Moral argumentation in talk about health and old age.
This study examines the ways in which people aged 90 or over construct and negotiate meanings of health in research interviews. Detailed analyses of two interview cases illustrate the flow of these negotiations within interviews, and how the interviewees balance different moral arguments. First, the interviewees try to manage the face-threat posed by the questioning about health. Second, their health accounts move on the axis of advocating good health and activity and conceding impaired health and diminished activity. They apply various rhetorical devices to challenge the traditional discourse of old age as decline. On the other hand, aligning oneself with the category of 'old' makes ill-health and inactivity legitimate, but brings along other kinds of moral obligations. Finally, the results are discussed in relation to cultural discourses of old age and health, and their moral implications.
Jolanki
Outi
O
Tampere School of Public Health, University of Tampere, FIN-33014, Finland. outi.jolanki@uta.fi
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over / Q000523:psychology*; D000375:Aging / Q000523:psychology*; D001294:Attitude to Health; D005260:Female; D015577:Geriatric Assessment; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D008297:Male; D009043:Motor Activity; D017008:Negotiating / Q000523:psychology; D012803:Sick Role; D028722:Virtues