What White House Conference on Aging? This December 2005 gathering, much ballyhooed in advance by some of America’s involved elder citizens and by many professionals in the field of aging, drew almost a complete blank in the media, so far as I could tell. Not a single story appeared in any of the mainline journals that I read.

The official host, George Bush, did not see fit to visit the assembly of some 1200 elders and their advocates. This marked the first time that a president had absented himself from this every-ten-years assembly.

Instead, Bush left town, traveling to a retirement residence in suburban Washington, reportedly a gated community, there to praise the perceived virtues of the new Medicare prescription drug program. Perhaps he sensed the possible specter of delegates reacting to that program with something less than enthusiasm.

Lack of enthusiasm would be too mild a term to describe the delegates’ sentiments about changes in Social Security. Overwhelmingly the delegates voted to keep this program the way it is, expressing little sympathy for Bush’s privatization proposals.  

Though he was not present, the conference was scripted by the planners to reflect Bush’s values. Thus “personal responsibility, healthy lifestyle, technological innovations, and entrepreneurial solutions,” all found emphasis in presentations by administration representatives, according to Washington journalist Abigail Trafford.

The three-day meeting itself was not exactly a model of democratic process. In fact, the agenda stirred protest among some groups of delegates, notably the New Yorkers who issued a formal complaint. Instead of setting their own agenda, participants found themselves confronted with a list of prefabricated issues which they were required to rank in order of importance.

Unfortunately, this belated report of the event must rely on secondhand experience because my own plans to attend were torpedoed by unexpected health problems. I would have enjoyed sharing with you some of what I heard on-site from my age-peer delegates and professionals.

However, tapping my contacts in the latter group, I find topics that deserve ongoing attention. The top issue is long-term care. Calling for change, delegates voted for widespread action in the areas of “financing, choice, quality, service delivery, and the paid and unpaid workforce.”

Across the country, advocates of older Americans continue to worry because the health care system is just not delivering what we need. Until you yourself or members of your family get hit with a serious chronic health problem, it is hard to appreciate how inflexible our system is.

People are suddenly faced with a maze of regulations that confound their efforts to cope. Not unreasonably, those needing care and their loved ones are often reduced to tears by the limits on their freedom to choose what is best.

Altogether too many people of modest means are forced into institutions that no one would freely choose. As Dr. Robert Butler, founding director of the National Institute on Aging, stated at the conference, only one out of every ten nursing homes across the country meets standards established by the federal government, a fact that ought to cause shock.

As he has done for decades, Butler also decried the nation’s failure to provide doctors specializing in medical services for older people. Of some 600,000 physicians in the country, only one percent has been trained in geriatrics. By way of vindicating Butler’s lament, Congress, at almost the same time he was speaking, eliminated the budget for geriatric education.

At least one local delegate, Michael Smyer, graduate dean at Boston College, found specific value in the conference. Though he says it is too early to tell about particular outcomes, he hopes for important proposals to gain traction when the final report is presented to Congress in June.

Among the topics receiving attention, he is particularly interested in mental health  and workplace issues. Both areas were ranked near the top from the list of 73 voted on by delegates. Also, the caliber of the discussions was high, a factor that encourages him to think the proposals have a future.

Another local delegate, Andrea Cohen, director of Houseworks in Newton, went to the conference with low expectations. However, she found it “verified for me some of the things that need to be changed.” Like Smyer, she was pleased at the level of interest in mental health services, and she took note of actual and proposed technology that may better the chances of tomorrow’s elders to live on their own.

With a third-place finish in the voting, another issue that scored surprisingly high among the concerns of delegates was transportation. Concern for the mobility and independence of older people moved them to stress the need for more options than we have now. Many Americans live in places, especially suburbs and rural areas where public transportation is quite inadequate or nonexistent, and private businesses have not made up for that lack.

Results of voting on resolutions, names of delegates, and much other information about the conference is available at www.whcoa.gov.

Richard Griffin