The term “quality of life” has gone through many historical phases and received many interpretations. It has preoccupied Greek philosophers since ancient times.

Aristotle was the greatest thinker of antiquity, philosopher and founder of many sciences and creator of Logic. In his collection “Nicomachean Ethics” Aristotle develops the philosophical analysis of the word eudaimonia and defines it as “a kind of (rational) mental energy in the measure of perfect virtue”. That is, in this concept there is a combination of the emotional-mental state of the individual and a kind of “rational energy”. Bliss is considered by the philosopher as the “perfect and self-sufficient good”, which constitutes the final purpose of human actions. The philosopher argues that “most people almost agree, because the multitude of ordinary people as well as the educated admit that the greatest good is happiness and consider that the quality of life (eu zin) and well-being (eu prattein) are the same thing with bliss”.

The term “quality of life” emerged through research on living conditions that developed towards the end of the 19th and the first decades of the 20th century in the advanced countries of Europe and America, finally embracing in the 1930s a spectrum of phenomena that led in the use of the term. In this sense, research on the quality of life first appeared in the USA. In 1929 it was founded in the USA. the first presidential commission to record the conditions of life of various strata of American society and the trends of their differentiation. Other studies followed, mainly in the USA. in the 1930s to continue, after World War II, in the 1950s and in the other advanced countries of the world. Since the 1970s, many scientific discussions have taken place and several studies have been written on the subject of quality of life. From these investigations it was found that the quality of life is a historical category, i.e. a concept whose content changes according to the socio-economic conditions that prevail each time, the dominant values ​​of life and the dynamism of social forces, which look ahead and struggle for a higher lifestyle. However, the term has certain fixed points, related to the ‘naturalness’ and ‘sociality’ of man.

Quality of life is a term that has been used extensively by philosophers, psychologists, theologians, poets and politicians. It is extremely difficult to establish a commonly accepted definition of “quality of life”. In the literature on health measurement, the term quality of life appears during the 80s. After 1980 this definition inspired quality of life researchers to devise techniques and develop tools to assess and measure health in physical, mental, and social dimensions of well-being.

The concept of quality of life was developed mainly in the Social Sciences, but it was also applied in other scientific fields, such as in Medicine and in the field of health in general as a daily desirable achievement. In the 1960s and 1970s, social scientists, philosophers and politicians began to show interest in the concepts of ‘quality of life’ and ‘standard of living’. This interest was manifested in the efforts of experts to deal with problems caused by inequalities in the distribution of resources and concerning the general “well-being” of society, in relation to the concerns generated by the progressive increase in the population compared to the rate of growth of the poor countries.

Quality of life is a concept rich in content and is a multidimensional phenomenon. Its rich content requires, on the one hand, the multi-dimensional approach to quality of life and, on the other hand, the assessment of each dimension with multiple questions. When the determination of the quality of life is attempted in such a way that it is possible to assess and measure it, then it is realized that it involves multiple and mutually influencing stretches, which make the task of measurement difficult. It is commonly understood that quality of life is a multidimensional concept consisting of various conditions or components. Several studies have analyzed which conditions are involved at different points in life and in different cultures and populations.

As with any abstract or multidimensional concept, measuring quality of life can be achieved in many different ways. Quality of life has been interpreted as the ability to allocate resources to cover social needs and the existence of those parameters related to society and the environment. Other authors emphasize the individual’s subjective assessment of quality of life and well-being.

As is evident, in the above definitions of quality of life, a separation is observed between “objective” and “subjective” parameters. However, the combination of these parameters is necessary. Quality of life is defined as “being a good life” and is evaluated with subjective as well as objective criteria, determined by the assessment of external conditions. Valid indicators for determining the quality of life are health, the natural environment, the quality of housing space and other conditions.

Research has shown that good health, functional ability, sense of personal adequacy or usefulness, social participation, social networks, especially the existence of friends, social support and income level have often been reported as important. Subjective self-rated well-being and health have been reported to be stronger than objective economic or sociodemographic criteria in explaining variance in quality of life estimates.

Additional social factors that have been reported to be key components of quality of life include social capital and cohesion. Various other psychological variables have also been hypothesized as key predictors of perceived quality of life, these include level of adjustment, self-control, morale and self-respect, perception of control over the life course, social comparisons, and life expectancy , of prejudices, social values ​​optimism-pessimism, beliefs, aspirations and social standards of comparison. It is largely unknown what mediates these social and psychological variables. But people have different priorities.

For example, older people were more likely to prioritize health, while younger people were more likely to prioritize work.

Dimensions of Quality of Life

In the last twenty years, many research efforts have been made to design and weight tables, lists, questionnaires, indices and ratings, which aim to capture various domains and dimensions of quality of life. Tools have been used to measure functions and activities, mental illness and mental health, social support, the individual’s perception of their health and service delivery.

Dimensions of quality of life are

1. good health,
2. independence,
3. energy,
4. good social/health services,
5. good family and friendly relations,
6. good pension/income,
7. satisfaction with life,
8. housing quality,
9. environmental quality,
10. new learning opportunities,

 

Measuring quality of life, especially among the elderly, depends on concepts that are difficult to define. A different way of life may be the result of circumstances or choice, or a combination of many factors such as health status, questions of morale and well-being, material conditions and living conditions. Also of fundamental importance must be the nature and importance to the individual:

1. of informal and formal support networks,
2. the degree and quality of daily care.

But it is, of course, the interaction of these different influences, linked to the subjective response of the person concerned, which ultimately determines the quality of his life.

The “quality of life” in old age depends on many factors such as the person’s good physical and mental health, his ability to carry out his daily routine activities in order to have an independent living, his financial independence, but also his social participation and support from social networks.

Social support is a key concept in social gerontology, and there is empirical evidence of its relationship to health and overall quality of life in old age. The frequency of the elderly’s social relationships, the degree to which they interact with other people, are related to health indicators, and how the person perceives their personal well-being, and their quality of life.

Autonomous Living and Dimensions of Quality of Life

People with independent living have good functionality, but also a positive perception of their health. With regard to the support they receive (subjective), the elderly perceive it more as help in practical matters, than in actually meeting their emotional needs. Also, very important for the elderly is the role of the family, specifically the spouse and children in providing care. Raising the awareness of the general public with informative speeches and contacts, aimed at understanding the special problems of the elderly, helps in the long term to change social attitudes towards the elderly, the sick and their relatives. Consequently, caring for the elderly in need is a task for the achievement of which all mechanisms of solidarity between individuals should be developed at both the micro-social and macro-social levels.

The presence of the family environment in the life of the elderly is important, but in addition to help in practical matters, more emphasis should also be placed on the emotional needs of the elderly as it is a lack that they identify.

On the other hand, to design effective social policy for the care of the elderly, knowledge is needed about many issues related to informal support networks, such as how they work, what goods or services they provide or do not provide, what the factors are that affect their operation and the items they provide, what is the division of labor-care among the members of the network, and last and most importantly what are the effects of informal caregiving on the care recievers and the care givers.

Social service providers are classified into four areas. They are the Public sector, the Voluntary non-profit sector, the private for-profit sector, and informal care networks.

Public sector, voluntary non-profit and private for-profit organizations are also referred to as formal care networks. It goes without saying that this classification is done for analytical reasons, because in daily professional practice it is known that there is an overlap of agencies in the provision of services.

Adjustment and quality of life in old age

The well-adjusted person of old age to the possibilities and limitations of old age is what is referred to as “aging successfully or well”. The American Gerontological Association in 1995, in view of the big problems that appear in old age, he formulated the quote: “Add life to years, not just more years to life”. This means that we should be interested in the quality of life of the elderly or how to achieve good old age.

Criteria for successful aging are the following:

1. The lifespan.
2. Biological health.
3. Mental health.
4. Cognitive efficiency.
5. Social competence and productivity.
6. The ability to control our lives.
7. Life satisfaction.

 

The measurements for the evaluation of the above criteria, so that we can decide on the quality of life of elderly people are:

1. objective, such as statistical measurements, measurements with diagnostic measures, normative criteria, and
2. subjective, such as the individual’s satisfaction, self-image and self-esteem.

 

It has been found, then, that people often compensate in subjective assessments for unfavorable objective reality, and thus we can get equal satisfaction from people who live in completely opposite life conditions.

For example, despite poor personal health, the person feels mentally satisfied because “it could have been worse” or because “others suffer more.” This means that subjective assessments are not enough to assess successful old age. They are necessary but not sufficient conditions for the definition of “successful old age”. Objective criteria are needed for such a thing.

The objective criteria can be:

Normative, i.e. criteria that define what the ideal situation is (e.g. ideal old age is that of “offering and wisdom”). These ideal situations, however, mainly reflect priorities of the middle and upper social class. They do not apply to all people.

Adaptive (ie, with respect to flexibility in behavior). These criteria concern the effectiveness of the individual in dealing with various demands of life. Adaptability can be seen e.g. in the quality of memory and the cognitive system in dealing with difficult situations. Therefore, such subjective and objective measurements give indicators of the individual’s adaptability and potential.

Subjective perception of quality of life in old age

In the 1980s and 1990s, there was much research and discussion regarding the quality of life of older people, how it can be defined and measured, and what factors influence it.

The term “quality of life” refers to the evaluation of the conditions of life of an individual, a group, or a population. There are objective criteria or standards that can be used to measure quality of life. These typically include the quality of the physical and social environment, physical and mental health, and available support systems. Quality of life is an emotionally neutral term and refers to the cognitive evaluation of a person’s life situation according to certain criteria.

However, there are also subjective criteria that can be used to measure quality of life, i.e. how good the person considers their life to be. These criteria consist of judgments of life satisfaction, the individual’s perception of his physical, psychological, sexual and social functioning, his health and economic situation, his ability to pursue interests and recreational activities, energy and vitality. of etc. However, subjective quality of life criteria include not only life satisfaction, but also subjective well-being and morale.

• Life satisfactionreflects the degree to which a person believes that their life satisfies their own criteria for quality of life. It is an assessment of how well a person’s goals, efforts, and expectations in life converge. It involves a comparison of a person’s achievements with their expectations. This implies that judgments of life satisfaction have both a cognitive (evaluation) and an affective (satisfaction) part.

 

• Subjective well-being is related to life satisfaction but also differs, as it includes a sense of happiness. Happiness is defined as a transitory mood state of excitement and joy, which reflects one’s state of mind regarding one’s current situation. It is an emotional reaction to recent or psychological current events. Happiness as the degree to which the positive state prevails over the negative. Life satisfaction contributes to subjective well-being, but the latter has a more emotional nature.

 

• Morale, on the other hand, reflects a person’s courage, self-discipline, efficiency, and enthusiasm. It depicts a person’s attitude towards the future, their optimism or pessimism. Therefore, morality has a cognitive and an affective character, although the emphasis is on expectations for the future, based on the individual’s sense of control and independence.

 

Together, these three properties of subjective quality of life indicate that life satisfaction is essentially a judgment based on the individual’s past, subjective well-being refers to the present, while morale refers to the future. Of the three components of quality of life, subjective well-being is the most emotionally charged concept in terms of positive and negative consequences, while life satisfaction and morale are the least.

2012 – European Year of Active Aging and Intergenerational Solidarity

This year’s aim was to raise awareness of the contribution of older people to society. The aim was to encourage policy makers and stakeholders at all levels to take action to create better opportunities to extend working life and strengthen intergenerational solidarity.

What is active aging?

Active aging means growing up in good health and as equal members of society, feeling more satisfied with our work, more independent in our daily lives and more active citizens. Regardless of our age, we can always participate actively in society and enjoy a better quality of life. Our goal should be to make the best possible use of the enormous potential we have, even at an advanced age. The European Year 2012 sought to promote active aging in three areas:

Employment: As life expectancy increases across Europe, so does the retirement age. But many fear that they will not be able to stay in their current job or find another until they can secure a decent pension. We need to offer older workers better opportunities to participate in the labor market.

Participating in society:retiring doesn’t mean you’re on the sidelines. The social contribution of older people is often overlooked, either in the form of caring for others, their parents, spouses or grandchildren, or in the form of voluntary work. The European Year seeks to ensure greater recognition of the contribution of older people to society and create more favorable conditions for them.

Independent living: as we age, we have more and more health problems, but there is a lot we can do to deal with this condition. Very small changes in our environment can have a huge benefit for people with various health problems or disabilities. Active aging also means having the ability as we age to define our lives for as many years as possible.

The goals and guidelines consist of the framework of inclusive development, the promotion of a healthy and active aging population, the promotion of social justice and protection, equality between women and men and intergenerational solidarity, which will contribute, among others , in achieving high employment, investing in skills and reducing poverty and social exclusion.

Promoting active aging means creating better opportunities for older people, women and men, to play their role in the labor market, combating poverty, especially women’s poverty, and social exclusion, promoting volunteering and active participation in family life and society and encouraging healthy and dignified ageing. This requires, among other things, adapting working conditions, combating negative stereotypes and age discrimination, improving health and safety at work, orienting lifelong learning programs to the needs of an aging workforce and ensuring the competence of social protection systems and the provision of appropriate incentives.

The overall aim of the European Year was to facilitate the creation of a culture of active aging in Europe based on a society for all ages. In this context, efforts by Member States, their regional and local authorities, social partners, civil society and the business community, including small and medium-sized enterprises, to promote active aging and make more effective use of the potential of the rapidly growing population near or over 60 years of age; In this way it strengthens solidarity and cooperation between generations,

Considering diversity it is important to have:

• Raising public awareness of the value of active aging and its various dimensions.
• Ensure that this issue is prioritized on the political agenda of stakeholders at all levels, in order to highlight the useful contribution of older people to society and the economy.
• Promoting active ageing, intergenerational solidarity, making more effective use of the potential of the elderly, and enabling a dignified and independent ageing.
• Strengthen dialogue, exchange information and develop mutual learning between Member States and stakeholders at all levels in order to advance policies on active ageing, identify and disseminate good practices and encourage cooperation and partnerships.
• Building a framework for commitments and concrete actions to enable the European Union, Member States and stakeholders at all levels (with the involvement of civil society, social partners and business) to shape innovative solutions , policies and long-term strategies, with a special emphasis on promoting information strategies. Pursuit of specific targets on active aging and intergenerational solidarity.
• Promoting activities that will help combat age discrimination, overcome age-related stereotypes and remove barriers, especially in terms of employability.

 

Too often aging is viewed both collectively and personally as a threat rather than an achievement. Workers reaching pensionable age are seen as a burden on younger workers. According to data from Eurostat (Statistical Service of the European Union), the average age in the E.U. is 39.8 years, while by 2060 the average age of EU citizens expected to reach 47.2 years. The percentage of people aged 65 and over is expected to reach almost 30% of the total population of the EU. by 2060 (instead of 16% in 2010). And yet, the health of older people today tends to be much better than that of previous generations.

Also, the younger in age may benefit from the valuable skills and experiences of the older. The key to dealing with the problem of aging is to stay active. Intergenerational solidarity is extremely important especially in today’s era when socio-economic systems are going through a crisis.

An example of how different generations can work well together is one of the largest European car manufacturers, which due to the change of its machines and insufficient training of older employees proceeded with mass layoffs/early retirements. The result was, within a very short period of time, to withdraw a large number of new technology cars from the market due to technical problems (loss of several million euros).

So they thought of calling the old employees and asking their opinion. When a pensioner was asked why he thought the new generation of cars didn’t go well, he replied: “I don’t know about new technologies…I have to listen to the car to tell you what’s wrong with it.” Since that day the company has hired retirees as mentors alongside the younger ones. This is a rocking testament to how truly wonderful partnerships, with great results, can emerge when the young join forces with the old.

republished from the website psychologynow.gr