The age of U.S. presidents is a hot topic. Knowledgeable, wise and capable candidates are judged by their number of birthdays over other considerations. Ageism is discrimination against an individual or group based on stereotypes of aging. “At your age, you can’t… you aren’t… you won’t…”

Such thinking separates and marginalizes people of goodwill. It also robs society of needed talent. I know many women and men who could be great candidates for president, if only for their age.

Neuroscience tells us that the human brain matures fully by the early 20s. Many adults in this age range earn college and graduate degrees, assume demanding and high-responsibility jobs, marry, have children, become valued influencers and commentators, run for political office, etc. My kids are in this age range, and I am blown away by their thoughtfulness and wisdom.

Why do we discriminate based on age when it comes to the presidency? According to the U.S. Constitution, a citizen must be 35 years of age to serve as president. This founding rule is as ageist as it gets. I am sick and tired of hearing that persons in their seventh and eighth decades are unfit to be president. I am equally disturbed by our institutionalized discrimination of persons in their third and fourth decades when it comes to our highest office.

If age matters for leadership as much as some suggest, it is time we talk about age more fully and consider ageism’s impacts across the full human lifespan.

Tom Meuser
Portland

Copy the Story Link