Earlier this week, we ran a local crime story titled "," which stirred up a side discussion among our readers about age.
Every so often we will run a story with the world "elderly" in the headline: such as or .
These 'elder' posts almost always initiate a discussion as to why or why not the individual we've written about is old enough to be elderly - so we've decided to settle the dispute once and for all as part of our new column.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines elderly as "rather old - being past middle age."
Responses to these stories included:
- The headline used the descriptive term "elderly". Since when are citizens below the age of retirement referred to as "elderly"? The author of the article and/or report needs to find more apt language.
- I, being a 63-year-old woman who is working full time and still very active, resent the fact that a 64-year-old woman was identified as "Elderly," Now please don't misunderstand me I have no problem with someone being actually "Elderly," but 64 years old??? The National Institute of Health still considers age 64 as "middle age."
- Come on! You're considered elderly as soon as your turn 65 and even then it really depends on what kind of shape you're in.
- The only people who think 65 isn't elderly are already 65 years old.
- How old was the person who wrote this story? 19!? A "child"!?
- I'm a 70-year-old woman who is still working and active - does this mean that I'm elderly?
Thanks to this column, we've learned that our readers ; don't think you ; and are split on whether or not .
Now we want to know - where do you stand?
Let us know by voting in our poll below and sharing your opinion in the comments section.