Aging is an interesting field in which to work. But messages about training for professions in the field can be confusing.
An aging population assures a growing “market” for the services of knowledgeable providers of just about anything aging people need. In April the Institute of Medicine predicted an impending crisis and verified what many have already observed: a shortage of geriatricians (medical doctors specializing in aging patients), nurses, and frontline aides skilled in the concerns of aging patients. Meanwhile, the New York Times is touting geriatric care management as “one of the most important professional roles in the whole health services delivery system” over the next 10 years.
At the same time, the March-April 2008 issue of Aging Today raises thoughtful questions in two articles about whether gerontology can continue as an academic discipline. The problem, according to authors Anabel Pelham and Robert Binstock, has to do with lack of formal accreditation programs.
Perhaps the problem also has to do with lack of clarity. Neither article bothers to define gerontology. Wikipedia says it has to do with everything about aging except diseases, which are claimed by the field of geriatrics.
I guess if you’re in the field, you know gerontology “belongs” to the human services side. But it would be a mistake to assume that others share that understanding. Pelham says that “gerontology can synthesize the field’s many realms of knowledge;” it would help the rest of us to know toward what end.
No fewer than four different programs certify geriatric care managers, who don’t have to be social workers, and case managers, who do. And no one has any trouble figuring out what it is that those worthy professionals do: the name is self-explanatory.
Gerontologists, help us clear up some of the mystery that surrounds you. We’d love for you to tell us what you do and what is happening in your field in Milwaukee and beyond!
