'Mean Girls' in Retirement Communities?

By Richard Zorza —

RichardZorza-150wideThere has been a lot of talk around Collington about this “Mean Girls” article in The New York Times.

The thrust of the article is shown as the writer describes her almost 99-year-old mother’s report on the her early days in independent living:

There was a pause. Then: “They won’t let me sit at their table!” Nanna cried.

“Wait, what? Who won’t let you sit at their table?”

“You try to sit and they say, ‘That seat is taken!’ ”

“Oh, my God,” I said, instantly thrust into a painful flashback of junior high, when I walked into the cafeteria and was greeted with the sight of leather purses looped across the chair backs and the sound of one girl with dramatically plucked eyebrows announcing, “Those seats are taken!” I hadn’t known enough to carry a purse. I had a lunchbox. (And it would take me another decade to figure out the eyebrow thing.)

“And just try to get into a bridge game,” Nanna continued. “They’ll talk about bridge, and you’ll say, ‘Oh, I play,’ and they’ll tell you, ‘Sorry, we’re not looking for anyone.’ ”

“Mean girls!” I said. “There are mean girls in your home!”

“It’s not a home,” Nanna said sharply.

….

When I was young and innocent — say, last summer — the idea of 90-year-olds in pecking orders, picking on those at the bottom, was a joke.

So we have been discussing if any of these dynamics exist at Collington, and we all agreed that as a general matter they do not. Particularly shocking to us was the claim, later in the article that there was an age-basis to the pecking order with the 70-year-olds looking down on the 80-year-olds, and the 80-year-olds looking down on the 90-year-olds. I really do believe that we honor those in their 90s (if we can pick them out), for their achievements and perspective. And no wonder, when we have in their 90s World War II decoders, journalists, professors, CIA analysts and the like.

More realistic is the possibility that there is less genuine enthusiasm at the table when someone struggling with significant cognitive challenges approaches — but I think most of us realize that we are headed that way too, and that we should include as we hope to be included. I have found that asking such folks to talk about their youth, or the place they enjoyed most, or the thing they are most proud of, often yields fascinating information and ideas, as well as a sense of worm connection.

When the article came out, one of the residents, Ken Lee, circulated some questions and thoughts about the possibility of people feeling excluded, and included these ideas about how to minimize any risk that people were not being included:

I would think the social workers on staff may have some clues.

Perhaps also the Residency Councilors in Marketing.

I would think those who manage dining services, particularly those who arrange for mixed or not-mixed tables.

There could be exclusions/inclusions based on cultural and racial factors. Political persuasion; religious persuasion. Past intellectual accomplishments, vs. their absence.

There is, as I have observed, a not insignificant LGBT presence among our residents.

There could be greater difficulty blending in, for those for whom time has been unkind in the pace of aging’s disruption of the body, including disfigurement.

Were one able to gather some data from those and similar segments of our residents, one could then consider developing things to do that might address your question of “…could we improve life for some at Collington.”

That’s the kind of place we try to be — where residents and management work together to deal with any such problems.