status of the elderly.

While I had been informed that the elderly at RSVP would be more on the corporate/professional side and would be higher educated, it still came as quite a surprise when the discussion began and I started hearing their views and their opinions of what is currently being done and what else needs to be done in the field to help the elderly. The manner in which they speak and the topics they touch on went alot deeper than what I had heard in the prevoius two FGDs; even their ideas went beyond what the others had discussed, such as the necessity to input preventive rather than merely remedial services and to detect issues at the primary touchpoint such as in hospitals.

This made clear to me that even I had my own notions of what older adults should be like - I assume that that they mainly speak Chinese or dialect, speak broken English, and have a basic education of up till secondary school at the most. I was not prepared that they would be highly educated and for all of them to have a tertiary education. With this in mind, I realise that even amongst the social work students (and society in general) that this could be the prejudice, conscious or not, that we have in working with the elderly, and that this could be the reason why so many would rather not go into working with the elderly. This would be a problem in the future if our mindset or the construct we have about the elderly does not change, while the demographic of older adults does begin to change (as those in their early 50s, who tend to have gone through university, begin to age).

In this case, the way we present programmes and services in the next 10-20 years would have to change drastically as well, as we begin to prepare for a highly educated aging population that would be used to being independent working professionals and adults, who might not be prepared for aging or who might have more Western leanings in terms of what they understand about the aging process.

While trying to think about how programmes might have to change for those about to become old, I begin to understand the difficulty in trying to help the current elderly and reaching out to them while having to bear in mind the "incoming" elderly when crafting service programmes. With such a perceived difference within this demographic the challenge of remaining relevant is crucial and not the easiest thing to do.

I also began to realise the importance of Active Aging, particularly after this FGD. The difference between the two FGDs with non-service users and the FGD with service users is really astounding, and while I did expect a difference I did not expect such a huge dichotomy. The FGD today further highlighted to me the reason why the government is pushing for Active Aging, and also for the elderly to become volunteers (as they have good ideas about how to help at the ground level, and can also connect with other elderly and continue to feel a sense of fulfillment).