Older Adults' Experience of Ageism and Ideas to Confront It

Background and Purpose: There is increasing evidence that ageism is both pervasive and harmful, significantly limiting older adults’ ability to participate fully in society. Ageism undermines their valuable contributions in employment, volunteering, and education, all of which are essential components of productive aging.

Interpersonal and internalized forms of ageism deeply shape how older adults perceive and experience later life. Despite growing awareness of their prevalence and negative effects, few interventions to combat ageism are designed with direct input from older adults themselves. This study addresses that gap by exploring how older adults conceptualize, discuss, and respond to ageism. Gaining insight into their lived experiences is essential for developing effective, person-centered strategies to combat ageism and support meaningful engagement in later life.

Methods: We conducted 12 focus groups across 8 local communities and organizations in the St. Louis area, involving 75 individuals aged 60 and older. Focus group interviews explored participants’ perceptions and understanding of interpersonal and internalized ageism, as well as their personal experiences and responses to it. Participants were predominantly female (67%, n = 50) and heterosexual (76%, n = 57). The racial composition of the sample was 56% White (n = 42), 41% Black (n = 31), and 3% (n = 2) identifying as another race. Age distribution was as follows: 16% (n = 12) were aged 60–64, 16% (n = 12) were 65–69, 17% (n = 13) were 70–74, and 51% (n = 38) were 75 or older. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and imported into NVivo 15 for data management. A thematic analysis approach guided our interpretation of the data.

Findings: Many participants reported not experiencing ageism in their own lives. Frequently, they discussed the broader challenges of aging, as well as shortcomings of the health care system and residential facilities. Commonly cited examples of ageism included experiences of overprotection, disrespect, and feelings of invisibility, particularly within family settings and interactions with service providers in commercial spaces (e.g., stores, restaurants). These instances often reflected paternalism and diminished social value. Although fewer examples were reported in healthcare and employment contexts, incidents in these settings were perceived as especially harmful. For participants with minoritized identities, experiences of discrimination were more centrally shaped by other identities, including racism, sexism, ableism, and homophobia. Responses to ageism varied considerably—from no response to strong—depending on the context of the incident and the nature of the relationship with the perpetrator. We found that participants often were not that aware about what the term ageism meant, especially the concept of internalized ageism.

Conclusion and Implications: Older adults emphasized that, in addition to increasing awareness and education, effective anti-ageism interventions must include the implementation of age-just policies and practices across healthcare systems, workplaces, and commercial settings. Providing skills to address ageism with families and service providers will be important.