Growing Old in a Therapeutic Culture

Abstract

ne of the primary manifestations of modernity is the therapeutic culture of western civilization. While there can be varied legiti-0 mate interpretations of "therapeutic," some positive and some negative, we will focus on certain aspects of both medical and psychological therapeutic assumptions that are problematic for Christians growing older in the current cultural context. Whether this present age is called postmodernity, late modernity, or a time of uncertainty, the therapeutic legacy of modernity cannot be denied. The assumptions embedded within that legacy include both psychological and medical claims that form expectations of how we should live as well as how we should die. The excesses of medical therapeutic modernity have frequently perpetuated the self-deception that death can be avoided if we work hard enough and sufficiently trust our rational scientific abilities. The psychotherapeutic mindset of the first half of the twentieth century evolved in the afterglow of high modernity and its convictions regarding an autonomous psychological self. Whether the goal is framed as self-actualization, the freeing of one's psychic structure from dependency conflicts, or the deliverance from externally binding contingencies, there is no question but that the supremacy of self-determination and autonomous rationality has ascended to new heights of significance within our therapeutic culture. Philip Rieff, a sociologist, assessed the far-reaching consequences of this ascendance in his now classic, The Triumph of the Therapeutic.' Rieff exposed a distressing process by which we had grown to replace the traditional idea of the preeminence of God with nothing more than a personalized, manipulable sense of well-being. He observed that our story

Conceptualizing "Religion": How Language Shapes and Constrains Knowledge in the Study of Religion and Health

“…Is religion good for your health? From the secular perspective, these utilitarian goals of research are intuitive and obvious, and to some extent, even the churches have adopted a therapeutic model of faith, replacing the "traditional idea of the preeminence of God with nothing more than a personalized, manipulable sense of well-being" (Meador and Henson 2000). For example, many Christians have adopted the therapeutic language of secular society as they "shop" for churches based on how a given congregation is prepared to "meet their needs."…”

Agency and Communion in End-of-Life Decision-Making

“…Hauerwas et al. (2003) offer a postmodern solution that once again situates “the pragmatic matters of everyday living within both the moral, as well as technical, local ecologies of our lives” (Meador & Henson, 2003, p. 94). Huerwas et al.…”

“…Research and social policy for aging and dying should deal with such important concepts as integrity, quality of life, happiness, competence or autonomy, and social support. One perspective that may inform decision making for end-of-life is Bakan’s (1966) theory for the balancing of agency (autonomy) and communion tendencies and Meador’s and Henson’s (2003) trenchant critique of aging and dying within a “therapeutic culture” (p. 90), as conceived by Rieff (1966) in his classic work, The Triumph of the Therapeutic . This article will consider the controversial topic of end-of-life care options, particularly assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia, from the perspective of each of these models; finally, it will address the implications of these models for end-of-life and a good death (Kastenbaum, 2004).…”