Let’s start with the unusual: give the verdict before hearing the case. Why? Because we’ve been so indoctrinated and behaviour-modified into thinking a certain way that a total uncluttered "Road to Damascus" moment is required on this issue. We must not let a previously brainwashed good story get in the way of the facts!
Age: A pain and a problem – right?
Wrong. If age was synonymous with pain and problems, the young would have no pain, and mental health problems for them would not exist. Old people would be in ever-increasing pain, and ever-increasing problems would forever be our lot. For most of us, there is a more benign comfort in reaching our senior years, and while the odd joint or body organ may be suspect, we can do what we do, wisely, usually much better than when we were immature.
There are judges who have a parent aged over 100 years, mentally astute and physically self-reliant. My great-grandfather lived until he was almost 102 years; he never had a night in hospital. Just before he died, the medical profession ordered him to have a hernia operation, which meant a first-time overnight visit to a hospital. My great-grandfather never had a night in hospital; he died the day before his operation. Now, that is fantastic mental discipline!
Under biblical law, we are promised three score years and ten, which makes 35 years halfway. If age is the determining factor for pain and problems, all judges should be appointed to the bench before they are 35 while still in “best health,” and compulsory retirement should be at 35 years when society's prescribed pain and problems are due. In other words, judges should deliberate when in their alleged prime, before 35.
If old age is the determinant of poor health, why has New Zealand spent so much money on Starship Children’s Hospital? Yes, if a person takes a Lotto ticket each week for a year, they have 52 chances of winning; if taken for 10 years, 520 chances of winning. More chances, but not a guarantee of getting something! Seventy to 100 years: more chances, but no warranty, especially if best maintenance is erasing poor care.
A person injured today, with good rehabilitation, is much better next month. But with the current age edict, that same person is a month older, so how can that be?
In Review Cases versus the Accident Compensation Corporation, where ACC has stopped patient cover because the injury was “age-related,” as an expert witness, I have sat back and listened to the other parties presenting their evidence to stop cover. At the end, my questions to the patient have been:
“How old are you?”
“How old were you six months ago when you first presented with your injury?”
“How high could you lift your shoulder, straighten your knee, swing your hip, etc., when you first presented at the clinic?”
“How high can you lift your arm today (fully)?”
“Are you much better?”
“Remind me, are you older or younger today than you were six months ago?”
“If older and better, how can the injury be age-related?”
Of course, age makes many aspects of life better, but there is usually a caveat: we must practice good patterns. Formulating a good plan takes time, and keeping to them takes good discipline. There are 1,440 minutes in each day; taking 20 of them for our health plan means the public’s falsehood that the inevitable traverse to pain and problems with age can mostly be averted. What you do with the other 1,420 minutes is yours to decide which habits you succumb to. Actually, a few more sit-ups or stretches may become more my bad habit. Standing up when everyone else sits down can often lead to more success than one’s peers.